25 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
25.
 
I just couldn't help myself
Jan 1, 2006, 14:02
25.
I just couldn't help myself Jan 1, 2006, 14:02
Jan 1, 2006, 14:02
 
I sent this email to the author and unlike the previous poster I hadn't the self control to refrain from a little bit of good natured mocking...

"The light of a monitor beamed down on my face as I trudged through a painfully written op ed piece….."

I had the distinct misfortune of happening upon you're ill conceived, reactionary piece
"Video games make mockery of human suffering" (http://www.byui.edu/scroll/20051213/opinion1.html) through a link on bluesnews.com.

I realize you're likely an undergraduate (you most certainly write like it) but that doesn’t spare me from umbrage that bluesnews chose to link to your piece. I mean what’s next? A link to your student papers trenchant op-ed commentary on “keggers”?

The two studies you chose to include were selective and of questionable merit. However, I can say, without qualification, my sundry hours spent playing Halo have not only led me to discount all human suffering but also denigrated the memory of those who so faithfully served in the Covenant Wars of 2552 (additionally, my watching 8 hours straight of Lord Of The Rings, rather than inspire me with it's Christian message, simply made me want to commit man-on-orc violence!!!)

For amusement’s sake I compiled a quick list of logically fallacies you (likely unknowingly) abused yourself of in the course of wasting my time:

Naked appeals to emotion

Petitio principii (begging the question)

Straw man

Argumentum ad consequentiam (appeals to dire consequences)

Argumentum ad logicam (argument from fallacy)

Equivocation

False premise (that goes without saying)

…I could go on and on believe me….


To quote the author, "Unfortunately, life does not have a restart button."

More unfortunate still is that your word processesor has a save one.

Jason


24.
 
No subject
Dec 31, 2005, 13:34
24.
No subject Dec 31, 2005, 13:34
Dec 31, 2005, 13:34
 
Remember that JFK Reloaded game, where you assassinate President Kennedy? Everyone said that game was disgusting. I challenged that belief, and said it was no different than killing "Bad Guy Commander #20011" in any Call of Duty game. Or that mission in 1942 Pacific Air War where I shot down the Japanese supreme admiral with my P-38. Killing Kennedy and killing that admiral is the same exact thing. Both are just military leaders. So why is it people find killing Kennedy is somehow unacceptable, while this woman's op ed is somehow wrong? She's essentially making the same argument most gamers made about the JFK Reloaded game: you don't make a mockery of real life human suffering by turning it into a game.

Ok genius... can you tell me how "Halo" or "Conflict: Global Terror" makes a mockery of real life human suffering? These are two of the games the author quotes in the article. We arent talking about some abberant crap like assassinating JFK here, we are talking about the most common mass market games.

Its called sensationalism. And you are buying into it with patriotic brainwashed glee. "Someone please think of the children!!"

Pathetic

if you feel that strongly about games being so ethically corrupt, then why the hell are you playing them?? i bet you are a christian arent you

________________________
music from space captain:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/errantways_music.htm
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/4/invisibleacropolis_music.htm
23.
 
Re:
Dec 31, 2005, 12:48
23.
Re: Dec 31, 2005, 12:48
Dec 31, 2005, 12:48
 
It was not in any way, shape or form, one of my principal arguments. It was one sentence out of like 30
If it were not one of your principal arguments, you would not have listed it first in your response to the author and you would not have devoted two paragraphs to it, i.e.

However, despite the few small scale studies that you cite, the actual level of violent crime in the Unites States has dropped dramatically as video games have become more popular.

Any number of publications will tell you that video game sales have skyrocketed over the past 15 years. For a number of years now, sales of video games have generated more profit than even the movie industry. However, during that time the violent crime rates in the US have been more than cut in half:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm


So, despite the fact that it was four sentences and not just one sentence, it was still one sentence too many as such crime rate statistics do not rebutt the author's cited violent behavior studies at all.
This comment was edited on Dec 31, 13:00.
22.
 
Re:
Dec 31, 2005, 12:03
22.
Re: Dec 31, 2005, 12:03
Dec 31, 2005, 12:03
 
If you find it so doubtful then you should not have used that as one of your principal arguments.

