Oh wow, did you say it. I remember watching that Father struggle through the first couple of Levels of Portal.....Deep Hurting.Adam Jensen said:I like figuring stuff out. That wouldn't make me aggressive. But then, I'm a science geek with a degree in physics and the only thing that frustrates me is other people's incompetence. If I feel like I'm getting increasingly frustrated I just turn the thing off. I like my peace of mind and clarity of thought.
You know what is more frustrating than sucking at games? Watching other people suck at games. Especially games like Portal.
AAARRRGGGHHHHH!, damn ninjas!, right in the VERY first post! >.<'TheSYLOH said:This just in! Millions of Dark Souls players rampaging across the nation!
What time, exactly? Just surious.Casual Shinji said:I reckon this study won't change their minds, but it's good back-up data nonetheless for when the time comes.
Indeed, IWTBTG seems to have its roots in the classic game with wonky controls and "unfair": surprises designed to separate you from your tokens. Which persisted outside of the arcade. SMB, on the other hands, is retro in a lot of sense, but tight controls and relatively straightforward gameplay has gone a somewhat different route. And in SMB, you at least get the comfort of knowing if you fail, it's likely because you screwed up.Piorn said:This is propably why I like "Super Meat Boy", but loathe "I Wanna Be The Guy".
In both games, you fully understand the controls, but in SMB, you also fully understand the gameworld. Every time you fail, it's something you see coming and just failed to counter.
In IWBTG, you can never see a death coming the first time. You can't blame yourself for failure, so you blame the game design. I know it kind of the point of IWBTG, I just don't like it, and if it wasn't such an elaborate joke game, these mechanics wouldn't be as well received.
Because in scientific study, nothing is ever a given until you can test it. Not even "common sense" stuff.canadamus_prime said:Who keeps paying for all these studies? Seriously?? Also I could've told them that.
Whenever by some mind boggling fluke a serious case gets made to create a law against violent games.Zachary Amaranth said:What time, exactly? Just surious.Casual Shinji said:I reckon this study won't change their minds, but it's good back-up data nonetheless for when the time comes.
I know exactly whose videos they should use for this study, but her name escapes me at the moment.seditary said:They should do a study on whether gamers watching other gamers suck at games make them more mad than if they're simply sucking at playing the game themselves cause oh boy.
Why would you expect to see a comparison of sports and aggression in a study about video games and aggression??chikusho said:Wanna know something else that causes increased feelings of violence and aggression? Sports!
Out of all the studies performed on video games and aggression, I've yet to see a comparison to physical exertion and competition in sports, which I think is a far more relevant analogy to make than just making references to violent content.
Sports can turn people rabid, as is regularly seen in sports-related riots across the globe.
Yet, I see no politicians lobbying for protecting our children from phys.ed. :/
That still doesn't explain who the hell keeps giving out the grants to perform all these studies.UNHchabo said:Because in scientific study, nothing is ever a given until you can test it. Not even "common sense" stuff.canadamus_prime said:Who keeps paying for all these studies? Seriously?? Also I could've told them that.