286: Videogame Myths Debunked

[targren]

You are completely missing the point of what I said, Catalyst.

Is Gears of War violent? Yes. Therefor, by playing it, the game is encouraging violent acts - chainsawing people, shooting weapons at enemies, destroying buildings, you get the picture. Never, not once, did I say this was good, bad, or that it carried though and invoked a real world recreation. My statement was that video games can and do promote violence.

And yes, books, art, movies, music - all of that - can also promote violence in this same way.

It's rather simple, hun.

That's being rather disingenuous about it, and using some VERY loose definitions of "promote" and "violence". Does Gears of War PORTRAY violence? Absolutely. Does it ENCOURAGE violence? No. No matter how hard you mash those buttons, you're not being violent (if you through the controller at the screen, you are, but the game isn't "encouraging" you to do that).

Portrayal != promotion.

 

[mr_rubino]

You are completely missing the point of what I said, Catalyst.

Is Gears of War violent? Yes. Therefor, by playing it, the game is encouraging violent acts - chainsawing people, shooting weapons at enemies, destroying buildings, you get the picture. Never, not once, did I say this was good, bad, or that it carried though and invoked a real world recreation. My statement was that video games can and do promote violence.

And yes, books, art, movies, music - all of that - can also promote violence in this same way.

It's rather simple, hun.

That's being rather disingenuous about it, and using some VERY loose definitions of "promote" and "violence". Does Gears of War PORTRAY violence? Absolutely. Does it ENCOURAGE violence? No. No matter how hard you mash those buttons, you're not being violent (if you through the controller at the screen, you are, but the game isn't "encouraging" you to do that).

Portrayal != promotion.

You're telling me The Scarlet Letter doesn't promote adultery?
Dammit. I guess that means The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo isn't all about hot juicy misogyny either...

 

[NLS]

Strange, something awfully familiar about this article...
Has this been published here before?

 

[mr_rubino]

snip

You are wrong.

You CANNOT play through Gears of War without performing violence. It's not possible. You must kill things in order to progress. Thus, the game is promoting violence.

Stop it, sweetie. You've made your mark on this thread. You can go now.

 

[Pecoros7]

snip

I did think it through. This is what was said that inspired my reaction:

Games are art, just as gravity pulls you to Earth and water quenches your thirst. It's not even debateable.

The implication of that statement to me was that games are inherently art. The comparison to gravity's pull or water's wetness implies that the artistic quality of games is inherent or fundamental to the medium. It is not fundamental, it is a quality which is striven to and achieved. Furthermore, it most certainly is debatable because there is debate. The subjective nature of art makes all artistic merit debatable, even in established media like painting or music.

 

[targren]

You're telling me The Scarlet Letter doesn't promote adultery?
Dammit. I guess that means The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo isn't all about hot juicy misogyny either...

I'm getting the idea that your sarcasm might be wasted here. >_<

snip

You are wrong.

You CANNOT play through Gears of War without performing violence. It's not possible. You must kill things in order to progress. Thus, the game is promoting violence.

No, you CANNOT play through Gears of War without pushing little plastic Skittles on an Xbox controller. Nothing is actually being killed. Contrary to what you may have seen in TRON or Reboot, there are not actually little beings inside the game that play the roles of the NPCs.

 

[mr_rubino]

snip

I did think it through. This is what was said that inspired my reaction:

Games are art, just as gravity pulls you to Earth and water quenches your thirst. It's not even debateable.

The implication of that statement to me was that games are inherently art. The comparison to gravity's pull or water's wetness implies that the artistic quality of games is inherent or fundamental to the medium. It is not fundamental, it is a quality which is striven to and achieved. Furthermore, it most certainly is debatable because there is debate. The subjective nature of art makes all artistic merit debatable, even in established media like painting or music.

Nope. He's correct. It's inherently art.
You seem to not really understand your argument, though. You're conflating art as a medium with that famed red herring "artistic merit"; you're effectively admitting games are art, but questioning what importance they serve. Which position are you taking?

 

[catalyst8]

Pirate Kitty, I can assure you that I'm not your 'hun', I'm not even Asiatic.

For the fourth time, I shall attempt to engage you with my point. When you say 'by playing it, the game is encouraging violent acts', by your reasoning the watching or reading of Hamlet is encouraging violent acts. You have agreed with this ('yes, books, art, movies, music - all of that - can also promote violence in this same way'). I've pointed out that it's a social benefit that this vicarious participation occurs.

However, the tone of your statement 'Video games can and do promote violence in young people' suggests that it's detrimental. It's also an incorrect statement, or at the very least it's an utterly unfounded claim. As I initially pointed out fictitious violence isn't real, it simply does not exist as violence any more than saying 'murder' does. You claim otherwise, but refuse to support your claim in any way, instead repeating the mantra 'You missed the point' in an attempt to escape justifying your claim.

I've seen you do this before, so that you don't have to engage with any debate over an empty claim you make you simply accuse the other person of not understanding, or of 'missing the point'. So why don't you actually attempt to support your claim this time? It would make a refreshing change.

 

[koriantor]

SNIP.

I'm calling you out on this. You're just being a troll.

 

[mr_rubino]

I've seen you do this before, so that you don't have to engage with any debate over an empty claim you make you simply accuse the other person of not understanding, or of 'missing the point'.