It was not in any way, shape or form, one of my principal arguments. It was one sentence out of like 30, and the reason I wrote that sentence was to make the point that I don't believe what the author does about media & violent crime. Now I understand why everyone flames the shit out of you Riley, either you have poor reading comprehension or you're twisting my words to mean whatever you want them to.


Avatar 22932
21.
 
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin
Dec 31, 2005, 10:48
21.
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin Dec 31, 2005, 10:48
Dec 31, 2005, 10:48
 
Do you honestly believe the Rambo and Pearl Harbor movies are "paying homage" to the casualties of war?

Rambo: First Blood yes it does. If you have ever seen it you'll notice that it's about a war veteran who is an outcast from society for no reason other than fighting in a war. The film brought out awareness that this was happening to people who helped fight to (in this case) stop the spread of communism throughout the world, and for their thanks they are shunned and treated as outcasts. Plus it's a fucking good movie.


Your entire post is a big example of what the problem is. You think games should be made in which real life people should be labelled as "bad guys" to be slaughtered en masse with glorious music swelling in the background as you do so. Who glorifies the death of our enemies in such a way, in the political realm? Crazy ass talk show hosts, that's about it.

Hold on now. I never said that. I was merely giving a possible answer to a question of why games are created the way they are.

Personally i dont care one way or another who's being depicted as being killed, they are still being killed. However since i'm not fucked in the head i realise that it's not real and as such it is not acceptable behaviour to go around killing people in a fashion depicted in a video game.

We all know these games and movies don't give a crap about any of that. Saving Private Ryan pays homage. Band of Brothers pays homage. Medal of Honor Pacific Assault does not pay homage. It's a game that exploits war dead.

The difference between the movies and the games? The games cant put forth the emotional hurt and suffering incurred in such circumstances. If the games did, would you then change your mind?

The movies still exploit past wars. How much money was pumped back into the economy of the USA after the Vietnam war due to movies? Or even WW2? Sorry it's just stupid (for me) to hear that someone can claim one medium can exploit a certain era, where as another medium is immune from the same claims.

Want an example? The movie U-571 was a complete travesty. That completely exploited the deeds done by British commandos to purely make money and put forth the whole idea of "America is the best. We won WW2, the rest of the allied nations did nothing" which, sorry, is just complete and fucking utter shit. The US did help immensely, i'm not denying that, but the fact that the movie re-qrote history to make money is just damn well disrespectful.

As for "recreating the horrors of war to put it into perspective", yeah right. No one plays COD2 and comes away thinking "war sucks! I never want to go to war!". The vast majority of people play it and go "THIS IS AWESOME! Lookat that explosion! hahaha I just shot that guy's head! Oh wow look at my friend's body fly through the air! So cool!"

You obviously skim read, or did not fully read my post. If you notice i said "attempt" to recreate the horrors of war. No-one has. If they had, fuck me, people would be emotionally scarred for life and as such never play an FPS again. Not very profitable is it?

20.
 
Re:
Dec 31, 2005, 09:37
20.
Re: Dec 31, 2005, 09:37
Dec 31, 2005, 09:37
 
I should say the same thing about your "PREPONDERANCE of evidence" statement, which is even more meaningless than the actual statistic (stamped with the approval of the US Department of Justice) that I provided.
LOL! The problem is not the source of your crime rate statistics but the totally speculative conclusion you draw from them. Crime rates may have fallen, but to attribute that to video games is just conjecture. It is much more likely that crime rates fell during that period due to factors such as increased prosperity and significant increases in law enforcement officers and resources. It is also just as likely that crime rates would have fallen more during the same period due to those other factors had it not been for the rise of violent video games than to attribute the drop in crime to games.

Remember I said I actually find it doubtful that entertainment media has any real affect on the rate of violent crime, though
If you find it so doubtful then you should not have used that as one of your principal arguments.

If you want to argue whether video media or video games specifically begets violent behavior, then use facts and reasoning which directly support your position. Simply citing crime statistics does not do that.

This comment was edited on Dec 31, 09:44.
19.
 
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin
Dec 31, 2005, 06:46
19.
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin Dec 31, 2005, 06:46
Dec 31, 2005, 06:46
 
Do you honestly believe the Rambo and Pearl Harbor movies are "paying homage" to the casualties of war? Do you honestly believe that Wolfenstein games and Indiana Jones films pay homage to the battles against fascism? Do you really think that these games are being made to "pay homage" to anyone? Come on now. Be honest with yourself.

