Slashdot Mirror


Game Industry Derided For Mature Content

Steve Rock writes "To the surprise of no one, game manufacturers and resellers were again taken to task over the production and sales of games containing violent or sexual themes. According to the National Institute on Media and the Family's Ninth Annual Mediawise Video Game Report Card even games with beneficial or neutral content can be harmful to children because of the connection between gameplay and our obesity epidemic. Interestingly, out of fifty surveys mailed out by the Institute to retailers and producers only two were completed and returned. The industry was given a passing grade for the ESRB rating system but the actual enforcement of the system by the retailers was not -- it is worth noting, however, that the Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association has stated that self-regulation procedures were scheduled to be implemented by December 2004 and therefore tests of retailer compliance to ESRB ratings was premature."

436 of 588 comments (clear)

  1. ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Informative
    US History 101:

    Back in 1954 Dr. Frederick Wertham wrote the infamous Seduction Of The Innocent, regarding the comics industry preying upon the youth of America.

    "Wertham was convinced that comic books were evil, that they contributed to the delinquency of minors, and also to their sexual perversion. In addition Wertham claimed that when any questioned the comic book publishers on their product, they were conspired against, and were labelled communists."

    Before you laugh off it off, recall the US Senate Subcommittee Investigation on Juvenile Delinquency in the United States. and all the recent stink about decency in television.

    The comic industry, to placate the witch hunters offered self policing. Sound familiar? Wertham considered it a sham. Sound familiar, too?

    For some background on Comics Code check this site and this site.

    make way! make way! make way for the age of decency! 60,608,582 merkins can't be denied!

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by AvantLegion · · Score: 4, Funny
      You know, I keep seeing this.

      Comic books were "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      TV shows were "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      Heavy metal was "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      Video games are "the devil", going through legal hassle, and becoming part of accepted culture.

      In light of this, I submit that the next big mind-warping fad needs to be "public sex with minors".

    2. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by AceCaseOR · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Before you laugh off it off, recall the US Senate Subcommittee Investigation on Juvenile Delinquency in the United States. and all the recent stink about decency in television.

      The comic industry, to placate the witch hunters offered self policing. Sound familiar? Wertham considered it a sham. Sound familiar, too?

      To add to the point, remember how long it took to bounce back from the damage Wertham did. Having that happen to video games now could have catastrophic damage.

      --
      Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
    3. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 5, Funny
      Also, D&D will turn you into Pentagram-doodling witch and the only way to come back to Jeebus is to burn all your D&D stuff (and heck, better throw all your other books on the fire, too).

      Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go carjack an old LTD, provoke a gang war, then go for some pizza and hookers.

    4. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by stecoop · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As preposterous as the comic book debacle seems it is true. I saw the story on the history channel and one the targets was Mad Comic books aka Mad *Magazine*. See to get around the issue, the owners ceased calling it a comic book and named it called it a magazine as defined by that days statutes.

      Don't call it crazy because look at the year 1954 and subtract just a few years - you'll find a time where the US legislate Prohibition into law. Crazy things happen when bounds aren't kept within check.

    5. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by yourexhalekiss · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the Hayes Code in the movie industry...

    6. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by TopShelf · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just beware the "extra sausage" - on the pizza and the hookers...

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    7. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As I say. God will find you if you are looking for him, But the Devil will find you when you are looking for him.

      Putting the religious reference aside it generally means if people put there time and effort in looking for the good in things then they will find the good and make themselfs better. But if they are looking for the fault in everything then they will make themself more faulty.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Monkelectric · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the "first" videogame generation is about 40 right now (people who had atari's in their teens). In another 20 years *THEY* will be the people in charge and this nonsense will go away.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    9. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by stretch0611 · · Score: 1
      ... comic books were evil, that they contributed to the delinquency of minors, and also to their sexual perversion ...

      I always knew that Richie Rich and Casper were EVIL.

      --
      Looking for a job?
      Want your resume written professionally?
      DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
    10. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Why are these people still under the assumption that all video games are only for 8 year olds?

      Had a look at what publications and TV time slots some of this stuff is advertised in?

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    11. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by TykeClone · · Score: 3, Funny

      "In my day, all we had were large squares on the screen and we LIKED it. All of this realistic video is bad for the kids - makes them soft. I say that we force all gaming consoles to conform to the Atari 2600 display standards. Now where did I put that copy of Space Invaders."

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    12. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Kombat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Crazy things happen when bounds aren't kept within check.

      Equally crazy things happen when we fail to learn from history. Funny you should mention prohibition, as it is back with a vengeance. Only this time, the culprit is marijuana instead of alcohol. Two remarkably comparable drugs, with identical consequences under prohibition (that is, the police are overworked, and drug lords profit from the monopoly they have on distribution).

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    13. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Exactly!

      (Somewhat related rant)

      They had a 'story' on the news here the other day about something like this. I didn't bother to watch it, but I remember seeing what looked like a 5 year old playing GTA3 in the commercials for it.

      GTA3 is RATED M FOR MATURE. It says it on/in every advertisement for the game and it even has it right on the front of the game with "18+" under it. Someone under 18 cannot buy these games, the store wont even let them. So these fucktard parents go out and buy the games for them and complain because they are too sexual/violent for an 8 year old?

      HELLOOOO? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?!

      So if I go take my 2 year old into a R rated movie, do I have any right to complain to the manager about how it is too violent for small children? I guess I do, but the manager has just as much right to call me a fucking idiot and kick me out of his office.

      Here's a hint to these people: If you give a game specifically marked 18+ that the stores try to not give to children to a child, YOU HAVE NO FUCKING RIGHT TO COMPLAIN.

      I swear to god, the next time I hear someone wanting our tv\movies\internet\games censored 'for the children', I am going to buy a shotgun and blow their bloody head off.

      (/UNINTELLIGABLE RANTING)

      Know what? *clicks post anonymously*

    14. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      So? How about you do not support the channels and mags that do not do what you want?

      The goverment doesn't have to control every aspect of our lives.

    15. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by shufler · · Score: 3, Funny

      Unless they are still living in their 60-year old parent's basement, since they devoted their entire life to munching pills in the dark, blaring their techno music.

    16. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by darkain · · Score: 1

      ya... some of the first Nintendo DS commercials where during One Tree Hill... It is all apart of the "touch it, feel it, play it" thing Nintendo has going on right now.

    17. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      the "first" videogame generation is about 40 right now (people who had atari's in their teens). In another 20 years *THEY* will be the people in charge and this nonsense will go away.

      That's right, because they will all realize that Yar's Revenge didn't mess them up, so there shouldn't be anything wrong with Grand Theft Auto... and in 20 years, GTA will probably look quaint.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    18. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 5, Funny

      Riiiiight. Show me a DM that looks like that and I'll show you a game with 67 guys packed into a basement, each one of them trying to roll a d20 and look sexy at the same time.

      "Soooo, lady DM - what'cha doing after I slay this gelatinous cube? Want to come over for some Cheez Doodles and the latest Next Gen DVD?"

    19. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by bersl2 · · Score: 1
    20. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 1

      You left out role playing games --- in particular, D&D.

    21. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by alc6379 · · Score: 1

      Funny you should say this... reminds me of my youth...

      My dad was one of those "semi-Catholics"; ie, Easter and Christmas mass, maybe. But, he stood fast against anything that was not Catholic, even other Christian denominations.

      There was actually a group of folks that lived in the apartments behind my house as a kid that were Wiccans. They performed rituals, and seemed to actually observe Wiccan practices (I'm still not really up on what all they were).Way came unto way, and I became friends with some of the guys over there. About that same time, I started picking up interest in fantasy-type games like DnD, and Magic: The Gathering.

      ...Enter CATHLI-DAD!, saviour delivering his children from evil! He found out I was hanging out with Wiccans, and he discovered my new RPG/Fantasy interests. My first batch of DnD character sheets got burned up, my Magic cards ripped to shreds, and all of my dice got pulverized under the iron of a sledgehammer.

      Pissed off about what he did, I came back at him for an explanation. His reply:

      DON'T YOU KNOW WHAT THIS PAGANISM IS ALL ABOUT??? THE WHOLE RELIGION WAS SPAWNED OFF OF DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS!!!! That reminds me... I need to build an altar to Gary Gygex...

