PureBasic Forums - English

ShadowRunnaX wrote:Thanks for all the great arguments, with such a wide range of people's opinions and views, I'm pretty much ready.

Personally, I believed that the people blaming violent videogames on violent behaviour were totally obsurd and obviously had never played videogames themselves.

What also needs to be considered is "What is violent?" Ban violent videogames, then ban:

-Terminator (example of a film)
-Star Wars (Jedi fights)
-Tom and Jerry (Kids watch this and do NOT swallow objects 3 times their size and start beating their opponents with an arsenal of weapons)

They don't ? either you don't have kids or you've not been paying attention to them, they at a very early age put things in there mouths it's the first port of call, give them anything the first place it goes is the mouth.

And as for arsenal of weapons, I am quite often removing make shift guns/swords from my kids hands, and telling them off, they've only had a _very_ limited exposure to voilents on TV, my oldest goes to school, and brings that crud home with him, so don't go telling me that it has no effect because I live with the effects every day of my life, 24/7.

They recently went to a christian camp, they came back happy, loving, respectful, and well mannered, 2 days at school at it was ALL ruined and we was back to fighting thise same fight.

ShadowRunnaX wrote: A famous case of violent videogames being blamed is the game Manhunt. The 17 year old who stabbed the boy was mentally unstable before playing the game and would have snapped at any moment, but it was a coincedence that he happened to have played Manhunt.

The thoery is a mute point, since you cannot go back in time and remove the 'game' from the life span of the 17 year old to prove it does or doesn't have an effect, however what we do know is that what you put into yourself as a charactor is what you get out, regardless if you have a stable mind and can cope with it, everything as an effect and while it might not be the complete reason for the 17 year old to go out and commit a crime, you cannot totally rule it out as being a contributing factor, the only study you could make would be to count the amount of 17 year olds playing games, and the ones that do not, and find out which set has the highest crime rate.

ShadowRunnaX wrote: I'm not saying certificating games is a godsend of a technique to protect people, but they do protect the minds of impressionable children, which I agree with. The rest is the fault of other sources, including parents and the media (not necessarily both or either).

They don't protect a thing, children have there ways of obtaining software regardless of there age group, all it takes is for a "parent" to be lax on how his/her son/daughter uses that internet connection, and they can get away with theift, and then play bloody murder.

ShadowRunnaX wrote: Sometime ago, a boy shot at a car with a shotgun and eventually caused it to blow up. He blamed it on GTA. Although unmentioned on the news following the event, it was found that he said "in GTA, the cars don't blow up". The people who blamed Grand Theft Auto for this obviously never played the game because in the game, cars do blow up.

The gaming industry is a milti-billion dollar industry you think there going to tell you, that "yes our garbadge harms you!?" I bet the tobaco industry kept it hiden for decades that it was actually killing you too.

ShadowRunnaX wrote: People affected by violent videogame banning:-

-developers (lose of millions, maybe billions and bankrupcy)
-psychopaths (need to find something else to occupy them)
-normal people (turn to beating up old people for fun, 'cos no more GTA)
-me (I matter )

-developers should come up with something new instead of this kill everything insight, I mean SERIOUSLY is this all they can come up with, if this is the limit to there imagination there there pretty lame.

-psychopaths that is debatable if they'ed be -psychopaths- in the first place, and if they was in the first place then perhaps they should have been locked up already for the good of the public.

ShadowRunnaX wrote: I'm a moderately well-behaved Christian boy who has played a few "violent" games, and never have I attacked anyone :roll: . The psychological affect of videogames is no more than that of the media and affects only the weak minded.

That is hibocritical, how can a "christian", play something that is blatantly agist _everything_ God & Jesus stand for?

Well, sorry if you feel so strongly, but I must say that from the experience of my own life, these are the things I believe.

I know how you feel tryna protect yo kids from videogames, 'cos I myself did not purchase GTA: San Andreas, no matter how bad I wanted it because of my 2 impressionable younger brothers. This is coming from a person saying that Violent videogames dont create violent people. Instead, I bought them Budokai 3, much rarer and expensive, because I don't want them to play this game.

Why I don't want them to play? Simply because they are impressionable and pick up habits easily. I'm not saying that they are going to start driveby killing groups of people at a time.

That is hibocritical, how can a "christian", play something that is blatantly agist _everything_ God & Jesus stand for?

I don't think it is hypocritical in anyway. I play games that don't influence my behaviour. I listen to music that don't influence my behaviour.
I went to a Christian camp myself and almost had a fight. Nothing works as plans.

Violent videogames and violence from other sources only work on the impressionable and easily influenced.

dontmailme wrote: On the other hand, 'normal' people.... once exposed to killing etc could become accustomed to it, even accept it as 'normal' behaviour..... then we'll be in trouble
Good Luck, it's a good debate

Try this:

Another bombing in Iraq killed 20 today....

