Scaremongering shock tactics, very cheap tactic to get a message across. Almost as bad as all those OTT photos on cig packets. *sigh*
Anti-Video game propaganda... Your thoughts?
- Thread starter astaldodhol
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I know this is a bit off topic but I'd have to disagree with you to a point there. Yes they're using scare tactics which are wrong but with cigarettes there is undeniable evidence that smoking kills so you can't really compare it to video game scare tactics which is inconclusive and flawed.dannydamage post=18.72956.780795 said:
Back on topic now, I've looked around and the opinions of parents who blame video games for violence in children do make a bit of sense but only when you look at it from the perspective of someone who's never played games before. So the only thing you can really do is promote the action of education so people actually know what goes on in video games and knowing their children well enough to judge how much of an impact it will have. As it's been said before; games don't turn people into killers, killers just get their hands onto games between rampages.
[off] Not saying cigs aren't unhealthy. I'm saying they've gone OTT with some of the pictures, people know the risks because it's been FASHIONABLE to hate smoking and smokers since the government's change of heart. If they're going to stick pictures on unhealthy things, get pictures of dead livers, drink driving crashes, abused kids and beaten wives on alcohol containers. (I'm not actually saying they should, I'm saying they should "think safe" about everything, or nothing at all.)Yassen post=18.72956.780824 said:
[on] It's control by fear politics and it should be OUTLAWED. If people are too stupid to explain to their children the difference between reality and make believe, then they SHOULD be subjected to acquiring some form of license before pro-creating and money should NOT be wasted on them to pay some photoshop "artist" to make pointless pictures like this in an attempt to get a very obvious message across. Especially if they plonk their kids infront of the Playstation (or whatever) and use it as a babysitter. No one to blame but themselves.
No age restrictions on books, but there's been campaigns to keep Harry Potter out of libraries because he's 'satanic' and 'promoting witchcraft to children'.
Here's a rare one, I'm actually going to defend the ads, someone needs to, or this ends up a non topic, along the lines of "I like pie, sign here if you like pie too!". (EDIT: didn't notice it went on for extra pages and I see other people are defending it too, so I'll shut up)
Wwe do need to push more vendors to be careful who they sell to, I know Jack Thompson is just jam packed with BS, but when he says he sent his son in to buy mature rated titles and got served, I can believe it happened sometimes, not nearly as often as he says but sometimes.
IF we can self police the industry, set fines on stores not being careful with who they are selling to, etc, then we can have every right to say 'We're doing all we can, but if parents read the warnings, see it's a mature rated game, read the back saying it's got swearing, drugs, extreme violence and death, and still buy it for 8 year old Timmy, then it stops being our responsibility.
While we're being the scapegoat, we have to try to be whiter than white. Every time a kid manages to buy a GTA4 or Resident Evil5 or whatever, its our gaming that will be blamed, until we can prove we're clean and doing our bit to separate mature and children's entertainment.
As for the ads, yes, they're balls, and the worst kind of emotional tugging in lieu of facts.
However they have a point, parents should be more aware of what they are buying and what their children are playing. To me the ads are not saying the games should not exist, whereas Jack Thompson wants anything that brings pleasure to normal people wiped off the face of the earth and all leisure time to be replaced with bible study.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting mature titles kept away from kids, I'm totally in favour of it, and have actually gone up to parents in stores and informed them, when I used to work in a store, partly because I want to do the right thing, and partly because I don't want them returning it in an hour and saying it's all my fault that Timmy was hacking hookers into pieces and giggling.
Side note 1: I'd also be pretty pissed if I was in the military and my image got used like that, and also yes, its hilarious that gameover.info is already dead. Killed by a kid who played games probably.
Side note 2: without wishing to be rude, FUCK me, Dark Dungeons? honestly, that's just scary how full on nuts some religious people can be. Kids were pretending to be monsters before D&D, and making gun shapes with their hands and 'shooting' their friends before Doom. Get over it, people like violence in their 'playing'.
Here's a rare one, I'm actually going to defend the ads, someone needs to, or this ends up a non topic, along the lines of "I like pie, sign here if you like pie too!". (EDIT: didn't notice it went on for extra pages and I see other people are defending it too, so I'll shut up)
Wwe do need to push more vendors to be careful who they sell to, I know Jack Thompson is just jam packed with BS, but when he says he sent his son in to buy mature rated titles and got served, I can believe it happened sometimes, not nearly as often as he says but sometimes.
IF we can self police the industry, set fines on stores not being careful with who they are selling to, etc, then we can have every right to say 'We're doing all we can, but if parents read the warnings, see it's a mature rated game, read the back saying it's got swearing, drugs, extreme violence and death, and still buy it for 8 year old Timmy, then it stops being our responsibility.