      --
      I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
    22. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by RollingThunder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The comic industry wasn't really global at the time, though.

      Yes, it would hurt the industry, but the US is not the only place that games get sold. Most of the publishers also don't work only in the US.

    23. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 1

      Before MAD, there was Haunt of Fear, Tales from the Crypt, Vault of Horror, Crime SuspenStories, etc. by the same bunch. I had never read any until recently. Wow! What a scream!

    24. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Orgazmus · · Score: 1

      doom3 isn't THAT retro, is it?

      --
      The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
    25. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Lev13than · · Score: 1

      Also, D&D will turn you into Pentagram-doodling witch and the only way to come back to Jeebus is to burn all your D&D stuff (and heck, better throw all your other books on the fire, too).

      To which I would reply, "I'll give you kids some candy if you let me hump your dog".

      --
      When you have nothing left to burn you must set yourself on fire
    26. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by prell · · Score: 1

      People choose to buy video games, like any other product. Why should we all be forced to adhere to (and possibly pay for) something that can be avoided by a simple choice? Of course you can't avoid your child doing things you wouldn't approve of, but that's life. Have respect for your child, and trust in their ability to make decisions, hopefully based on your parenting and influence on them. Your children aren't yours; they're human beings. They don't need to be protected from the world.

    27. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Um it goes back way further than that.

      Socrates was found guilty of corrupting youth because of his stories, and committed suicide. (Btw read up on Socrates - fascinating story).

      Then drama was considered harmful to kids - kids acting out violant plays? Terrible! I can't remember the name of the famous dudes that got into trouble for that though.

    28. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by damiam · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course! Just look at all the progress the first mass-pot-smoking generation has made.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    29. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Comic books were "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      40 years ago, marijuana was the devil, has been through legal challenges, when does it become accepted culture?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    30. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      Drug lords ?

      Are we talking about marijuana or heroin ? lol

      The 'drug lords' in my city are 20 year-old college kids growing in their basements and selling to their friends to earn a few extra bucks. Every so often (living on a border town) we hear of a smuggling bust going from Canada to the US or vice versa .. in those cases they *claim* it's like $20,000 worth but do the math .. then you know it's overly exagerated and probably just kid and his girlfriend with a nickel bag.

    31. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Hatta · · Score: 3, Informative

      Only this time, the culprit is marijuana instead of alcohol. Two remarkably comparable drugs, with identical consequences under prohibition

      Come on. Alcohol and marijuana are about as comparable as, well, two very dissimilar things. Alcohol is addictive, causes violence, swollen ego, lack of coordination, liver disease, etc. On the contrary, marijuana is nonaddictive, users are peaceful and calm, there is no impairment of coordination, most activites you can do sober you can do stoned.

      I agree with you, the results of prohibition are the same no matter what drug we're talking about. But you do a disservice when you say alcohol and marijuana are comparable. Marijuana is in every respect safer and more beneficial than alcohol.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    32. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by norle · · Score: 1
      Heavy metal was "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      Well, heavy metal is the devil...

    33. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Yeah, let me tell you... those terrorists were influenced by Gran Theft Auto and Mortal Kombat.

      That's an excellent point.

      Stop blaming video games for the White house's fault.

      To quote Pig from Pearls Before Swine: "What's George W. Bush got to do with this?"

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    34. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by escher · · Score: 2, Funny

      They don't need to be protected from the world.

      They don't?

      Great. What the hell am I supposed to do with all this bubble-wrap?

    35. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Kesh · · Score: 1
      40 years ago, marijuana was the devil, has been through legal challenges, when does it become accepted culture?

      Maybe if you roll the marijuana in comic-book pages...

    36. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by escher · · Score: 4, Funny

      most activites you can do sober you can do stoned.

      Not entirely true. I'm far better at Soul Caliber 2 when stoned.

    37. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by hawkstone · · Score: 1

      Mostly true, but you forgot the most important one: Every year there are plenty of cases of death by alcohol overdose. Last I studied the subject of psychopharmacology, there were no known deaths by marijuana overdose alone ever.

      (Obviously I use the term "overdose" loosely in the case of the latter. One could argue that there is no such thing.)

    38. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      Doom 3 is a re-make of the original Doom...that's retro.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    39. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      I like this one:

      4) Females shall be drawn realistically without exaggeration of any physical qualities.


      These are comic books we are talking about, right?

      The Comics Code authority had a lot of nasty underhanded stuff it in that targeted specific comics in publication - like saying comics can't have certain words from a list in the title, and then specifically picking words for that list that match the titles of your competitor's comics.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    40. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1
      There are websites all over the Internet of the American prisoner getting his head severed by Iraq terrorists while held down and screaming in tears.

      I'm assuming you're talking about the non-faked videos.

    41. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by prell · · Score: 1
      Great. What the hell am I supposed to do with all this bubble-wrap?
      Buy some duct tape and you'll have yourself a state-of-the-government terrorist protection system.
    42. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      the game industry is so damn large that they have enough money to slap down any puritan crap that congress tries to push through.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    43. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by xSauronx · · Score: 1
      Now that marijuana has been brought up, I remember what my mother asked me just weeks ago about my younger brother you, until he got busted 2 weeks ago, smoked regularly:

      "Why is it james is always broke and in such a good mood?"

      I wonder how much the government would get on taxes from marijuana if it was legalized...and my brother wonders how much the good stuff would cost him.

      --
      By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
    44. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1


      Gran Theft Auto

      I now have this horrible image in my head of a granny with a walker and a pistol, creeping up to another granny and jacking her Hoveround.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    45. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "Yes, it would hurt the industry, but the US is not the only place that games get sold."

      Doesn't really work any more.

      For example, Fallout was released in a special European edition without children, and 'Temple of elemental evil' was released with the children removed, apparently at the last minute, so that they could sell the game in Europe.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    46. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Actually it just disappeared from the public consciousness altogether, just like everything else that isn't pop. Thank you ClearChannel.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    47. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by dswensen · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that Chick tracts are unrealistic?

      Whoa -- you cracked the case! WOW!

    48. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by robyannetta · · Score: 1
      "Soooo, lady DM - what'cha doing after I slay this gelatinous cube? Want to come over for some Cheez Doodles and the latest Next Gen DVD?"

      DAMN, that sounded sexy!

      --
      - Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
    49. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      The Comics Code was written by some obviously less than professional people. As just one example of that, it contained the neologism "werewolfism", because the people involved had never heard of the word lycanthropy.
      The code enforced a 'Dick Tracy villian' mentality, where criminals should not be made physically attractive, so characters such as "Flathead" and "The Brow" came along to fit the code. (Hey kids, deformed people are all criminals, and handsome people are all honest!).
      It had a general rule that crime must not pay, but it also more specifically prohibited showing crooked cops or elected officials, even if they got their comeuppance in the end (Hey kids, you can always trust those in power to be honest and decent!).
      It banned showing any realistic method to commit any crime, so Batman had to stop murderers who used endless variations on "Aluvium Phosdex, the shaving creme atom", to poison their victims because the code effectively prohibited mentioning arsenic.
      It prohibited all drug abuse references, so one message that couldn't be preached to the kids was "Heroin will kill ya, m-kay?". The first comic that had normally been code compliant to publish an issue that lost the code sticker from their cover was DC's Green Lantern/Green Arrow, when it showed sidekick "Speedy" getting strung out - with a nickname like that, Green Arrow should have seen it coming.
      I've got mixed feelings about having a code for video games at all, but I am damned sure they don't need a code like that one. One thing to remember is that, when there are things you don't want kids to hear, there are always people ready to add "any criticism of our benevolent leaders" to that list.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    50. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Deagol · · Score: 1

      "I drank what?"

    51. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by EvilAlien · · Score: 1
      This too shall pass...

      Self-regulation often results in much less burdensome and impactful restrictions than doing nothing. Without self-regulation by industry, the facist-wannabes, puritans, and other asshats are able to push really onerous restrictions through. It all comes down to the Grand Unifying Problem: Stupid People.

      Screw 'em, fuck the FCC, think for yourselves. Do what you want and raise your children however you want. These idiots only have as much power over us as we give them.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    52. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Shajenko42 · · Score: 1

      Difference is, big corporations have an interest in keeping marajuana illegal. Look up Du Pont and their involvement with hemp.

