I like this quote: ""Television has 4.8 violent scenes per hour and nursery rhymes have 52.2 violent scenes per hour," say the adult scientists." :D
And i assume that is the MODERN versions of the fairy tales (as edited by the victorians) not the original ones (such as where the evil stepmother had her feet encased in hot iron shoes and was forced to dance at snow-white's wedding for the entertainment of the guests until she died).
Of course, the original fairy tales were supposed to teach kids lessons, but recently that has been watered down by taking out some of the violence.
:D I got quoted!!!:D
PS/ I DID maye it up myself *sulks*, though i didn't think it was especially clever when i said it. The things i thought were clever were dismissed... :eek: :confused: :D
PPS/ DOes that site have a review for Requiem: Avenging angel? Its interesting that attacking demos is considered bad, but is a major part of the bible...
If games were the problem, why has real violence been a problem since the begining of mankind?
I saw on the Poastal website that the game Poastal was banned in 10 third world coutries. don't you think it is strange that they thought banning a game was more important than feeding their population?
They said it was condemed by the US senate, a senater said the 2 worst things in america is marylin manson and the game Poastal. now that is something to luagh about.
There was a lawsuit by postal workers people aginst the company for naming it "Poastal" and they're still going! they should have better ways to spent taxpayers money on.
The original Poastal website proudly announced this.
Wouldn't be America without lawsuits eh?
I can find at least 10 things that are worse then Postal or Marylin Manson. Oh wait, I listen to a lot of Manson's songs...oh man I must be a homicidal maniac!
ah nothing to worry about....i'm 21 in about 2 months. gonna go play 'america's army' in february if i'm up to it. :D
The ESRB rating is sometimes wrong. Like Mario Party 4 and 5. They are rated G8+ for gambling. The gambling is spending stuff. Can someone explain what part is gambling. Maybe the board in no.4 which has a roulette is why. But thats just one!
(I dont like Mario Party. My sis does and she likes me to play it.)
Originally posted by Rogue15
ah nothing to worry about....i'm 21 in about 2 months. gonna go play 'america's army' in february if i'm up to it. :D
Hmm I didn't think about it...America's Army. Why isn't it on any of those list? It's a realitic depiction of war. It's as close as you get. Gee I wonder why it isn't boycotted....
Let's put it simple:
All rating systems are based on someone's opinion.
If we were in charge of the rating system, they would be alot different.
that became clear in the Uk when the previous head of the BBFC (British board of film censorship) left, and suddenly all these films hat had been banned/edited were allowed (exorcist, i spit on your grave, etc..) or were allowed uncot (bruce lee nunchaku scenes, etc..)
No changes in laws or rules, just a change in the person interpreting them.
----------------
I still think that, in general, the game ratings are pretty good. Informative graphics and comments about content.
It isn't the game makers fault if parents and shops ignore them.
Mayeb they should also include the film rating system on the front, like on dvds, as there is at least a chance that the parents will understand that...
...or mabie they should rate movies and gmes based on how much of each thing, Example:
Nudity factor: 5/10
Gore Factor: 3/10
Sexual Content Factor 9/10
Language Factor 2/10
etc...
they have to have a certain amount before they CAN have higher ratings, like how many swear words they say, what body parts is shown, and what % of the movie is covered with gore...
then the ratings will be based on fact not opinion.
A system like that wouldn't perfect either. How will we judge which swear word is worse then another? What if the message it contains is "dangerous" without the use of foul language? What can we consider has a nude body part(I know some crazy people will want to ban a movie because they see some cleavage)?
We'll never get a perfect system I guess.
Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
A system like that wouldn't perfect either. How will we judge which swear word is worse then another? What if the message it contains is "dangerous" without the use of foul language? What can we consider has a nude body part(I know some crazy people will want to ban a movie because they see some cleavage)?
We'll never get a perfect system I guess.
maybie we can list the specific swear words in it.
My Dad says we are defending the video games only becuase we are the ones addicted to it, like the ciguretta addicts defend the cigarettes.
when crazy dog said "anyone who would confuse graphics with real life has to be messed up to begin with." dad says " you do't confuse the things, you get immune to it"
I stil disagree. Klebold and Harris did the schol shooting at 17, and i'm 24 and I havent even considered hurting anyone yet. I'm not gooing to turn into a homicidal maniac anytime soon...
i can somwhat see the "getting immune" angle. But it isn't in any way related to games... movies, tv, advertising, even radio all have to try and be more and more shocking to get people's attention (especially with so much out there, vying for people's fickle attention)
I know that games and tv and movies that were shocking a few years back are no longer very shocking at all these days. And scenes that would have guaranteed an 18 certificate get in 12 cert film these days too.
That said, familiarity definately reduces shock value. I remember thinking the battles in Gladiator were incredibly intense when i watched it in the cinema. But even a few weeks later when i went again with a different lot of mates it had lost a lot of it's shock value.
I perfectly agree with limiting exposure to violent games to certain ages, but i don't think games should be treated differntly to movies or games, and i definatley don't think that games for adults should be neutered just so kids don't get affected by them.
Originally posted by kipperthefrog
My Dad says we are defending the video games only becuase we are the ones addicted to it, like the ciguretta addicts defend the cigarettes.
Not really. I know a lot of smokers who don't defend the cigarette and know clearly that it harms their health and the one of the people around them.
So they do their own stuff away from other people.
Please forgive my double posting but I had something to report:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2004-12-01&res=l)
Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
Please forgive my double posting but I had something to report:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2004-12-01&res=l)
:rofl:
Thats too funny! People should know by now that they're is more violence in the real world than in most video games, so if you block them from the games they'll only get stung by reality. Also, they don't seem too understand the concept of "Its just a game." *sigh*.:rolleyes:
Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
Not really. I know a lot of smokers who don't defend the cigarette and know clearly that it harms their health and the one of the people around them.
So they do their own stuff away from other people.
I wish my dad wouls post here and try to argue with you. you guys have good points and you would trly help him see the light.
Maybie the "hoo hahh" about violence in video games is all media insighted.
Don't worry guys, we have the software corperations on our side. they have billions of dollars that say "VIOLENT IS HERE TO STAY!" as long as someone is getting rich, they won't ban them in America.