BTKGF
btkgf blog
Yeeeeeeeessssss?
Posts: 453
|
Post by BTKGF on Oct 16, 2007 6:39:04 GMT -5
With the recent Manhunt 2 censorship thing over this side of the pond I thought it would be good to debate whether or not censorship should be taken further with computer games?
I fear I may be preaching to the chore but I just want to get my view out there.
Games are given an age category. But this is only a guideline and it is up to the guardian of the under 18 to decide if it is suitable. once they are 18 they get to choose for themselves.
It is like a movie... There are 16 year olds who would be too immature to view a 16's movie and there are 15 year olds who would be responsible enough and mature enough to watch it.
So in saying that I believe I have realized the point most campaigners to remove violent computer games don't want you to realize. They want the relevant authority to parent peoples kids for them.
If I had children it would be my choice whether or not to let them play Resident Evil or the ilk. They want that option removed from parents just so they can see other peoples kids raised as they would raise their own.
Where do they stop? Campaigners decide no one should eat meat? ban meat (extrema expel but needs pointing out). I don't do it so why dint we ban S&M. I must point out I don't mind people doing it so I am the wrong person to be making these examples but you get my point.
I am all for freedom of choice and to take that away from parents is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by M.Madison on Oct 16, 2007 7:13:28 GMT -5
This one reminds me of all of the stress this forum goes through to keep it "PG 13". It's in my nature to want to protect youth, but is it really my duty to do so.
Not really...
Number one , I have to leave that up to the trust of the forum's members to tell the truth when it comes to age.
Number two, I have to hope there is responsible parents on the other side of the computer screen. Which in my experience, 7 times out of 10, there just isn't. Some parents use the computer like some use the TV, as a babysitter. It keeps the child quiet and content for long periods of time.
But to totally ban anything due to reason's like this, I personally think goes against the free speech ideal and takes away our right to choose.
|
|
Dragon Slayer
oziez's blog mod
Quest Status: Currently Hunting A Dragon
Posts: 266
|
Post by Dragon Slayer on Oct 19, 2007 18:58:07 GMT -5
GRRR so it begins, the damned child violence related to video games (SO THEY SAY)
Its wrong, seeing the enemys flesh tear apart after you brutally slash at them with a chainsaw or a
Machete is what makes games enjoyable. would you like to have a demon walk up to you bite into your
neck and have rainbows and butterflies cover the gorey sweetness....I THINK NOT !!!!!!!!
the games clearly say 18+ or M for mature, if a parent wants to buy it for there kids they obviously dont
know math or dont even care. the stores will not sell a M or 18+ to a kid without parents approval and
there isnt a secret video games trade facility. when i was 12 i tried to buy a M or 18+ video game for
double the price just so i can have it but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If in the end theres no violence in any games i will destroy the companys buildings.
( if that dragon is behind this ive hit the fan with its discusting face and i will finally rid the world of its presents )
|
|
Dragon Slayer
oziez's blog mod
Quest Status: Currently Hunting A Dragon
Posts: 266
|
Post by Dragon Slayer on Oct 19, 2007 19:01:24 GMT -5
NOW GIVE ME MY COOKIE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (gives a sad face) please
|
|
|
Post by M.Madison on Oct 20, 2007 9:32:03 GMT -5
lol btkgf has to post one more time..you need to give a chance for rhetorical responses. But I personally agree with you on this.
If the parents don't want their child to see stuff like that then they should monitor their kids, it's really that simple.
|
|
BTKGF
btkgf blog
Yeeeeeeeessssss?
Posts: 453
|
Post by BTKGF on Oct 22, 2007 3:51:25 GMT -5
If in the end theres no violence in any games i will destroy the companys buildings. I think this is the exact reason advocates of non violent video games are talking about. they would say that it is the games that are making you violent toward the company. However by both your own and my argument you are just a violent person. Predisposed toward violence. I say movies are much worse for violence. Suppose they are right and the games do cause violence I would have thought movies were worse. This is because in the games you do the actions yourself and you will not need to try them in real life. Where as the movie just demonstrates them. To get any gratification from it you need to act them out. Violence is caused by many things but I do not believe it can be caused by escapism. Computer Games are escapism and it is the real world that makes us violent. When has a computer game hurt your feelings? When has it insulted you personally (not counting things like in the 11th Hour where the main character is constantly insulted)? When did it Last hit you or neglect you? When did it smash up your stuff? When did it offer you drugs? I am guessing never would be the answers to all those. Reality makes us violent not fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by M.Madison on Oct 23, 2007 7:41:33 GMT -5
split the cookie between the two of you?