    53. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by rbullo · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Only this time, the culprit is marijuana instead of alcohol.
      Not to mention LSD, psilocybin and psilocin (magic mushrooms), mescaline (peyote), and DMT, all of which are illegal and yet completely safe if you know what you're doing. Most of them have applications in psychology (they are supposed to help you discover yourself and aid the process of changing bad habits and fixing problems), but this is not recognized. (Schedule I, anybody?)

      The government of the Sixties feared the hippie generation. Hippies had ideas that were radically different than their own, and they thought that drugs might have had something to do with that. In their panic to maintain the status quo, they completely forgot about the disaster that was the Eighteenth Amendment.

      Obviously, I think that the enforcing the Controlled Substances Act in its current form is a massive and pointless drain on federal funds. I bet that we could cut the deficit significantly if we modified it to set tax rates on drugs instead. It'd be safer, too, since then the FDA would set standards on purity and dose.
      --
      OH NOES!!! IT APPEARS YUO DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY FOR DIS HERE PIZZA! WAHT EVER ARE YOU GOING TO DO!?!?
    54. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "US Senate Subcommittee Investigation on Juvenile Delinquency in the United States."

      Surely the members of such a distinguished body such as the United States Senate can serve as some positive role models for these delinquent juveniles!

    55. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by xgamer04 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, heavy metal is the devil...

      I definitely agree with this. Especially the Christian heavy metal bands.

      ...

      :P

      --
      When you look at the state of the world, how can you not become a radical, liberal anarchist?
    56. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Entropy_ah · · Score: 2, Funny

      In light of this, I submit that the next big mind-warping fad needs to be "public sex with minors".

      Ok, but they have to take their hard-hats off first.

      --
      my other penis is a vagina
    57. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by mjc_w · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or, as the old saying goes, "People who always know right from wrong usually find most things wrong."

      --
      This is the Constitution.This is the Constitution under the Bush administration. Any questions?
    58. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by ManxStef · · Score: 1

      I'll give you another example of something that seemed equally (if not more) preposterous, but was also true: witch-hunting.

      Reading back into history it seems completely ludicrous: all you had to do was point the finger and shout "witch!", then the accused, however innocent and however tenuous the "evidence", would be rolled down a hill in a barrel full of spikes, burned at the stake, drowned, or something equally barbaric. If by some small miracle they survived, then they were _definitely_ a witch, and were killed. If they didn't, well, err... unlucky, I guess, they weren't a witch!

      Now, substitute the word "witch" with the word "terrorist" and you're getting close to something I suspect many, many people will find equally shocking and preposterous in years to come.

      Like you say, crazy things happen when checks and balances are omitted...

    59. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see a text-based or even Atari-graphics GTA.

      I guess http://www.grandtheftendo.com/ will have to do for now.

      --



      ...spike
      Ewwwwww, coconut...
    60. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Pickas · · Score: 1

      ...marijuana is nonaddictive, users are peaceful and calm, there is no impairment of coordination, most activites you can do sober you can do stoned...

      There is a mounting level of clinical trial material that states that Marijuana has some severe adverse events associated with it's use. Paranoia for one and aggression for another. In some people it aids in the development of psychosis and schizophrenia. It can lead to feelings of helplessness, depression and psychological addiction. Oh, and let's not forget things like dietry problems, birth defects, etc that are higher in chronic abusers.

      I have heard some people claim that people who are affected in this way are a minority - that these people are let down by their genes. This is exactly the same issue with alcohol. And cigarettes. Others say that if used correctly it is perfectly harmless. So is alcohol.

      On the whole I would think that a little more education on both of them would go a long way. They are not as different (in terms of risk)than both the law and the smokers/drinkers would have us believe.

      Oh, in a vain attempt to stay OT... Marijuana and alcohol represent a far greater threat to young minds than all the violence and sex in computer games. That's why we have ratings systems. We just need proper enforcement of them.

    61. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's not a remake, it's a bad rip-off.

    62. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by lovswr · · Score: 1

      Actually I'm only 37.

    63. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Hatta · · Score: 1

      There is a mounting level of clinical trial material that states that Marijuana has some severe adverse events associated with it's use. Paranoia for one and aggression for another. In some people it aids in the development of psychosis and schizophrenia. It can lead to feelings of helplessness, depression and psychological addiction. Oh, and let's not forget things like dietry problems, birth defects, etc that are higher in chronic abusers.

      I would like to see these studies. Please provide references. Marijuana does cause acute paranoia and anxiety in some people. It's not a medical problem, and if you react this way it's easy enough to avoid it. I have never seen any suggestion of increased agression in marijuana users. This is so far out of line with my reading and personal observations that I'm astounded by the claim. I have seen no evidence that marijuana "aids in the development of psychosis". While marijuana use is more common in schizophrenics than the general population, so is the use of every other drug, alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, whatever. Same thing with depression. As for dietary problems, it's conceivable that marijuana could lead to overeating and obesity, but I have no data on the incidence, and suspect you would have to smoke a ton of pot for a very long time. As for teratogeni city, the data are conflicting, but it's never a good idea to ingest foreign chemicals during pregnancy. Disregarding the effects of THC it's likely many of the compounds produced by combustion of cannabis are teratogenic.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    64. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by damiam · · Score: 1

      Your current bong will be fine; you just need a lot of pot and a lot of time.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    65. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by shawb · · Score: 1

      Well, then there's THIS. I mean, There's a bunch of girls (some aren't even ugly) that play D&D, and then make a show about it. No... seriously.

      The best is when they get all excited about rolling a natural twenty.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    66. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      People choose to buy video games, like any other product.

      Perhaps this is one reason Valve is moving to Steam-based sales: they can treat it like cable or satellite radio. Howard Stern is moving to Sirius satellite exactly because there is no regulation there.

      Perhaps all games will be banned from stores, just like all entendres (let alone the double kind) are banned from the airwaves. The people will move on; we've tasted "censorship = damage and we can route around it" and we won't give that up.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    67. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by eam · · Score: 1

      > Your children aren't yours; they're human beings.

      I agree with that.

      > They don't need to be protected from the world.

      That's insane.

      Children are human beings, but they are remarkably STUPID human beings. It isn't their fault. Their brains just haven't finished forming yet. They aren't supposed to make all the decisions. That's why they should come equiped with parents/guardians.

      Children will touch a hot stove.

      Children will run out into traffic without looking.

      Children will eat nothing but sugar all day given half a chance.

      Children will hurt their younger sibling when they are playing.

      Children will trust the nice stranger who offered them candy.

      Children will do what their friends are doing because they think it is important to be accepted by others.

      The list goes on and on.

      The trick is letting them learn from the world, while protecting them from being a victim of the *REAL* dangers that exist (as opposed to the fantasy dangers imagined by all the people who want someone to "think of the children"). Not everything is dangerous, but the world is not a safe place, and life is very fragile.

      Here's another thought to scare you. The responsibility to protect, nurture, educate, and assist your children never ends.

      The line between being a good parent and being a smothering pain in the ass keeps shifting, but there is parenting still to be done right up to the end.

    68. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by GORby_ · · Score: 1

      The netherlands seem to be ahead of the rest of the world on that one...
      It's partly legalized over there :-)

    69. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by dajak · · Score: 1

      You know, I keep seeing this.

      Comic books were "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      TV shows were "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      Heavy metal was "the devil", went through legal hassle, and eventually became accepted culture.

      Video games are "the devil", going through legal hassle, and becoming part of accepted culture.


      The problem with the moralist lunatic fringe is that they have no discipline. If they wouldn't have owned a TV they would never have found out about newer evils like computer games and D&D. Do the Amish ever bother anyone? I don't think so.

    70. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by TheAntiCrust · · Score: 1

      Children aren't stupid. They are ignorant. There is a fine and very important distincion in those two words.

    71. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by eam · · Score: 1

      Well, you might choose a word different than stupid, but ignorant isn't it.

      When a child runs into a wall and hurts himself, and you point out that he should:

      a) not run in the house

      and

      b) watch where he is going

      and then the child IMMEDIATELY runs into the *same* wall in the *same* way, "ignorant" is not an accurate description. Ignorance could be responsible for the first impact, but something else is at work with the second impact.

