Violent computer games

So i guess you get your ass kicked by your mates ... playing then. Same here , i quickly disliked computer games once i realised i was crap at them hahahah . So games that require just one person and not the humilation of a ass whooping , well i can see the appeal.

 

Nope... just never seen the appeal of spending hours on end trying to beat up or shoot something that doesn't exist.

 

I was only pulling your leg...i am crap at computer games ...but i am crap because i agree with you that that spending hours beating/shooting something up that will ultimatly win ...because its just a game and once you complete you have to start again or they bring out a sequel , never realy appealed to me either.

Its what is known as a 'cheap dig' i think

 

i dont dig violent games but super nintendo is awsome

 

I live by the love and peace principle, I don't see what that has to do with a fictional New York getting overrun by Russian communists and I end up shooting and killing them. It's not real violence, if you don't like it, dont buy the games.

Its entertainment. It makes money. Stop getting into other peoples' business and mind your own, if you don't like violent movies or games, don't play or watch them.

I have played violent videogames before....a couple years ago I was pretty addicted to Delta Force Land Warrior, and this last summer I played Freedom Fighter on ps2 a lot. I dont play them much now, videogames have gotten pretty boring. The gaming industry is looking in all other directions, they've covered pretty much every aspect of life. Its a little thing called 'freedom of expression', if you dont like it, dont worry about it. Let people have fun with violent videogames if they want, they arent hurting anybody.

Your opinion is wrong. Did any U.S. soldiers die in the air raids on Iraq? No.

 

what are you on .... it seems your agreeing with me..but saying i am wrong. i don't understand...

plus leave the original poster alone..they are just making a observation and commenting on their point of view. ok comment but don't be so confrontational...

 

Violent video games are fun, but kids shouldnt be playing them just like they shouldn't be watching violent movies. There is a line between a child's world and an adults. What's sad is that most marketing is geared towards kids and parents that give kids anything they ask for to shut them up feed the monkey even more.

 

I agree with soulrebel51 you don't like the violence on video games don't go buy them. Also if you don't like violence on tv or movies don't go waste your money. I can relate with soulrebel51 because I used to be addicted to playing delta force and I actually remember him from the game, but as of now I really don't play video games anymore because they kinda just got old. I'd say in most cases though it would be said if you are good parents you won't let your children watch the violence on movies, tv, or video games

 

i think we should all be thanking violent games...without them people with the urge to kill would have nowhere to go...without violent computer games there would be more people running through malls with automatic weapons...i know it works for me...every computer animated person i explode the head of means one less real life person i want to push down some stairs the next day...

 

There is a lot of speculation as to whether violence in movies and video games can be considered the cause for the increase in violent crime in our country. I strongly doubt that people are that impressionable as to have seen death on a video game and been influenced to commit a violent crime. This is, ofcourse, giving people the benefit of the doubt. The number of violent crime in this country rose 3-fold from 1965-1975. Are we to blame the civil rights movement and the subsequent freedom of black individuals for this influx? No, we're not, but I've actually heard that argument. Violent crime is actually on the decline, and honestly, there will never be any way to gather empirical evidence that one factor or another caused violence, and trying to pin-point a cause is always going to be a guessing game. To quote comedian David Cross "wait, I forgot, what are those video games Hitler played?".

Children should not be listening to violent music, or playing violent video games, but the makers of these video games still posess the right to manufacture these games for older customers. There is something called a constitution, and there is something in that constitution called "Article 1". I suggest anyone with a complaint about art-forms first get their hands on a copy. There was a privleged woman in 1990, her name was Tipper. She decided that because she was too irresponsible to raise her child properly, and therefore too stupid not to neglect her child, art was hers to violate. This is how we got "discretion" labels on C.D.s. That's fine with me. But now people who can't raise their children properly have something to look for before buying something for their kid. My round-about point is this, video games are sold in stores, in packages. If you don't like what you've heard about a particular video game, you don't have to wander into that store and buy that packaged video game. No one will ever prove that video games cause any type of violence.

By the way, Orsino, I always hear people say things about how games that don't teach them resoning skills are pointless. It's fine if you like 'mentally stimulating' games, but that's a bit of an absolutist argument. In that context, watching television or movies is completely pointless. Sometimes people don't want to use their brain. Sometimes people simply want to sit on their ass in a bean-bag chair and shoot things.

P.S. I don't believe that violence in movies and games has increased support for a war. Granted, they may help one be less hesitant to shoot another in a war (speculation), but it doesn't effect over-all the way people reason when it comes to geopolitics. Playing Vice City isn't going to make us all stop asking why we're going to war. There always were and always will be spartans, and the reason why there was much more resistance in the late '60s was because there was still a hippie movement. That really doesn't exist anymore. We might be more prone to supporting a war these days because statistically 40% less of our population reads, but not because we played a video game with violence. People are simply less-educated today. Had half this population lived 40 years ago, they probably would have supported the war in Vietnam because none of them would have read enough to know that A:It was essentially a civil war which we should have had no part and that B:It was a war fought solely to save face in the midst of the Cold War with communist Russia. Face it, people are less educated today, but you can't blame Rock Star north for that.

 

I am not on anything. From what you posted, it seems as if you believe the U.S. was in as much danger as the Iraqis were during the imperial bombing. You are wrong, they weren't in any danger at all.

He asked for opinions, and I gave him mine. Don't be such a baby.

 

Sure i guess they didn't, but some of my fellow Canadians were bobmed by piolets in Afghanistan.... And BTW- You cant tell someone that their opinion is wrong....

I think the argument against violent games that is "they are so violent, kids can beat rained snipers at these games" is sooo outa wack that it makes me sick...What if the sniper cant controll both his hands like that...You don't see any expert hockey players being beat by nerds out on the ice...

 

I knew that, but we're not talking about the Canadians. He appeared to be saying that U.S. soldiers involved in the Iraqi bombings were in as much danger as the Iraqis being bombed, which is pure fucking ignorance.

If a person's opinion defies logic or reality (Matthew managed to do both) then the opinion is wrong.