Let's Not Get Ahead Of Ourselves
Last week saw some interesting news on the video game front as the National Institute on Media and the Family (NIMF) announced they will shut their doors at the end of the year.Apparently, sitting around making up lists about what games kids shouldn't play doesn't make as much money as you'd think.
Now, the reaction on the gamers' side has been mostly positive. A lot of gamers saw those lists as an indictment of gaming as a whole. Do we really need another list of the most violent games of a year?
Gaming isn't all violence. Yes, some games do involve violence, but the majority do not.
Unless you include plumber on turtle violence.
Then... Yeah.
The thing is, this isn't really a reason to celebrate. This isn't a victory any gamer should be happy about.
Yeah, they gave violent games a lot of shit. They created lists to keep parents from buying violent games.
That's not bad.
See, it wasn't censorship exactly. They were actually trying to educate parents about how little Billy maybe shouldn't be allowed to play the game with all the dismembering and the disemboweling and the hey now.
That's a noble ideal.
Sure, how they went about it made gamers a little angry. We tend not to like when anyone suggests that there could be anything wrong with video games whatsoever.
We're a very angry people.
Not at all related to video games, though.
But if you look at it honestly, what they were trying to do wasn't all bad. Behind the big bad list of the evil vidjeo games, there was a message that parents should work to make good choices for their children.
I'm sorry, but your ten year old kid shouldn't be playing Call Of Duty. If you purchased this game for your child, you are a terrible parent.
A lot of parents don't know that. All they know is that Christmas time is coming or it's Billy's birthday and all he wants is that MurderKiller8000 game for his Wiistation 480.
How bad could it be, right? Let's just take your kid's judgment on that one.
People don't end up violent because of video games. They end up violent because of their moron parents.
NIMF tried to change that. They were a cheat sheet for game buying.
I'm sure they did other things, but since they are not related to video games, they have no bearing on my life.
They were trying to help parents understand what games their kids were asking for were really like.
Was that really so bad?
Yeah, we won't have another list to bitch and moan about, but we'll also have entire fields of tech-retarded parents buying their retarded kids whatever games they ask for.
And servers packed deep with their retarded offspring.
Then one of those retarded, neglected children is going to do something stupid and/or violent. And who are they going to blame?
That's right. Video games.
Not the idiot parents who bought the game without finding out what it was about. No, sir.
Seriously, this was a hollow victory and not one to be celebrated.
...
We did win though.
posted by Goblin Smithy @ 8:08 PM
14 Comments:
First^^
Those lists of the most violent video games were useful. How else are we supposed to know which ones to buy first to satisfy our bloodlust?
@ ~G: Yay, you're first. Now how about learning how to be a useful human being? That meme was too fucking old five years ago.
Now, I never saw those lists, but as long as they only stated the content of the games and didn't try to indict them, then there should have never been a problem.
Especially the new Call of Duty where you stroll through a Russian Airport and kill every civilian in sight. That's definately not rated "E for Everyone".
I'd love to play an MMORPG that doesn't allow anyone under the age of 18. We'll call it Naked Bisexual Vampire Babes With Swords.
Leut? Daggers>swords, they are sexier
@Kimberly-Ann
No, I have to disagree. Swords are much sexier, depending on the sword. However daggers are a close second.
Katanas>all
Guns be good to people, smexy guns are HOT.
@ ~G dumbass!!
Yeh I agree Dave as long as it wasn't censorship it was ok. And yeah we could miss a couple of those anoying kidds in our "adults only" games!
Allthough the QQ in chat when you faceroll them over and over again is... priceless!!
You guys have a lot of anger issues if you're getting upset about me saying "First".
I'm also not certain how saying First pertains to my usefulness as a human being, but if you're satisfied continuing your life as a delusional individual, you go right ahead Jakk.
@~G: Because you contributed nothing to the discussion and simply wasted bandwidth.
I Agree with Dave on this one, because those lists, aside from being exgagerated over by the media (mainly) and getting us gamers all psyched-out, where useful for that one purpose stated: keep the kids away from the potentially harmful games they may want to play.
Well done Dave :)
And ~G, the "First" sort of comments are unnecesary, and as the first comment you see "hits" you in some way, it should be something worthwhile.
Which in your case, is not.
So don't get upset, and come to realise it was just a waste of time.
Both yours, and ours.
We have a rating system for parents to look into to find out if games are violent, or hey here's a novel idea, they could actually TALK to their children, look over some gamer magazine reviews with the content fairly outlined for consumers!
I'm sorry, if you only didn't give you kid a violent video game because it was on some list - You're still a horrible parent just the same as if you unknowingly bought it for them.
Ignorance we can cure, but stupid is forever. Being a parent is more work than just checking a list, and the more crutches we take away from them the better. Shape up or sterilize yourself.
Post a Comment
<< Home