We all know these games and movies don't give a crap about any of that. Saving Private Ryan pays homage. Band of Brothers pays homage. Medal of Honor Pacific Assault does not pay homage. It's a game that exploits war dead.

Do you think Conflict: Global Terror pays homage? No, let's get real here. That game's developers said "hey! People hate terrorists! Let's let people kill them in a game so we can make money!"

Your entire post is a big example of what the problem is. You think games should be made in which real life people should be labelled as "bad guys" to be slaughtered en masse with glorious music swelling in the background as you do so. Who glorifies the death of our enemies in such a way, in the political realm? Crazy ass talk show hosts, that's about it.

When it comes right down to it, most of the popular video games are not much more than those crazed talk show hosts like O'Reilly or Limbaugh, or a popcorn history/action film maker like Michael Bay.

As for "recreating the horrors of war to put it into perspective", yeah right. No one plays COD2 and comes away thinking "war sucks! I never want to go to war!". The vast majority of people play it and go "THIS IS AWESOME! Lookat that explosion! hahaha I just shot that guy's head! Oh wow look at my friend's body fly through the air! So cool!"
Adventures of a video game mercenary
http://virtualmerc.blogspot.com
18.
 
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin
Dec 31, 2005, 03:06
18.
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin Dec 31, 2005, 03:06
Dec 31, 2005, 03:06
 
Give me the name of an FPS that allows you to kill Allied soldiers.

Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory.

That was too easy.

edit: Do I get bonus points for mentioning Battlefield 1942?

-----
Blue's Post Enhancer Greasemonkey script:
http://camaro76.web.aplus.net/bluesnewspostenhancer.user.js
Blue's Punk Buster (Troll-B-Gone) Greasemonkey script:
http://camaro76.web.aplus.net/punkbuster.user.js
This comment was edited on Dec 31, 03:08.
--------
BOOBIES Filter Greasemonkey script:
http://camaro76.web.aplus.net/BOOBIES_filter.user.js
Punk Buster (Ignore Trolls) Greasemonkey script:
http://camaro76.web.aplus.net/punkbuster.user.js
17.
 
Re:
Dec 31, 2005, 01:55
17.
Re: Dec 31, 2005, 01:55
Dec 31, 2005, 01:55
 
Anyone that says Doom caused Columbine is an idiot.

Video games do not make people more violent.
Naturally violent people are drawn to video games, though.

So a lot of violence comes from people that play games. Ask yourself which came first - the video games or the tendancy towards violence?
The easy answer is to assume there are no bad people and video games caused it.



Try sticking your head further into the sand.

-------------
Doomriders: the first new band worth a signature - http://www.deathwishinc.com/
16.
 
Re:
Dec 31, 2005, 00:34
16.
Re: Dec 31, 2005, 00:34
Dec 31, 2005, 00:34
 
"p.s. to sky, your statistics are meaningless unless you correct for other effects"

I should say the same thing about your "PREPONDERANCE of evidence" statement, which is even more meaningless than the actual statistic (stamped with the approval of the US Department of Justice) that I provided. Remember I said I actually find it doubtful that entertainment media has any real affect on the rate of violent crime, though. Did you feel like killing dozens of teenagers after playing the original Doom? Do you honestly believe that Doom is what caused Columbine? 'cause I don't.


Avatar 22932
15.
 
"devil's" advocate
Dec 30, 2005, 23:16
15.
"devil's" advocate Dec 30, 2005, 23:16
Dec 30, 2005, 23:16
 
Hey kids,

I love violent video games as much as anyone, but there is a PREPONDERANCE of evidence that violent media (INCLUDING tv, video games, music and literature), and especially visual media, predisposes groups of people toward violence. This is as well-established as anything else in psychology. However, this does NOT mean that everyone who enjoys these media will engage in this behavior. It just means they are MORE LIKELY to do so in a given situation than they would have otherwise. And so what????? I can see why opponents of video game violence would find this troubling, but why do gamers refuse to accept this about themselves? Why do you find it so impossible to accept about yourself? Why not just acknowledge it, and then remind videogame opponents that it is your right to play these games regardless?