      If ignorance was the only problem, information would be the cure. However informing them doesn't work. If you say the stove is hot, and they will be seriously burned if they touch it, they will still touch it! You have to physically prevent them from doing so.

      There's all kinds of stupid. From Merriam-Webster Online (www.m-w.com):

      Stupid

      1 b : given to unintelligent decisions or acts : acting in an unintelligent or careless manner

      Hey, they're my kids, I love all of them, and they're all stupid. It's nothing against them. Every single one of their peers is stupid. I was dumb as a stump at their age. With guidance, they should live up to their potential and grow out of their stupidity. If they're lucky, they'll start to climb out of it before they graduate college. If memory serves, many don't (perhaps most). Until that time, I'll do everything I can to step between them and the stupid things they do.

      I'm not saying that the human battering ram doesn't have a brain that appears to be developing. In some ways he's well beyond the curve. According to his teacher he can read and comprehend significantly better than anyone else in his first grade class.

      Of course, I also know PhDs who could easily strangle themselves by getting their tie caught in a pencil sharpener... a manual pencil sharpener.

    72. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Oh yes! Custer's Revenge! I love that game. If you play it emulated, all you have to do is tap multiple fingers on the spacebar (emulator's fire button) and you can get up to 50 "screws" in no time and get an extra life. I think my highest score was 270, and that was with the game running at 70 fps (I was running a DOS version of Stella that was vsynced to 320x200, which runs at 70Hz)

      I mentioned it to someone at work and they actually knew what I was talking about. He also mentioned another masterpiece called Beat 'Em and Eat 'Em, which used the paddle to take the cumcatcher from one side of the screen to the other.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    73. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by Rares+Marian · · Score: 1

      Look Angels and SEELE are responsible for second impact. Don't tell me you know what happened at first impact.

      Oh wait, what was this thread about again.

      --
      The message on the other side of this sig is false.
    74. Re:ESRB? Holy Comics Code, Batman! by mink · · Score: 1

      I'm sure GTA has always been 3rd person or top down.
      Maybe you need to check your perspective.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  2. Do video games affect culture? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do video games affect culture or does culture affect video games?

    With all these problems being pinned on video games the real question is it really video games causing all these problems. For obesity is it just because video games cause children to be obese causing them to stay at home with little activity to play games, or is it that children who have a tendency of being obese don't want to go outside and play (for reasons of security, lack of proper parental supervision, or just no one else in the area to interact with) So they will stay in side and play video games, where if there were no games then they would Watch TV all day. The same is with violence in games is it because games are violence causes kids to become violence, or is it that they see themselves in a culture of violence so they enjoy violent games. I am not a big game player and I really don't care for first person shoot-em-ups and having excessive gore. But I feel that these games reflect the culture more then culture reflects the games because the games will not sell if they didn't reflect the culture.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Do video games affect culture? by Ironsides · · Score: 2, Insightful

      is it because games are violence causes kids to become violence, or is it that they see themselves in a culture of violence so they enjoy violent games

      Congradulations. You have just discovered the dificulty in figuring out Cause and Effect vs. Correlation. This is the hardest thing for scientists and psychologists to figure out. Do I have a correlation here? Or do I have a cause and effect?

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:Do video games affect culture? by jamesdood · · Score: 1

      This is an insightful comment, I look at my kids and their love for video games, however my wife and I carefully monitor the content of the games they play. I like to play some violent games, but don't allow my kids to. It comes down to being a responsible parent, not letting your 10 year old play GTA for example. As for obesity, kids are encouraged to stay home, I know I don't feel comfortable letting my 8 year old daughter outdoors on her own, you read about some sickos picking up kids all of the time, and yes in my nice quiet suburban neighborhood! So as a parent I feel more secure knowing where she is and being protective.
      I don't think the game industry is to blame for violent acts, I mean the Vikings certainaly could be considered violent, and I don't think that they had video games back then! On the other hand the comment that the games reflect culture I would have to agree with. Look at what the media focuses on, murder, mayhem, war, so of course that is what our attention spans (short as they are) are drawn to.
      So to conclude, video games are not bad, people are bad, and people are influenced by popular media... no huge revelation here.. move along please!

      --
      *narf!*
    3. Re:Do video games affect culture? by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly. But unfortunatly these groups that do all these statitcs dont tend to realize this. For a country that puts little focust on the importance in math they put a lot of attention on what the numbers give, whithout looking at the non matmatical portion to it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:Do video games affect culture? by zx75 · · Score: 1

      The answer is 'Yes'. Its not a one way street. Sure, video games are culture based, if there wasn't any basis then they wouldn't sell.

      But, as with anything, they expand on what we consider our culture to be, they contribute to it. They also serve to reinfoce attitudes and culture that we already have.

      Video games aren't the message, they are the medium, and the messages that are being passed through that medium are intertwined with our culture. They express values already held by society (not necessarily in the literal sence), while simultaneously adding to the body of work that make up our basis for those values.

      --
      This is not a sig.
    5. Re:Do video games affect culture? by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      They do realize it, they just ignore it as it hurts donations.

    6. Re:Do video games affect culture? by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Apparently the second hardest thing for scientists and psychologists to figure out is how to spell the word "congratulations" without using the letter 'D'.

    7. Re:Do video games affect culture? by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      I don't see what the big deal is about violence in videogames.

      We've had violent entertainment in every society for the entirety of human history. From this, do you surmise that:

      1: Violent entertainment is making people violent?

      2: That modern society is somehow "sick" for wanting violent entertainment?

      3: That we're naturally violent and violent entertainment is a socially acceptable outlet for our violent tandencies?

      I think 3 is the only one that makes any sense at all.

      --
      Everything seemed to be going so nice
      'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    8. Re:Do video games affect culture? by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Sorry, forgot to close my 'bold' tag.

      --
      Everything seemed to be going so nice
      'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    9. Re:Do video games affect culture? by chrish · · Score: 1

      Whoops... I misread "doctrines" instead of "donations" in there...

      --
      - chrish
    10. Re:Do video games affect culture? by JohnFluxx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "you read about some sickos picking up kids all of the time"

      You realise that statistically she is far more at risk from you and her family then strangers?

      She'd be safer outside.

    11. Re:Do video games affect culture? by angst_ridden_hipster · · Score: 1

      Given your name, we can forgive you.

      --
      Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
      www.fogbound.net
    12. Re:Do video games affect culture? by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      As for obesity, kids are encouraged to stay home, I know I don't feel comfortable letting my 8 year old daughter outdoors on her own, you read about some sickos picking up kids all of the time, and yes in my nice quiet suburban neighborhood!

      Sure you *hear* about it, but does it actually happen ? "Sickos picking kids up" accounts for single-digit percentages of child abuse. If you really want the best chance to protect your kids, keep them away from family and family friends.

    13. Re:Do video games affect culture? by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      hehehehehehehe

      I like it!

      --
      Everything seemed to be going so nice
      'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    14. Re:Do video games affect culture? by MrDickey · · Score: 1

      If video games are not bad, why don't you let your children play them? Clearly you think they could have some negative influence. I think the good parenting part of controlling video games really comes into play when children do nothing but eat cheetos and play video games. In that case, you should really cut the cord.

      --
      I hate my sig
    15. Re:Do video games affect culture? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1


      Do I have a correlation here? Or do I have a cause and effect?

      That's not really an either-or situation. A correlation *does* prove that a cause-and-effect is happening somewhere, but it doesn't tell you between what two things the cause and effect is occuring. If A and B always occur together, and it's repeatble provable that this is the case (not just a statistical freak accident) then that has to be either because A causes B, or B causes A, or that both are effects of some other cause C.

      It's not that a correlation doesn't imply a cause/effect relationship - it DOES. It just doesn't tell you what that relationship actually is.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    16. Re:Do video games affect culture? by mdfst13 · · Score: 1

      "For obesity is it just because video games cause children to be obese causing them to stay at home with little activity to play games, or is it that children who have a tendency of being obese don't want to go outside and play (for reasons of security, lack of proper parental supervision, or just no one else in the area to interact with) So they will stay in side and play video games, where if there were no games then they would Watch TV all day."

      This doesn't explain why obesity is *increasing*. However, it is true that TV is also to blame here.

      Also, I feel that the issue is better taken as it involves sex and violence. However, that is not to say that a move to games with less sex and violence might not push back against the native urges of those who feel this way.

  3. So what? by The+Kow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What I don't understand is that, in spite of endless harping and railing by People With Nothing Better To Do (PWNBTD), has the gaming industry *EVER* been impacted by the complaints? Can someone provide a list of tangible side-effects of all of this criticism? It seems like the gaming industry just keeps chugging along.

    --
    Moo
    1. Re:So what? by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's now illegal to sell an M rated game to a minor in California, thanks to the Governator.

      I mean, it's not like he'd actively try to hamper the sale of video games so that youngsters disposable income would be spent on his latest action flick.

      To summarize: Arnold pretending to kill terrorists on the big screen, is A-OK. Nothing more american than Arnold Shwartzenegger. But me pretending to kill terrorists on the small screen, not OK.

      Yes, this has hampered the industry. Dozens, hundreds, hell who knows how many projects have been cancelled or shelved for fear of some frivolous lawsuit. Thrill Kill being a "famous" example of a promising game being scrapped because of PC concerns.

      See the douchebags vs Doom and douchebags vs Rockstar cases for more background.

      When I was a kid it was Dungeons and Dragons and Judas Priest albums that were responsible for all the troubles of youth. I guess they fixed D&D and Priest.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:So what? by redivider · · Score: 1

      "It's now illegal to sell an M rated game to a minor in California, thanks to the Governator.

      I mean, it's not like he'd actively try to hamper the sale of video games so that youngsters disposable income would be spent on his latest action flick.

      To summarize: Arnold pretending to kill terrorists on the big screen, is A-OK. Nothing more american than Arnold Shwartzenegger. But me pretending to kill terrorists on the small screen, not OK."

      Well, if you're 17 or older, it's A-OK to watch one of his R-rated movies. The one year age difference in rating systems notwithstanding, it seems like the same thing to me.

      I'd say 17-18 is a bit old for the cut off in either case -- 16 would probably be more reasonable, but I definitely wouldn't want my kids playing something like GTA before they were old enough to fully understand the difference between what's OK to do in a game and what's OK to do in real life.

      --
      Sinch
    3. Re:So what? by FuzzzyLogik · · Score: 1

      In fact I think video games get more and more violent... i don't see the criticism stopping anything.

      I just think parents need to watch what their kids do. I play violent video games and you don't see me running around killing people or "immitating" a video game. All this violence crap has to do with bad parenting, or lack of parenting period. I wish people would understand this. (sorry, took a detour there)

    4. Re:So what? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      There's no law behing movie ratings, they're completely voluntary just like the ESRB. In fact, the ESRB's system is much more complex and informative than "PG-13".

      I see kids renting/buying R rated flicks at blockbuster all the time.

      Video games are apparently different because they're interactive.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    5. Re:So what? by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because those 15 year olds don't understand it's wrong to kill.

    6. Re:So what? by 3nuff · · Score: 1

      The governator is just enforcing the system. He's not saying that the minor cannot play the game.

      This is a great way to involve the parent in the game buying process. If a parent decides that it's ok for their child to play an "M" rated game then they can go buy it for them, simple. In a way, this also teaches parents to be a little more involved in what their kid is exposed to.

      This has noting to do with hampering game sales or promoting his movies. AFAIK, movie theaters also verify age when a minor wants to see an "R" rated film. So, if Arnold wants the kiddies to see his movie then he probably will make sure that it gets a lower rating, like "Jingle all the Way"

      --
      "Give me taste, give me funk, give me fury, gimme some more."
    7. Re:So what? by The+Kow · · Score: 1

      Yes, but how much has this actually affected the gaming industry's profit, sales, and growth?

      I'm mostly interested in the third aspect. Up until noise was being made about violent video games, there really was nothing that even pretended to stem the growth of the industry, and it seemed to be growing faster every year as PCs and the internet became more and more commonplace, and as consoles became more available (console games have cost approximately $40-50 each since the mid-1980s, as I recall).

      If this 'video games are the devil!' movement - which seems awfully late, by the way, since they've pretty much proliferated as far as they possibly can - is actually affecting video game sales significantly, which I'm not entirely sure it is, then is it affecting it negatively enough to stem the continued growth of the industry, or is it just a bump in the road?

      --
      Moo
    8. Re:So what? by peter_gzowski · · Score: 1

      There's no law behing movie ratings, they're completely voluntary just like the ESRB. In fact, the ESRB's system is much more complex and informative than "PG-13".

      So, who cares, as long as both are enforced? As long as I'm allowed to go see R-rated movies, and buy/rent M-rated games, and a 13-year old is not, then I think the system is working.

      I see kids renting/buying R rated flicks at blockbuster all the time.

      This is an argument for better enforcement of the rating system at Blockbuster. Perhaps a good way to encourage better enforcement is to make its enforcement law and penalizing Blockbuster for breaking the law.

      Video games are apparently different because they're interactive.

      I think video games are different because they haven't been around as long as movies, and therefore the practice of enforcing the ratings (voluntary or not) is not as established.

      --
      "Now gluttony and exploitation serves eight!" - TV's Frank
    9. Re:So what? by gblues · · Score: 1
      Thrill Kill being a "famous" example of a promising game being scrapped because of PC concerns.

      Hardly. It was a shit game, and EA just took advantage of the uproar to kill the project and get some "we care about the kids" press at the same time.

      Nathan

    10. Re:So what? by ronfar · · Score: 1
      If it was that bad why did they ressurect it with a Wu Tang Clan face lift?

      Seriously... why?

      --
      All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
    11. Re:So what? by gblues · · Score: 1

      Probably an attempt to recover the investment in Thrill Kill with a piece of licensed crap.

      Nathan

    12. Re:So what? by redivider · · Score: 1

      OK, so make it 15. My point was that 17/18 was a little old and that younger kids could handle MA games and R movies, but they shouldn't be avaible to kids of *any* age. A line has to be drawn somewhere.

      --
      Sinch
    13. Re:So what? by mink · · Score: 1


      We (a group of gamers) found it to be an ok 4 player brawler on a platform that lacked many 4 player brawler type games.
      Your Mileage Obviously Varied.
      I'd much rather play Rakugaki Showtime with my peers but as SONY has deemed NA unworthy of game like that (region locking on the consoles).

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  4. crappy double standard by AgentGray · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In other news the movie industry and book industry just keep putting out their usual mature content crap.

    --
    "Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    1. Re:crappy double standard by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

      And please note that reading, school attendence and homework contribute to obesity.

      Children of the world, arise, arise!
      Loose yourselves from the corpulent shackles that bind you,
      Gripping your hearts in a greasy fist of early death,
      Sucking you to the earth with the inexorable force of mass attracted to mass.

      Eschew literature. Screw Math. Fuck school!

      The stalwart guardians of your interests have spoken. Sitting is bad for you,
      And in the words of the great prophet Moss, "Movement is serenity."

      Go outside and play. You have their blessings.

      KFG

    2. Re:crappy double standard by Kombat · · Score: 1

      In other news the movie industry and book industry just keep putting out their usual mature content crap.

      Movie theatres are much, much more diligent about enforcing their age restrictions. Of course there are some that are lax, and kids get through, but it simply can't be compared to the "anything goes" attitude of video game retail sales.

      Adult books/magazines are on the top shelf of the racks, often with their covers hidden, and even if a 12 year old could reach them, the stores typically will refuse to sell it to them.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
  5. Why are they parenting others kids? by Ironsides · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Content aside, the amount of time kids spend playing games, even the good ones, is contributing to the obesity epidemic among American youth. For too many kids, the only parts of their body they are exercising are their thumbs. We are particularly concerned, therefore, about the launch of games this year aimed at children as young as two. We know that the industry wants to expand its customer base and that it is in their economic interest to hook babies on games. This trend, however, raises serious implications for our children's health.

    What ever happened to parents kicking their kids out of the house to play ball outside? Turn off the TV, unplug their game console, log them off the computer and send them outside to play with their friends. This is nothing new and the "problem" is solved. This coming from someone who spends 10+ hours a day in front of a computer and still looks skiny.

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    1. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by jthayden · · Score: 1

      But it takes a village!

    2. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by musikit · · Score: 1

      "What ever happened to parents kicking their kids out of the house to play ball outside?"

      1. murder
      2. rape
      3. kidnapping
      4. weapons
      5. drugs
      6. 5 choose 2 on 1-5
      7. 5 choose 3 on 1-5
      8 5 choose 4 on 1-5
      9. all of the above

    3. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Blah blah blah. All that stuff was around 20 years ago. Hell, there was more of it. The difference now is that the bad stuff is overreported, so soccer moms the world over do all they can to protect their kids from the world. I say let the kids go play kickball and educate them about not running off with strangers. Grow up - the world is and always has been dangerous. That's no reason to avoid it.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    4. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by netfool · · Score: 1
      It should say:

      Content aside the amount of time parents allot to their kids to spend playing video, even the good ones, is contributing to the obesity epidemic among American youth.

      --
      Left 4 Dead Gaming Group - http://www.l4dgg.com
    5. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by petersam · · Score: 1
      This coming from someone who spends 10+ hours a day in front of a computer and still looks skiny.[sic]

      Ah, but are you physically fit, other than your hand-eye coordination? :-)

      I do completely agree with your point. People in this world constantly complaining about the horrors of modern media turning our kids into zombies and them not getting out enough. But the responsibility lies with the parents to raise their children properly.

      I think video games are great for kids - when there's nothing better to do or for a change of pace. When your kid is sick or it is raining outside, I'd rather they played a game or watched PBS instead of sit around being bored, playing with dust bunnies for fun. However, my kids have to go out and play because we make them. I would never let my children play my copy of Doom 3 until they're old enough to understand the difference between fantasy and reality, right and wrong. And that all comes gradually.

    6. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by PedanticSpellingTrol · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's really more the yellow journalism that blows those all of those risks totally out of proportion and perpetuates the culture of fear that's lead to America having the higest per-capita rate of imprisonment in the world. (mumbles something about the black people and locks the door)

    7. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      "What ever happened to parents kicking their kids out of the house to play ball outside?"

      That means parents would actually have to be raising their kids. Shame on you for thinking that having a kid presumes a certain level of responsibility, because irresponsible parents couldn't possibly have anything to do with irresponsible children.

      That said, children are individuals with minds of their own. Sometimes they are just unpredictable, scheming, and beyond control. Good parenting makes this type of child unusual, but it can still happen.

      On a different note (responding to a different person's assumption), obesity is not caused by a sedentary lifestyle. Obesity is caused by eating too much in relation to a particular lifestyle. A sedentary lifestyle does cause a host of physical problems (muscle loss, join pain, etc), but obesity is, at best, tangential to lifestyle.

      Exercise less, eat less, and you don't gain weight. Work out like a bandit, eat excessively, and you still become obese.

    8. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      I am physically fit and am probably in better health than I have ever been. (I'm 22, fresh out of college). After 4 years of college I'm still in better health than most people I know from scouts that are a few years younger than me and get regular exercise. I won't say I couldn't stand to lose a few pounds (under 10) but I'm deffinitely fit.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    9. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by drawfour · · Score: 1

      EXACTLY. I grew up in Phoenix, AZ. Maybe not a great crime city, but from age 3.5 to 6th grade, I was living 2-3 blocks away from the capital building in downtown Phoenix. We had our local gang running around, we had a murder down the street, we'd see police helicopters overhead quite often.

      But I knew where it was safe to go, where it was unsafe to go, what the limits were. I played basketball and our own version of baseball right in my yard, rode my bike all around, roller-skated, climbed trees or whatever else, and nothing happened to me.

      The real issue is parents need to educate their kids on what to do and not to do. Now, it's true that while my dad was hardly ever home, my mom was always home, but she can't keep me from getting into a stranger's car or anything else unless she's RIGHT there.

      We live in a society that likes to blame EVERYONE ELSE for their problems and not take any responsibility for their own action or inaction. Show your kids that you care, give them good instruction, and that will go a long way.

    10. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by rune.w · · Score: 1

      What ever happened to parents kicking their kids out of the house to play ball outside? Turn off the TV, unplug their game console, log them off the computer and send them outside to play with their friends. This is nothing new and the "problem" is solved.

      The problem with that is that other parents will have to do the same otherwise it isn't going to work out. Society as a colective has to realize that their children are spending too much time in front of a screen and missing out many other things in life, and that's simply not happening yet.

    11. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by urbaer · · Score: 1

      This coming from someone who spends 10+ hours a day in front of a computer and still looks skiny.

      So children should drink coffee and smoke while playing video games?

    12. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      How about feeding your kids lard soaked food everyday? Not teaching them anything remotely like good eating habits?

      I mean come on as an outsider looking in I can tell you Americans that the food you eat just isn't healthy, too much and too fat.

      Jesus North Americans have mapel sirup on bacon for gods sake. Teach your kids good eating habits and put them in a sport they may like. Karate or Tae Kwon Do are great choices.

    13. Re:Why are they parenting others kids? by burdalane · · Score: 1
      "What ever happened to parents kicking their kids out of the house to play ball outside? Turn off the TV, unplug their game console, log them off the computer and send them outside to play with their friends."

      Kicking kids out of the house to play ball doesn't always work. If my parents had made me go outside, I would have just ended up standing around by myself. But since I was so bad at computer games (I never had a console, only a PC), I still ended up standing around by myself inside the house.

      Anyway, hooking up the video game controllers to a treadmill would solve the whole exercise problem, or just buy the kids Dance Dance Revolution.

  6. mature content by randalware · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What about all of us old people (21+) that want content more adult.

    I enjoyed GTA vice city, Postal 2, Quake and would not call them G rated.

    I want them labeled for content, with good install/de-install programs.
    And if you really insist a password/age checker.

    --
    This is my opinion based on what little I know and understand of the rumors and lies Thanks, Randal
    1. Re:mature content by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      And an age checker would work how? Require a credit card?

      I remember the old Leisure Suite Larry games had questions you'd need to be 20 or so to know the answers to but that was pre-internet.

      If manufactures can't get a copy protection scheme to work for more than a week, I wouldn't expect them to get one to work that blocks underage players.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    2. Re:mature content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Age checker? I remember when i was maybe 14 on my dad's IBM PC Jr, opening leisure suit larry and answering questions like "what are the names of the beetles", and getting in no problem- It was a good thing i got in, because i learned early that if you find a girl to have sex with you and don't wear a condom, you die

    3. Re:mature content by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      If manufactures can't get a copy protection scheme to work for more than a week, I wouldn't expect them to get one to work that blocks underage players.

      How is that their job? Surely all these kids have parents.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    4. Re:mature content by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      I'm not disagreeing with you. I just am trying to figure out what the Over Protective Family Value Coalition or whatever they actually thinks could be done.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    5. Re:mature content by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      I remember the old Leisure Suite Larry games had questions you'd need to be 20 or so to know the answers to but that was pre-internet.

      Wasn't that just a take off on Leather Goddesses of Phobos (Infocom) that required you to assert your age (over 18) before it would enter "lewd description" mode?

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    6. Re:mature content by mink · · Score: 1

      It had a database of questions about pop culture, events and people from the fifties and sixties. It asked random questions. You could gat past them 4 out of 5 times at age 14 (when LSL1 was released). I seem to remember you were asked 3 questions and you had to pass them all.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  7. Games industry has bigger problems.. by raehl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Like being derided for poor, delayed, buggy content.

    1. Re:Games industry has bigger problems.. by alphaseven · · Score: 1
      Like being derided for poor, delayed, buggy content.

      Hey, you try getting a game out on time with a bunch of inexperienced, underpaid programmers working 80 hour weeks.

  8. Give me a break! by m.h.2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "even games with beneficial or neutral content can be harmful to children because of the connection between gameplay and our obesity epidemic."

    I've played these games all of my life. I'm not a criminal. I'm not a sociopath. I'm not overweight.

    When are people going to start taking responsibility for the things they and their children do, rather than blaming it upon "outside influences."

    Kids become criminals because they aren't taught to NOT be criminals and because their parents are too soft/stupid/lazy to discipline them appropriately
    Kids become fat because they eat to damn much.