While we're being the scapegoat, we have to try to be whiter than white. Every time a kid manages to buy a GTA4 or Resident Evil5 or whatever, its our gaming that will be blamed, until we can prove we're clean and doing our bit to separate mature and children's entertainment.
As for the ads, yes, they're balls, and the worst kind of emotional tugging in lieu of facts.
However they have a point, parents should be more aware of what they are buying and what their children are playing. To me the ads are not saying the games should not exist, whereas Jack Thompson wants anything that brings pleasure to normal people wiped off the face of the earth and all leisure time to be replaced with bible study.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting mature titles kept away from kids, I'm totally in favour of it, and have actually gone up to parents in stores and informed them, when I used to work in a store, partly because I want to do the right thing, and partly because I don't want them returning it in an hour and saying it's all my fault that Timmy was hacking hookers into pieces and giggling.
Side note 1: I'd also be pretty pissed if I was in the military and my image got used like that, and also yes, its hilarious that gameover.info is already dead. Killed by a kid who played games probably.
Side note 2: without wishing to be rude, FUCK me, Dark Dungeons? honestly, that's just scary how full on nuts some religious people can be. Kids were pretending to be monsters before D&D, and making gun shapes with their hands and 'shooting' their friends before Doom. Get over it, people like violence in their 'playing'.
^I agree with your general point, but they went way, way too far with these posters. If I have problems getting to sleep because of the image on a poster...then that is worse than any video game.
People who have little or no idea what they are talking about focusing their shock at things such as school shootings and their or people they know childs disrespect towards them upon videogames, not taking responsibility or seeing what is truly the matter, instead just blaming something their child enjoys which has violence in it.
You want to meet a really violent child? Don't talk to the kid who likes playing on his xbox, talk to the kid whose parents beat him, or the child who barely gets to see their mother as she is out 'protecting' him or her then you will see what really is the problem.
Also using images of violence is just sad, saying that a child who likes defeating the Locust or what ever is going to grow up to enjoy killing innocents is just idiotic and it really shows through their choice of images.
You want to meet a really violent child? Don't talk to the kid who likes playing on his xbox, talk to the kid whose parents beat him, or the child who barely gets to see their mother as she is out 'protecting' him or her then you will see what really is the problem.
Also using images of violence is just sad, saying that a child who likes defeating the Locust or what ever is going to grow up to enjoy killing innocents is just idiotic and it really shows through their choice of images.
I'm not against censorship in all circumstances, I think it is actually required in many instances. However, I am against censorship being media specific. I mean have any of these people picked up a fiction book recently? The content is far worse than in film and games.
They're trying to use the same ideas with video games. I can just see pictures like those propaganda pictures on the back of video games with the slogan "Every violent video game is doing your child damage."Yassen post=18.72956.780824 said:
I just think it's wrong that people are trying to shelter their kids this badly. Next thing will be kids are gunna end up like Rod and Todd from "The Simpsons". Absolute shut in's. Don't get me wrong, parents are right to try to stop their kids from seeing violence, but it's everywhere. Like trying to stop your kid seeing a certain colour in the world. Can't tell your kid not to look at the colour blue or something, can you?
Jack Thompson was no head, more of a paraplegic fist. The head of the problem is more dispersed and until most of it's parts are gone the problem will persist.Souplex post=18.72956.785963 said:
This is the dumbest thread I've ever read. Whenever one of these threads come along, everybody and their dog jumps all over it, shouting about how parents should pay attention to the age ratings and not let their small children play violent video games. Then somebody makes a few magazine ads advising parents not to let their small children play violent video games, and gets the exact same reaction.
Seriously, these ads are repeating one of the fundamental arguments that the anti-game-censorship crowd has been using for years. I think it's completely ridiculous that gamers constantly accuse the anti-game crowd of ignoring evidence, jumping to conclusions, and making baseless statements when this is the sort of response that characterizes their own side of the argument.
Seriously, these ads are repeating one of the fundamental arguments that the anti-game-censorship crowd has been using for years. I think it's completely ridiculous that gamers constantly accuse the anti-game crowd of ignoring evidence, jumping to conclusions, and making baseless statements when this is the sort of response that characterizes their own side of the argument.
Listen, I appreciate the message. But the method is wrong.Good morning blues post=18.72956.787487 said:
How? It's a visually arresting, visceral presentation of the message that is sure to grab the attention of the parents that we're interested in. What's wrong with it?thebobmaster post=18.72956.787938 said:
How about the fact that it defends our point by visualizing gamers as bloodthirsty murderers, and gets its point across by scaring the shit out of the parents viewing it? That's what's wrong with it.
Ehh. People can complain all they like so long as it doesn't affect the laws. However, if they complain about games, why aren't they complaining about films to the same extent?
People who would see that poster and go "oh noze our son will kill people if he plays Halo" generally shouldn't be allowed to procreate. Manhunt I could understand though.thebobmaster post=18.72956.788208 said: