Slashdot Mirror
The Moral Pathology of Vice City
SiliconRedox writes "An interesting article at the NYTimes (reg req) outlining the rise of rockstar games and the imminent release of Vice City. What the article mentions but never brings together is the ability of the player to win the game through peaceful(ie: not killing people) or criminal means. The game, while being hailed as morally reprehensible, is in fact only acting out the pathology of the player." Everything worth knowing in life can be learned from GTA. For example, upside down cars explode, and flying cars can jump the bridge between the first and second city without finishing the quests. Just like in real life. I still haven't picked up Vice City, but I'm stoked. And I will most definitely not win through peaceful means.
For some unknown reason, i read through your flame, just because it was near the bottom of the page, so i didn't rush it.
And one thing, above all, stood out.
You don't even know what you are talking about: All this about CmdrTaco, is a load of rubbish, for this simple reason:
He didn't even write the article. He just posted it. The writer/submitter, is the person who wrote the little section you see on the main page.
If you don't pay enough attention to things like that, soon enough you're going to have very confused opinions about the motives and views of Taco, Tim, Michael, and everyone who has the power to actually post articles.
...winning through peaceful means? What crack are you smoking?
This just proves the age-old wisdom:
The first rocks, the sequel is downhill, and on the third they go ahead and FUBAR the concept.