The first sign for me would be social networking sites, e.g. Facebook, assigning a section for "Favorite Games" in your profile. What do you think?
By what sign will we know (video) gaming is mainstream and 'normal'?
- Thread starter donquixote
- Start date
-When gaming has its own TV channel (a dedicated one)
-When gaming is featured on news sites and shows as frequently and prominently as movies and music
-When gaming is featured on news sites and shows as frequently and prominently as movies and music
When pro-gaming tournaments are taken as seriously as World Series of Poker tournaments by non-gamers.
When game developers don't edit their games just so it makes the criteria for a certain rating.
When video game stores carry games of all ratings including AO.
When Jack Thompson is considered a complete parasite and waster of resources.
When game developers don't edit their games just so it makes the criteria for a certain rating.
When video game stores carry games of all ratings including AO.
When Jack Thompson is considered a complete parasite and waster of resources.
That's not the situation for movies (see This Movie is Not Yet Rated) so should it count?LxDarko said:
Tellingly, the most popular Japanese social networking site has a category for just that.donquixote said:
There's also a game-related TV channel (if memory serves, it has a lot of information about Pachinko too, though).
How many times have you watched deleted scenes or behind the scenes commentary on dvds and hear the director talk about how they had to edit some scene because it would affect their MPAA rating. Many movie scenes have been edited to attain that coveted PG-13 rating.donquixote said:
Also if I go into FYE I can find everything from children movies to adult movies but if I step into Gamestop no game there is over the M rating and many retailers won't even carry AO games.
Yeah, I'm not sure that statement is far off. I'm going to check it out though; I know I saw a story somewhere about video games as being a bigger than you would think.Dom Camus said:
How many AO games are there out there really?
I might be speaking out of prejudice, but AO makes up a small portion of games. And of the lot of the games seem to go for the novelty of being an "Adult Only" game that they aren't much good. Again, I’m speaking from a somewhat distant understanding of the games, but that’s my limited experience with them.
Video gaming will become mainstream once all the old dinosaurs die off and you get people in charge who've been gaming all their lives; give it another decade or two.
The main reason why there is such a lack of AO games is because they won't sell. The main reason why they won't sell is because most stores will not carry them. AO games, as the current state of the industry, simply aren't marketable.Blaxton said:
As for the quality of AO games, I'm not too clear on that. I've only played two, and besides the original version of GTA: SA, the other one, Snow Drop, wasn't really too bad of a game. I've played about half of a Japanese game(Wind) that would be rated AO if rated by the ESRB, and that was a good game(though with low production values).
Interesting Meophist, but I think I still lack some understanding. AO games, from what I can tell, are often rated as such due to over-sexualization. I have in mind games like "Leisure Suit Larry". To me, its just not a very worthy type of game.
But, that is where I need clarification. Am I wrong to assume that's what we are talking about? Are we really talking about a more general rating that includes extreme violence? If we are, then I think that it is probably due, in part, to the lack of shelf space devoted to them. If, however, the games are sexually based, I can't imagine them selling well; atleast, not at a $60 price tag. I'd get more into that theory, but I think things might get a little "inappropriate".
But, that is where I need clarification. Am I wrong to assume that's what we are talking about? Are we really talking about a more general rating that includes extreme violence? If we are, then I think that it is probably due, in part, to the lack of shelf space devoted to them. If, however, the games are sexually based, I can't imagine them selling well; atleast, not at a $60 price tag. I'd get more into that theory, but I think things might get a little "inappropriate".
Well, not all of what would be AO is based on over-sexualization. I'd say one of the problems with the ESRB is that extreme violence gets a free pass, but any amount of sexual content automatically gets an AO, but that's a topic for another day. As for not being very worthy, it's a rather subjective thing.Blaxton said:
Well, no, they probably won't. However, if made well enough and marketed properly, it can be enough to make a profit. Retailers' refusal to carry AO-rated games hampers that significantly, however.Blaxton said:
In any case, the situation is basically the opposite in Japan, which is kinda interesting.
God of War got away with some tits and the suggestive sex implied. I don't really see it as a big deal. Just as stated earlier, R rated movies can get away with much more than M rated games...but so what? The ESRB always has pressure on it for not being strict enough.
I'm fine with the swirly eyes and stars going around Mario's head and the occasional Peach/Zelda panty shot I get in Super Smash Brothers. I don't have a need more more sexual or violent content, at least not right now.
I'm fine with the swirly eyes and stars going around Mario's head and the occasional Peach/Zelda panty shot I get in Super Smash Brothers. I don't have a need more more sexual or violent content, at least not right now.
We seem to be getting there or are at least closer than we've ever been before. More and more I see headlines about gaming companies (i.e. Take Two and the SEC today)and they do seem to be moving up the webpages of various news sites.Logan Frederick said:
As a german gamer, it is relatively easy to tell:
When Public Broadcasting Television stops bragging how "Killergames" (roughly translated) make kids dumb, agressive and turns them into potential Mass Murderers.
Oh yeah, and when politicians stop comparing Games to Child Pornography.
When Public Broadcasting Television stops bragging how "Killergames" (roughly translated) make kids dumb, agressive and turns them into potential Mass Murderers.
Oh yeah, and when politicians stop comparing Games to Child Pornography.
I still get about a 50/50 mixed reaction between people who think being a game journalist is the most awesome thing they can imagine, and a waste of an otherwise promising life. When that ratio hits 80/20 I think we'll be there.
I used to subscribe to a magazine called "Backpacking." It was, for all intents and purposes, about backpacking, and contained articles on campsites and reviews of backpacks and other gear. I can't imagine what their circulation was, but I doubt it was as high as ours, or any other game magazine's. But the guys who wrote for it and edited it never had to justify their choice of career the same way we do.
I look forward to the day that changes, and on that day will consider gaming "mainstream."
I used to subscribe to a magazine called "Backpacking." It was, for all intents and purposes, about backpacking, and contained articles on campsites and reviews of backpacks and other gear. I can't imagine what their circulation was, but I doubt it was as high as ours, or any other game magazine's. But the guys who wrote for it and edited it never had to justify their choice of career the same way we do.
I look forward to the day that changes, and on that day will consider gaming "mainstream."
Gaming is mainstream. If "killergames" are on the news it means that enough people know what computer games are to generate ratings for the news station.
As for a mixed reactions to game journalism as a career, I dont think this will change. I believe backpacking writers wouldn't have to justify there position because its to dull a subject to garnish such attention. Besides the only one you need to justify your career choice to is yourself (if your happy who gives a toss?).
Computer games are mainstream - this is the sign
This will never happen. Movies and music VIDEOS relate well to TV. You can show a movie clip on tv but you can't play a game level etc when its on the news. Viewing a game clip relates less to the experience of playing games than veiwing a movieclip, which uses the same facilities as actually watching a movie (you sit and stare at a screen). Having said this we have a channel here called "playin tv" where you can play crappy games with your remote.Logan Frederick said:
non poker players probably dont take the world series of poker tornaments seriously. If pro-gaming tornaments had the same prizes as the poker world series, I feel they would generate more interest than the poker equivilent (at least initially).LxDarko said:
As for a mixed reactions to game journalism as a career, I dont think this will change. I believe backpacking writers wouldn't have to justify there position because its to dull a subject to garnish such attention. Besides the only one you need to justify your career choice to is yourself (if your happy who gives a toss?).
Computer games are mainstream - this is the sign