That's not news anymore and people don't get shocked either....

MadMax wrote: torturing your wife...

Hey what's the name of that one???

I'd like to give it a go!

You're all forgetting about the most banned and hated game ever

POSTAL!!!

Now that's total nonsense violence... Kill everything that moves and if after that they still twich give'hem a couple more rounds

But to wrap this up a little:

Violent games are created because there is an audience for them, or they would not sell has hot cookies;
Players wanna give wings to their subconscient need of feeling superior to the law and or be a better "hunter" than the rest.

It's just our pre-historical senses waking up

We make this stuff to compensate our immediat needs for trills; phisical or emotional

omg Postal 2 is very nice! i still play it a lot, and i havent been running around with a can of gaz and a stungun setting fire to neigbours or their dogs!

ShadowRunnaX wrote:Well, sorry if you feel so strongly, but I must say that from the experience of my own life, these are the things I believe.

That's fine, you can believe what you wish to believe it, however I believe in the quality of freedom of speech.

ShadowRunnaX wrote:I know how you feel tryna protect yo kids from videogames, 'cos I myself did not purchase GTA: San Andreas, no matter how bad I wanted it because of my 2 impressionable younger brothers. This is coming from a person saying that Violent videogames dont create violent people. Instead, I bought them Budokai 3, much rarer and expensive, because I don't want them to play this game.

Why I don't want them to play? Simply because they are impressionable and pick up habits easily. I'm not saying that they are going to start driveby killing groups of people at a time.

This is the thing that irks me so, we are born with a mind that mind is fragile and subject to all sorts of in-fluents from all directions during it's growth, the only deferents in that mind, between a new born, and an adult is age and maturity, but still just as fragile, so why then would we with a sense of right and wrong, go out of our way to "emulate & or imitate", wrong doing.

ShadowRunnaX wrote: I don't think it is hypocritical in anyway. I play games that don't influence my behaviour. I listen to music that don't influence my behaviour.
I went to a Christian camp myself and almost had a fight. Nothing works as plans.
Violent videogames and violence from other sources only work on the impressionable and easily influenced.

really?, I can't see Jesus playing Doom 3, right after saying to the world "Love your enermys", or God for that matter putting in small print after the the commandment "thou shalt not steal" (but it's okay to do it on computer vertually), I've played those sorts of games in my past I've stopped because it was not doing me any good;

Philippians 4:1-9 1
8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

While your busy hunting the last monster on level whatever of which ever game;
Your not think true thoughts, your thinking of murder & killing.
Your not being honest with yourself about how it really is effecting you.
It certainly isn't a just thing, to run over people on the street virtual or other wise.
Pure? I mean come on voilent computer games could hardly be call pure.
Lovely? there not beautaful in the least, there dark and full to the brim with satainic symbols that your walking past all the time.
Good report/Praise, they only have a good report because they are of the world, and Christians are not supposed to be of the world, in it but not of it.
There is no virtue in it at all, it's just wasting time that could be better spent doing something creative.

So if computer games do not offect you then why would God diliberately go out of his way to lay guide lines for out thinking.

Btw: this is my last rebutel on the subject.

Inner wrote: While your busy hunting the last monster on level whatever of which ever game;
Your not think true thoughts, your thinking of murder & killing.
Your not being honest with yourself about how it really is effecting you.
It certainly isn't a just thing, to run over people on the street virtual or other wise

First off, I do not own any games like Doom 3, containing monsters and such. Second off, if I ever play one of these games, all that's on my mind is fun.

If I'm playing a game where I've hit peeps, I dont think, "yeah, that was fun, I wanna do that in real life", I just play it the way it is. you may call that wrong, I don't care, we all have different opinions.

Inner wrote: Btw: this is my last rebutel on the subject.

That's a shame.

Thanks to everyone's contributions. Bless.

okay maybe just 1, "oh so now it's fun to pretend to run around and kill things?"

> Another bombing in Iraq killed 20 today

And I bet the bomber didn't play violent video games either.

Actually, I heard an artical sometime ago they actually use those sorts of games to help desenitize the suicide bomber, might see if I can find it.

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,116822,00.asp - doesn't quite state which but still..

Everyone know that the 'fictional' charactors use MS Flight Sim 2000 to train for 911, didn't they ? (MS Flight Sim however is hardly a voilent game)

well how do you know that i wouldnt drive around killing people if i wasnt playing gta?

I say to that, how do you know you won't do it in the future as a result of playing GTA?

it's a mute point, you cannot prove either way. however garbadge in, garbadge out.

well you got a point i dont know if i will do that in the future, but its unlikely that i will.

Teacher must have said she thought it was a draw .

Fun though. I learnt a lot of points of views.