    1. Re:Give me a break! by flibuste · · Score: 1

      Granted for the rest, but

      I'm not a sociopath. remains to be proven.

      Hint: you are posting on slashdot.

    2. Re:Give me a break! by the_mad_poster · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm not a criminal. I'm not a sociopath. I'm not overweight.

      Then why are you posting here?

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    3. Re:Give me a break! by Vidael · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I see far too many parents subscribing to the "TV will raise my children" method of parenthood. It's disgusting. If parents are not going to take responsibility for how their children are raised, then they have no legitimate reason to blame anyone other than themselves for how their children turn out.

    4. Re:Give me a break! by Kombat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When are people going to start taking responsibility for the things they and their children do, rather than blaming it upon "outside influences."

      It's not exactly an "either-or" situation. You see, society/culture will exerts a lot of influence on kids. The parents can work to direct this influence, by controlling the amounts of influences they deem positive/negative, but if society shifts, and begins offering grossly disproportionate amounts of "good" vs. "bad" influences (as measured by typically acceptable cultural standards), then the parent will understandably complain, as their job is being made harder. It's not a matter of saying simply they're either doing their job or they're not, but rather how much the media and society is acting with the parents' values, or against them, acting as either an enabler more than a hazard, or vice-versa.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    5. Re:Give me a break! by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1

      Um. The action of inhaling harmful chemicals into the lungs and bloodstream causes adverse physical effects on your health.

      The action of leading a sedentary gaming lifestyle causes adverse physical effects on your health.

      That was a reasonable analogy the g-parent poster used. In each instance we're talking about the negative health effects of choosing to perform certain actions. Of course, there's always the argument that you can lead a moderate gaming lifestyle without being sedentary but you can't really "moderately smoke" without expecting to get sick.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    6. Re:Give me a break! by drawfour · · Score: 1

      Sociopath != Socially challenged. :P

    7. Re:Give me a break! by Shajenko42 · · Score: 1

      I believe you're thinking of the term "anti-social", not "sociopath".

    8. Re:Give me a break! by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      Because it's so damn easier to blame metal/videogames/porn/movies for fucked up children instead than accepting responsabilty as a parent and teaching your kids what's wrong and what's not.

      Seriously, it seems like every 5 years they come with a new demon to rotten your kids' minds unless that influence is banned, burnt and burried. Some people have way too much spare time on their hands.

  9. In other words by sulli · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Senator Lieberman is up for re-election in 2006, and he wants to make sure he's way ahead of any Moral Values his opponent will throw at him.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:In other words by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      hey - he's got to have joe-mentum in the upcoming election.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    2. Re:In other words by IInventedTheInternet · · Score: 1

      Would someone just jump on Lieberman's head? That'll show him...

  10. pac man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Video games don't affect kids.. I mean if Pac Man effected us as kids, we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching on magic pills, listening to repeditive electronic music.

    heh heh...

    1. Re:pac man by corpsiclex · · Score: 1

      hahahaha, oh wait..you mean us rave kids? ...
      shit.

      --

      eBayDig 1s a typo saerch engien
    2. Re:pac man by Ignignot · · Score: 1

      That's totally what I'm saying! I used to play pac man all the time and now I'm totally not into that dorky video game stuff cuz I'm all chillin or partying at the club... its so great to take some X and then like BAM you like other people so much and you're so social and just haaaaaaaaaaave to touch... if that's what pac man did to me I mean turn me into a cool hip partygoing chico then so beit because its either that or become a sweaty overweight gross guy who won't stop complaining about how bad things are but man, you should just roll with me and then you'll see how good things are!

      --
      I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
    3. Re:pac man by njfuzzy · · Score: 1

      When you quote, you should mention who you are quoting-- or at least put it in quotes, if you don't know who said it. (Marcus Brigstocke, probably.)

      --
      My Photography - http://ian-x.com
      The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
    4. Re:pac man by AhabTheArab · · Score: 1

      its so great to take some X and then like BAM you like other people so much and you're so social and just haaaaaaaaaaave to touch

      I, for one, prefer to eat ghosts when I've been taking some X.

  11. Parent's fault by ifwm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If your kid plays a game with mature themes, or sexual content, instead of blaming the game manufacturers, blame yourself for being a shitty parent. And don't try that "what if he plays it at his friend Johnny's house" because good parents know what happens at their children's friends houses. Excuses are ruining your children. Do your job parents, stop blaming others.

    Also, last year the average age of "video gamers" was 27. Not sure what the source was, but I remember it being reputable. Why would companies NOT make mature games? There are more adults buying (and playing) games, so it makes financial sense.

    If parents did a better job, the current system would work fine.

    1. Re:Parent's fault by alc6379 · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you don't see things correctly.

      If it's on the market, on a shelf where little Timmy can get to it, it's obviously supposed to be for anyone, right? Never mind the M rating, and how retailers are supposed to check ID for such games!

      Why don't more retailers do like they do with adult magazines in most convenience stores? Put them on a rack that's either behind the counter, in view where people old enough could see it, but not where some kid might be able to see. Or even, put the games up on a higher shelf, eye-level for the target audience.

      But seriously... these people who say their kids committed violence because of these games, or that they picked up disrespect for women, or drug use, or anything from games need to look closer at themselves. Little Timmy is more likely to say "Shit" because they heard you say it, than some pixelated dude pulling a guy out of a car. At least by hearing you say it, they'll have practical application for those "skills" when the time arises.

      --
      I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
    2. Re:Parent's fault by goldspider · · Score: 1

      Careful! There's a lot of people here who will mod you down for that kind of sentiment!

      Remember, parenting = invading childrens' rights, and! That's being overprotective, and oppressive, and we can't have THAT, now can we?

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    3. Re:Parent's fault by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Neilson (of TV ratings fame) do stats on video games too. The enormous bulk of the market is in the 20-30 range, mostly male, although they noted that female players between 20-30 was the biggest "growth" area.

      Video games aren't just for kids anymore.

      I don't know why Blockbuster, EB, Best Buy, etc, cant segregate the games into kids section and regular. I mean, the movies are segregated by type/genre. Lord knows there's enough of them to group them like Action/Adventure, Roleplaying, Horror, Adult, Children.

      I think a lot of the noise would go away if "Monsters, Inc" wasn't on the shelf right next to "Manhunt", but there will always be kooks.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    4. Re:Parent's fault by Kombat · · Score: 1

      Also, last year the average age of "video gamers" was 27. Not sure what the source was, but I remember it being reputable.

      Was this the average age, or median age? Slashdot has made me alert to the magic of statistical manipulation, and when you said this, I instantly envisioned a legion hall full of septogenarians fragging each other in a 30-player game of Unreal on nights when there's no Bingo. That'd drive up the average age in a hurry. :)

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    5. Re:Parent's fault by UWC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd also like to know the criteria used to determine the age of the gamer. Is it based on who purchased the game? I'd imagine that many video games that kids play are purchased by parents.

    6. Re:Parent's fault by sqlrob · · Score: 1

      More than 2/3 of gamers are over 18 from the same study, released by ESA earlier this year.

    7. Re:Parent's fault by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      sure, as soon as all the R rated movies are kept in the same manner.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    8. Re:Parent's fault by chinakow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is absolutly correct. I actually watched the press confrence yesterday, I saw the last half or so, here is what I got from it.

      The average PS2 owner was like 27 or so and the average Xbox owner was a year younger. The board is not tying to censor the games but make parents simply AWARE that these things exist, they also mentioned that ESRB had only ever rated 18 games as AO (Adults Only, 18+), but showed clips of "The Guy Game" and "Leisure Suit Larry", these games are rated M(Mature 17+) yet last I checked I needed to be 18 to buy magazines with topless women in them. they stated that the ESRB might consider removing the AO rating since there is only a 1 year differnce in the age "restrictions" also mentioned as possible reasons for adult games being labeled as M was that some retailers will not stock AO games. They suggested changing the ratings to reflect the movie rating system, since most people understand the difference between PG-13 and R.