After all, ultimately it is the upbringing and the environment of the gamer that plays the largest role in predicting their behavior. If you play violent games but have received a stable upbringing and have not been exposed to violence growing up, then video games will not be the cause that pushes you over the edge into violent behavior.

p.s. to sky, your statistics are meaningless unless you correct for other effects. For instance, it means absolutely NOTHING that violent crime has gone down as videogame popularity has risen UNLESS you can also show that 1. the number of VIDEOGAME players committing violent crimes are not increasing and 2. a decrease in crime levels is not being caused by something like more police officers on the street etc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
14.
 
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin
Dec 30, 2005, 22:38
14.
Re: I agree with first op ed's main poin Dec 30, 2005, 22:38
Dec 30, 2005, 22:38
 
The reason why killing Germans in games set in WW2, or VC or shooting Japanese fighters out of the sky is because they were the bad guys.

People didnt like the re-enactment of killing JFK was because JFK was a good guy. If it was Hitler, no-one would give a shit. The victors write history, and consequently control how past events are remembered.

If the Germans had won WW2, im sure we'd be shooting allied soldiers in an FPS, not German soldiers. Give me the name of an FPS that allows you to kill Allied soldiers. I personally don't know of one. Some games (IL/IL2 Sturmovik, Soldiers: Heroes of WW2) allow this, but these games are by far in the minority.

Games are created for fun. Ok so companies are profiting directly/indirectly by the massive loss of lives in war, but if we had no games based upon history, all we'd have would be fantasy/sci-fi games which would be thoroughly boring.

Have you ever thought as well that this spate of FPS war games are actually doing homage to the men and women who died in war? Have you ever thought that by attempting to recreate the horrors of war in a game it would put into perspective just what those men and women did to create the world we live in today, and as such stop future wars from happening, not to mention incur a certain amount of respect for what they actually did?

Just throwing it out there.

13.
 
I agree with first op ed's main points
Dec 30, 2005, 21:52
13.
I agree with first op ed's main points Dec 30, 2005, 21:52
Dec 30, 2005, 21:52
 
I agree with the main points of the "human suffering" op ed. I believe that any media that purposefully turns real-life events into entertainment is unethical. Most "based on real events" video games are no more ethical than the Rambo or Pearl Harbor movies, which is to say that all they care about is making money off the corpses of war dead.

Remember that JFK Reloaded game, where you assassinate President Kennedy? Everyone said that game was disgusting. I challenged that belief, and said it was no different than killing "Bad Guy Commander #20011" in any Call of Duty game. Or that mission in 1942 Pacific Air War where I shot down the Japanese supreme admiral with my P-38. Killing Kennedy and killing that admiral is the same exact thing. Both are just military leaders. So why is it people find killing Kennedy is somehow unacceptable, while this woman's op ed is somehow wrong? She's essentially making the same argument most gamers made about the JFK Reloaded game: you don't make a mockery of real life human suffering by turning it into a game.

People said that killing Kennedy was different than killing Germans in Call of Duty, because in COD, the Germans have no names. Does that mean if Kennedy's name had been changed to "Kenneth", JFK reloaded would be OK? Of course not. And so, the realistic recreations of real WW2 battles, in which real American and German forces died, is not more acceptable simply because the names are different.

The second half of the op-ed goes on about how people may be getting more desensitized to violence thanks to games and other violent media. This topic, I don't really care about. She also goes on about how all game violence is bad. Nuts to that. But the first half of what she wrote is pretty spot on to me and shouldn't be dismissed so quickly.

All that being said, I love DOD, COD, and BF2 games. But if you took all the combat mechanics of those games and put them into a fictional war environment (think of the Ace Combat PS2 games), I'd be much more comfortable with them. Instead, I get to reenact the real deaths of people.. and enjoy doing it. That's just wrong.


This comment was edited on Dec 30, 21:56.
Adventures of a video game mercenary
http://virtualmerc.blogspot.com
12.
 
Re: Games? what about books?
Dec 30, 2005, 18:20
12.
Re: Games? what about books? Dec 30, 2005, 18:20
Dec 30, 2005, 18:20
 
Well I'm currently in the midst of the third novel in the Malazan book of the fallen series,(Memories of ice.) and it is far more graphic and violently intense than any game I have had the pleasure to play

That series is the best i've ever read, and that particular book is very very violent i agree, not to mention the best (i find anyway) in the series. The siege of Caputsan (i believe it's that city) and the Tenescowri are some of the most violent and graphic things i've ever read. And i agree that it is much more violent than any game i have ever played or movie i have ever seen.

