Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gaming Naysayers Have Little Context for Criticism

Posted by Zonk on from the you-have-to-play-to-nay dept.

Buzzcut.com has a nice piece on the lack of context video game critics have in making their arguments. It should be noted he is not referring to today's report card, but a list of Top Ten most violent games put out by the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility. From the article: "I followed up with a simple question, "Who on this panel has played which of the games?" Burke answered first, "I haven't played any of them." She backed up her willful ignorance of the games by suggesting that she didn't need to play Soldier of Fortune to know that she was opposed to its glorification of killing. "I think it's an irrelevant question," she concluded."

8 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Top Ten most violent books of the Bible by ixtapolapoquetl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe someone should condemn reading the Bible, and put out a list of their own Top Ten most violent books of the Bible.

    I'd then like to respond to the question "Why do you condemn these books of the Bible?" with "I haven't read any of them."

    I'd continue, "I don't have to read the chapters about God slaughtering a bunch of people to know that I'm opposed to the Bible's glorification of killing. I think that's an irrelevant question."

    1. Re:Top Ten most violent books of the Bible by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What is fun is arguing about the Song on Soloman with people who KNOW FOR A FACT it has nothing to do with sex.

      I do not get the hang up some religious people have with sex, I really do not.

  2. One wonders by wowbagger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One wonders how many respondants to this story will have read the article before they click Submit....

    (and yes, I DID read the article before posting this.)

    This, unfortunately, is an all-too-common theme - a bunch of People With Too Damn Much Free Time Who Have Decided They Are The Guardians Of The Public Morals seeking to "protect" us from ourselves.

    In addition to the question of "How many of you have played any of these games" I would add another - "How many of you have spent any time at all with your children today?"

    Funny how these folks have plenty of time to have these meetings - they must REALLY spend a lot of time with their kids.

    Just remember - whenever you have the chance to attend something like this - ask them "And how many games have your played with your children in the past month?"

    It's much more statisfying that saying STFU.

    --
    www.eFax.com are spammers
  3. A little note: by activesynapsis · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The article refers to the Interfaith list as a ranking, 'Doom 3, the #1 offender', when it's really in alphabetical order.

    I was wondering how Doom 3 could be considered more violent than GTA: SA in the eyes of religious and censorship groups until I went to the Interfaith site myself.

    Personally, I thank Interfaith for compiling this year's Christmas shopping list for me.

  4. for these people it is an irrelevant question by merdark · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I know these people are hated here on slashdot (and I certainly don't love them), but come on now, it IS an irrelevant question.

    I think we all know just from screenshots and descriptions what the games generally involve. These people, in their glorious wisdom, decided that anything involving shooting guns is too violent. I really don't think knowing that game A has a riviting storyline, or that game B involves fighting evil oppressors, will at all change their opinion.

    It's like people who think cars are from the devil. Will it matter to them that car A is fuel efficient, or car B is fun to drive, or car C is practical? No, they just hate cars, and they don't need to drive one to know it's a car.

  5. The list itself by generic-man · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's the press release in question with the list at the bottom. Not only does the ICCR not play any of the games, they can't even spell them correctly! Look at GameSpot's treatment of this press release for some simple corrections.

    I can't wait to play some of the Top 9 games that they recommend as "non-violent" at the very bottom. Either "Antigrav" (which as of this morning was spelled "Antigrave") or "EyeToy: Antigrav" (which was simply called "Eye Toy" earlier today) should be good. They're listed separately, by the way.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  6. Minor mistake in TFA by empaler · · Score: 4, Funny

    It was supposed to be the Center for Relative Advancement of Public Policy, not CAPP.

  7. what's being overlooked by fireduck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    is that most, if not all of these games, have an M rating; meaning kids shouldn't be playing them in the first place unless a parent agrees. Yes, these games are violent, have blood, contribute to negative stereotypes, etc, whatever. However, they are clearly labeled as something not fit for a kid. Rather than get in a fit over content, this group really should get in a fit over how lax the enforcement of ESRB rating is. The system is in place, and working in so far as stating that these games are for mature audiences. It's the next step, retail distribution, where the biggest failing is.