I think you both had very good arguments so far, lets wait for Dragon Slayer to respond.
|
|
Dragon Slayer
oziez's blog mod
Quest Status: Currently Hunting A Dragon
Posts: 266
|
Post by Dragon Slayer on Oct 24, 2007 15:10:14 GMT -5
lol i was kidding around
|
|
Dragon Slayer
oziez's blog mod
Quest Status: Currently Hunting A Dragon
Posts: 266
|
Post by Dragon Slayer on Oct 24, 2007 15:25:50 GMT -5
To continue my arguement i am in high school currently and constantly people are getting beaten by gangs
half the kids smoke or deal drugs even.
how can you blame this on videogames...my friend recently got involved with a gang and he hates
videogames.
do you think that college shootings and high school shootings or whatever the hell this whole thing is about
are based on videogames....NO !!!!!!!
simply because shootings like those are based on depression, and rage against there peers.
do you honestly think someone would play a game like DOOM and say OMG i have to kill somebody... or
even a more realistic type game like GTA and say that....NO.
the press is printing these foolish articles about this with no evidence, all they want to fill a
blank spot in a newspaper.
And when people say im gonna destroy a building which im sure you have heard has it ever happened...
~ THIS ONE'S GONNA OWN ALL OTHER ARGUMENTS ~
If say we did take all violence outta games than KIDS, yes kids will think its ok to hit someone cause IT DOESNT HURT. or if there's no violence in games NOBODY WOULD BUY THEM. ok why do you think kids want them, to find out how to kill someone......NO! cause if there isnt any violence mickey mouse will be taken of shelfs...OH YA ive seen my little sisters play and you still have to kill things.
( YOU GOT OWNED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! )
|
|
Dragon Slayer
oziez's blog mod
Quest Status: Currently Hunting A Dragon
Posts: 266
|
Post by Dragon Slayer on Oct 24, 2007 15:27:37 GMT -5
Glue That cookie back together its mine
|
|
BTKGF
btkgf blog
Yeeeeeeeessssss?
Posts: 453
|
Post by BTKGF on Oct 25, 2007 2:55:52 GMT -5
As for your no one would buy non violent video games point. I do not believe that is true. There are a lot of games out there that are not based on violence. Racing games (F1 etc.) for example. Though there can be violence in htem sports games such as the Fifa ranges are not based on violence and I am sure would work just as well without the violence. That is assuming a late tackel counts as violence in your book.
The shootings may be based on depretion etc. but I think you are starting another debate. Here we have the same violence in computer games but there are no shootings in class rooms. That is due to the fact that the vast majority of us don't own guns. (Gun control debate to insue)
There is more violence in old cartoons than there is in modern computer games. Roadrunner for instance. The differance is that there are consiquences in computer games but there were never any in old cartoons. you drop a rock on somone in a game they die. you drop a rock on someone in an old cartoon they just stuck their fingur in their mouths and blew to reinflait themselve. Which is more realistic.
Truely it comes down to one thing. Personal choice. In my group of "Friends" (I say it like that as there is one I shal mention as a friend that no longer is a friend) there were the posibilitys for lots of things if I wanted to get into them. Drugs, Bands, achidemics.....Many things. I CHOSE to go down the road of getting a degree and a house. I did not do the drugs thast were offered to me. The choice was mine not to be in that group. I also did not like what it was doing to my friend and I told him this and he gave me the choice to go away or accept it. we slowly drifted appart after that and I would no longer call him a friend.
You can blaim what you like, music, violent games, depretion but when that persons, who was standing infront of you 5 secons before, braines are making a Jakson Polok on your school wall you pulled the trigger no one else.
|
|
|
Post by M.Madison on Oct 25, 2007 14:04:49 GMT -5
So, here's the tally.. Dragon Slayer says no ban on video game violence. and btkgf says it's open to personal choice... and I say it's up to personal choice and responsibility. The standing in this debate is neutral draw, all three debaters agree with each other to an extent that video violence shouldn't be banned. All three debaters have well thought out arguments but I'm awarding the cookie to Dragon Slayer this time. Dragon Slayer feel free to open the next debate Dragon Slayer + 10 karma ... debate is closed.
|
|