These Message Boards
-
ZetaX1
- Posts: 577
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
If you're visiting a site called "Rock Paper Shotgun" (really?), pseudo-intellectual snark is probably par for the course...
-
Vexer1
- Posts: 883
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
-
gleebergloben1
- Posts: 687
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
Tron is right. We are awesome. (Gives cyber hug to Tron).
-
Rev1
- Posts: 1777
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
-
velcrozombie1
- Posts: 400
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
I don't feel like RPS is as bad as you make it out to be. They can be overly PC at times (the review of Skullgirls praised the game but wondered if some of the character designs went too far into sexualization, although it not like they're the only site that has expressed that opinion either) and you will get the occasional nasty fight in the comments, but the commenters are generally more intelligent and well-spoken than those on the average gaming website and they have some interesting interviews and guest articles from time to time. Also, their reviews never make me feel like someone's got a hand in their back pocket.
I can't comment on the "violence in games" article, but I don't know that, as an issue, it's the open-and-shut case you make it out to be; I've seen plenty of studies for both sides of the debate (although I admit that I just don't have the energy or expertise to sort the worthwhile studies from the chaff). While I have no interest in censoring games (I still think games are art, even if they're often trash art), I'm not going to act like I was totally comfortable watching my 10-year-old cousin playing GTA or Saint's Row 2, and it's difficult for me to believe that it couldn't have at least a subtle effect on him over an extended period of time (I admit this is pure conjecture and may have nothing to scientifically support it).
-
Vexer1
- Posts: 883
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
I never said it was an "open and shut case", but I think the article is extremely wrong-headed and ignorant in the way it totally dismisses every single scientific study that proves the very point it's arguing against.
I totally agree that young kids absolutely should NOT be playing M-rated games, i'm disturbed by the all the kids playing COD online and swearing all the time, i'm shocked that their parents would allow them to do that, I don't know if it would necessarily make a kid commit violent acts, though it probably would make kids swear more often.
If I ever had kids, i'd never let them play M-rated games until they were at an age were they could properly handle the subject matter.
I guess not all the comments on that site are bad, it just seems like 60% of them are overly condescending towards others and all about trying to make themselves sound smarter then they really are.
Their reviews are also generally pretty bad IMO, they may not feel like they were in anybody's "back pocket", though they do often leave me questioning if the reviewer bothered playing much of the game at all(the review for Modern Warfare 3 is very lazily written and gives me the impression that they didn't get very far into the game).
-
Tron1
- Posts: 401
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
-
Atarifever1
- Posts: 3892
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
My favourite is still one of the earliest that I've probably mentioned on here before. Kids were shown a violent film or, IIRC, an educational one. Then they were told to go play floor hockey, and it was observed that the ones who saw the violent film acted more violently. Yeah. OR, how about the ones who saw an exciting, violent film were more EXCITED than the ones bored with the other movie. They were more aggressive playing an aggressive game because they weren't just lulled half to sleep!
Dumb studies like that, with obvious and simple methodological errors, are what the whole field has to show for itself after decades of work.
I did a Masters course where I had to design a study (but unfortunately not do it) of my choosing and present it and my reasoning and literature review to the class. I did it on this very topic. My instructor (a Social Psychologist) really put this thing in perspective for me. When I had to explain how I would explain the results (pro tip, scientists always have the explanation ready for results in either direction or null before they start) I said "... and if the result show playing games leads to less violence than watching violent TV..." she jumped in and said "it wouldn't ever show that."
I found that funny, because I was so sure it could. Violent TV has no consequences. You watch the "hero" kill someone and he goes off and has sex with their sister or whatever the show wants to say. Even a very violent game might make that alert enemies and make your life immediately more difficult. And it happens to you, not to Jonny Heroman on the TV. She didn't consider that at all until I said it.
-
Vexer1
- Posts: 883
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
Anyone who jumps to conclusions and prematurely says "a study would never show that" should NOT be an instructor, she sounds extremely unprofessional and ignorant.
-
Tron1
- Posts: 401
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
These Message Boards
Return to “Video Games General”