Then why are you continuing to reply to her? If you already know intellectual dishonesty is the order of the day with PK - and it always is - why keep taking her bait?

No, you CANNOT play through Gears of War without pushing little plastic Skittles on an Xbox controller. Nothing is actually being killed. Contrary to what you may have seen in TRON or Reboot, there are not actually little beings inside the game that play the roles of the NPCs.

It is the depiction of violence. You cannot possibly say otherwise.

There is a reason the rating system for an M classified game says 'Mild Violence', 'Strong Violence', and others to that effect.

That is my entire point; the player is, in some games, encouraged to use violence. Simple.

Stop it, PK. You're breaking the flow of conversation.

 

[catalyst8]

If you already know intellectual dishonesty is the order of the day with PK - and it always is - why keep taking her bait?

I live in hope that one day s/he might gain some honesty or integrity. It's either that or hit the 'Report' button for trolling.

 

[targren]

No, you CANNOT play through Gears of War without pushing little plastic Skittles on an Xbox controller. Nothing is actually being killed. Contrary to what you may have seen in TRON or Reboot, there are not actually little beings inside the game that play the roles of the NPCs.

It is the depiction of violence. You cannot possibly say otherwise.

There is a reason the rating system for an M classified game says 'Mild Violence', 'Strong Violence', and others to that effect.

That is my entire point; the player is, in some games, encouraged to use violence. Simple.

Why would I say otherwise? I'm the first one who SAID it was the portrayal of violence (which is a synonym for "depiction"). But yet again, "portrayal"(or "depiction") is NOT
"promotion."

 

[mr_rubino]

If you already know intellectual dishonesty is the order of the day with PK - and it always is - why keep taking her bait?

I live in hope that one day s/he might gain some honesty or integrity. It's either that or hit the 'Report' button for trolling.

It won't do anything. At least wikipedia has policies for dealing with people like her... They don't follow them, but it's on the books. On a free-for-all like The Escapist, there's no way to deal with a troll that flies under the radar.

 

[Erja_Perttu]

No, you CANNOT play through Gears of War without pushing little plastic Skittles on an Xbox controller. Nothing is actually being killed. Contrary to what you may have seen in TRON or Reboot, there are not actually little beings inside the game that play the roles of the NPCs.

It is the depiction of violence. You cannot possibly say otherwise.

There is a reason the rating system for an M classified game says 'Mild Violence', 'Strong Violence', and others to that effect.

That is my entire point; the player is, in some games, encouraged to use violence. Simple.

I assure you that when I snipe a prostitute from a rooftop in GTA3, I'm not actually doing it, nor do I have any intention nor compulsion to. As targren said :

Portrayal != promotion.

And I'd have to agree. Video games in which violence occurs are about as violence inciting as deliberately choosing the bad ending in a pick your own adventure story. Speaking plainly, it ain't real, so it's no big deal.

 

[catalyst8]

If you already know intellectual dishonesty is the order of the day with PK - and it always is - why keep taking her bait?

I live in hope that one day s/he might gain some honesty or integrity. It's either that or hit the 'Report' button for trolling.

It won't do anything. At least wikipedia has policies for dealing with people like her... They don't follow them, but it's on the books. On a free-for-all like The Escapist, there's no way to deal with a troll that flies under the radar.

Well, I'll give her/him a chance here. If they don't untangle their trolling I'll hit the 'report'. Thankfully the mods have gone back to keeping things in order, so we'll just have to see.

Oh well, apparently not. 'Report' it is then.

 

[_Cake_]

Aw thought it would be fun video game myths like the Sasquatch in GTA 4, not a bunch of stats arranged in the form of a preachy soap box. Video games don`t make people violent, girls are gamers too, casual gamers are good. Yeah yeah boring, I rather hear about the curse of madden or is that really Christie's vag in DOA Xtreme XD

 

[mr_rubino]

If you already know intellectual dishonesty is the order of the day with PK - and it always is - why keep taking her bait?

I live in hope that one day s/he might gain some honesty or integrity. It's either that or hit the 'Report' button for trolling.

It won't do anything. At least wikipedia has policies for dealing with people like her... They don't follow them, but it's on the books. On a free-for-all like The Escapist, there's no way to deal with a troll that flies under the radar.

Well, I'll give her/him a chance here. If they don't untangle their trolling I'll hit the 'report'. Thankfully the mods have gone back to keeping things in order, so we'll just have to see.

Oh well, apparently not. 'Report' it is then.

It'll do nothing, like I said. I used WP as my example because it's the place I instantly thought of where trolls gather on "controversial" topics to pretend they're just honestly misinformed fools. They flood the talk pages with 3-paragraph essays to push incorrect facts, pimp blogs and other known unreliable sources, complain about the conspiracy against their truths, and do so constantly, on multiple pages, on multiple topics. They act snide, backpedal and change the subject as needed, and never answer responder's arguments or waver from their starting point no matter how much logic and fact is thrown at them. At best they do nothing for the community; mostly, they harm it. They're coddled and put up with instead of axed with prejudice by the people in charge, because the choking bureaucracy of the place never gets around to getting rid of them.

Similarly, PK prides herself on just disrupting any discussion that comes along. You'd be forgiven for not being able to get a read on her beliefs from her post history because she shifts positions wildly from topic to topic according to what allows her more lulz. And she gets what she wants because she's allowed to continue.