It's just a shame people are looking for a scapegoat. Why don't people blame movies or books?

11.
 
Re: Human suffering
Dec 30, 2005, 16:53
11.
Re: Human suffering Dec 30, 2005, 16:53
Dec 30, 2005, 16:53
 
the author is "Julia Fullmer" she has no idea what shes talking about. Ill bet she's never even play a game before. I want to know if games are so bad what do horror movies show. There is more Violence in horror movies than games but no one complains about that. She talks about halo but she seems to forget or not know it is set in outer space with aliens not humans as enemy's. The main problem with the kids that killed the children in school were screw in the head long before they played games. Its the parents fault for not teaching there kids right from wrong. Plus not seeing the problems they had ahead of time. The signs were their they just had to care and look.Anyways the lady author is full of crap.
steven aka
;sgoell75
10.
 
Re: In-game Advertising
Dec 30, 2005, 16:29
10.
Re: In-game Advertising Dec 30, 2005, 16:29
Dec 30, 2005, 16:29
 
Why not go further where the companies are using MMORPG's as a medium for providing services directly? Do online banking through your favorite MMORPG, pay bills, manage your credit card, file your taxes, buy a car, shop for clothes, find a mate, take some online college courses, join a church, etc. What are we getting ourselves into?

How do you know you're not currently playing an MMORPG, thinking it's 'real life'? The game is just that convincing.

As these MMORPGs and Sims-type games become more and more realistic, this question will seem less and less 'out there'. Just you wait..

Avatar 20985
9.
 
Games? what about books?
Dec 30, 2005, 16:01
9.
Games? what about books? Dec 30, 2005, 16:01
Dec 30, 2005, 16:01
 
Well I'm currently in the midst of the third novel in the Malazan book of the fallen series,(Memories of ice.) and it is far more graphic and violently intense than any game I have had the pleasure to play, and I truly believe that games such as Call of Duty, and Brothers in arms is meant as a homeage rather than a mockery in any way, besides these games are a different approach to story telling and reaches a different demographic than the discovery channel usually could.

I have quite frankly been exposed to violent media most of my life, and nothing has been more intense and graphic in it's nature as litterature.

If we are going to point any fingers towards any one thing to cause pain, death and suffering my choice would be religion.
How many muslims has been murdered in the name of christ?
How many christians have been slain in the name of Allah?
far too many is MY answer.

Yet these deaths has been caused by the "misguided" few.
I have far too many friends in either religion too not see the good of both.
And when one sits down and compares the similarities of the two beliefs. one could only wonder at the dispute in the first place.
----------------------------
Yes, I abuse grammar by opening my mouth.
8.
 
Re: In-game Advertising
Dec 30, 2005, 15:46
8.
Re: In-game Advertising Dec 30, 2005, 15:46
Dec 30, 2005, 15:46
 
Note that link is from BYU.

Mormons. Didn't they kick a girl out because she slept with males in the same room on MTV once?


Devout mormons have little connection with the reality of today's world. By no means all of them, but every religion has their crazies, and mormons send theirs to BYU.

-------------
Doomriders: the first new band worth a signature - http://www.deathwishinc.com/
7.
 
In-game Advertising
Dec 30, 2005, 15:14
7.
In-game Advertising Dec 30, 2005, 15:14
Dec 30, 2005, 15:14
 
"Soon you’ll be earning virtual dollars to buy virtual Nike shoes to put on your virtual toon that gets into their virtual Ford car and drives by a dozen billboards hawking everything from iPods to Viagra. And guess what? You’ll probably be thrilled to do it if they design their games correctly."

Why not go further where the companies are using MMORPG's as a medium for providing services directly? Do online banking through your favorite MMORPG, pay bills, manage your credit card, file your taxes, buy a car, shop for clothes, find a mate, take some online college courses, join a church, etc. What are we getting ourselves into?

6.
 
Re: Human suffering
Dec 30, 2005, 14:57
6.
Re: Human suffering Dec 30, 2005, 14:57
Dec 30, 2005, 14:57
 
Very nice skyguy,please let us know if you ever get an answer.I'm betting no answer.

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that it's difficult to discern weather or not they are genuine"-Abraham Lincoln
Avatar 13436
25 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older