      I get the feeling that the news likes to Hype things way too much, there was maybe one fist slamed on the podium, or it might have been a hand that slipped of the edge, and simply fell, they are not super angry or upset at these games, with the possible exception of JFK reloaded, and I kinda understand that one, otherwise the whole thing was a real even keel here are the states, just thought you might want to know what your children are doing.

      Just my thoughts, it seems like everone gets the impression that they are out to make games out to be "Evil" but from what I saw, they where getting more to the point of, You don't let your children watch porn, do you really want to have them blowing the brains out of some random character in video games after getting out of school? If yes, then here are some easy ways to get them that game, if not, check the rating.

      Jon

    9. Re:Parent's fault by alc6379 · · Score: 1

      I see exactly what you're saying, and I probably should come from a standpoint of "they're going to bitch no matter what".

      My personal opinion on the matter is as same as the parent poster. If you've gotten in such a wad over the games your kids are playing, stand by them in the store, do research on your own about what the game's all about. Find out why it's got an M rating. If your kid's playing it at someone else's house, then your kid isn't allowed over there.

      Bottom line is, it is the parent's responsibility for how their kids turn out. If they let their kids play games with adult content, and that messes them up, then it's the parent's fault, not the game producers.

      --
      I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
    10. Re:Parent's fault by ccharles · · Score: 1

      Excellent point. I used to tutor kids in the 9-to-12-year-old range. I could never understand why their parents picked up games like GTA:SA for them.

      Where I live (in Ontario, Canada) you legally have to be 18 to purchase some of these games. They actually ID you.

      The problem seems to be that non-geek parents tend to assume that video games are for kids. If a 45-year-old man is buying GTA, there's a good chance it's not for him. But the retailers don't bother carding him because he's obviously old enough to purchase the game.

      I know this won't help the bottom line too much, but the stores need to start making it painfully obvious to parents that some games are NOT FOR CHILDREN.

      It should almost be mandatory to orally inform all buyers of video games of the game's rating upon purchase...

    11. Re:Parent's fault by CreatureComfort · · Score: 1



      As the father of a 12 year old, I say your rant is somewhat misdirected. If as a parent you raise your children with a knowledge of right vs wrong, and of fantasy vs reality you don't need to worry much about what they play.

      As an example, I would rather he play GTA where 1) the game is obviously fantasy, 2) the actions would obviously be the wrong thing to do in a real setting vs fantasy, and 3) most of the situations are not something he even could get into without a long slide down. Compared to the latest Tony Hawks game which encourages him to do really stupid stunts on his skateboard that look possible and encourages other great "doable" actions like tagging and tire slashing. It's a fine "approved" non-violent game...but far more likely to cause harm.

      But then again, I'm involved in his life. I do pick-up/drop-off at school, talk to him about his day and his friends, go with him on Boy Scout campouts, talk frequently to his teachers, etc. As a result he has grown into a young man I am very proud of. I don't need to worry that he finds GTA as much fun as I do, and we trade tips for getting past missions. I don't need to worry that he enjoys listening to my AC/DC CDs as much as I do. I don't need to worry that he likes watching Vin Diesel movies. He's a good kid with almost straight A average in advanced classes, loves playing the violin, and I get constant comments from other adults about what a helpful and caring person he is.

      For your kids, it's not anymore about what they play or listen to than it was for you when you were that age. It's about parental involvement in their lives, and a caring, loving, encouraging environment that offers them respect and guidance, rather than insults, ridicule, and neglect.

      --
      "Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
      Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
    12. Re:Parent's fault by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      I'm really glad to see you're modded at +5. This shit has to end.

  12. 'violent and sexual themes' by 93,000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Good thing we have the wholesome, trash-free alternative known as television to distract us from this video game smut.

    1. Re:'violent and sexual themes' by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Well, the government keeps our "news" very clean. The average US citizen knows virtually nothing about an ongoing, bloody, expensive war going on. Hell, most people in the US thinks that Iraq had something to do with 9/11/2001. The US government is good at keeping its people ignorant. Maybe they're thinking that if they remove violence from video games, that'll pacify the sheeple enough for now, while the big industries (TV and movies) can still make their money. I can tell you though, if the US gov't didn't censor news, and the people of the US saw what was going on Iraq, video games would be the least of their worries. Far, far more gruesome things are going on over there. I've never played a video game where I bombed schools, hospitals, and apartment buildings full of innocent people.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:'violent and sexual themes' by moorcito · · Score: 1

      Or the wholesome, trash-free alternative known as the internet.

  13. Why pander to the kids by furball · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We have movies that don't cater to kids, plays that don't cater to kids, why do the same thing with video games? The generation that grew up on video games are now adults and if we want adult content then give us adult contents.

    ESRB did what it was meant to do. It gave parents a way to figure out what types of content are to be found in a given game title.

    What next? Is Congress going to hold hearings on hentai next?

    1. Re:Why pander to the kids by interiot · · Score: 1

      Exactly. If anything, the game industry should be derided for not having ENOUGH adult content. Sure, I'll agree that 75% of game content should be geared towards youngsters, but there's still quite a few single white males out there who live alone and would appreciate it if some games didn't have to pretend that sex and nudity were are completely non-existant in real life.

    2. Re:Why pander to the kids by alexo · · Score: 2, Funny

      > Maybe, moron, because video games are for kids. Plays for adults have been around forever,
      > so it would make sense that movies for adults would also exist. (In fact, plays/movies
      > were for adults first and kid-themed performances were added later.)
      >
      > Video games are for children. See the difference? Some of these new "games" are almost
      > like giving codoms out in Happy Meals. It's just not right.


      Breasts are also for children, yet a lot of adults like to play with them.

    3. Re:Why pander to the kids by fireteller2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      > "Video Games are for children."

      Video games, like every product on the planet, are *for* who buys them, and right now adults buy video games. The average age of all video gamers is above 21. So I'd have to say that your statement is exactly untrue.

      j

    4. Re:Why pander to the kids by Kombat · · Score: 1

      ESRB did what it was meant to do. It gave parents a way to figure out what types of content are to be found in a given game title.

      What next? Is Congress going to hold hearings on hentai next?


      Uhm, I think what they're asking for is for the ESRB ratings to actually be enforced, a la movie theatres and adult magazines. Seems like a very logical request to me.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    5. Re:Why pander to the kids by btrapp · · Score: 2

      Maybe it's because I'm older (32) but I tend to dislike games that pander 'adult' content as that adult content tends to be geared more towards horny teenage boys than real adults.

      Examples: Laura Croft's physique. Almost any D&D female char. will be in a full plate... bikini.

      Maybe the industry is confusing 'adult' with 'sophmoric'. At least Half Life 2's Alyx seems to buck the trend.

    6. Re:Why pander to the kids by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "What next? Is Congress going to hold hearings on hentai next?"

      Right... I can't wait to hear the debate over whether or not the depiction of tentacle sex is bad for sailorsuit-clad schoolgirls.

      Perhaps they will give a demonstration?

      As long as they don't get Ms Rice to dress up in a cosplay demonstration of hentai filth...

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    7. Re:Why pander to the kids by imroy · · Score: 1
      Maybe, moron, because video games are for kids.

      Really? You sound like the kind of ignorant jerk that would rent Ninja Scroll for a kid because it's a "cartoon" and obviously cartoons are for kids. Here's a clue: us adults also like to play games and watch "cartoons". There's a market there, quite a sizeable one. And in a capitalistic world, that means that someone will make games and cartoons for adults. Don't pre-judge something simply because of its medium.

  14. Just games by DogDude · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Or maybe they're just games, and they're completely unrelated to "culture". I, for example, have little to no contact with pop culture. I have no TV, I live in a progressive town that doesn't allow big box stores (which seems to be the heart of US culture these days), I rarely listen to the radio. But, I love the Grand Theft Auto series. They're fun games. Good relaxation after a 16 hour day of work. Culture has nothing to do with it. I'm glad games like these exist, else I'd be playing mindless, juvenile "Mario" games, which, I'm sorry, just aren't the same thing.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Just games by redivider · · Score: 1, Troll

      "I, for example, have little to no contact with pop culture. I have no TV," ...

      "But, I love the Grand Theft Auto series. They're fun games. Good relaxation after a 16 hour day of work."

      Just out of curiosity, how do you play GTA without a TV?"

      --
      Sinch
    2. Re:Just games by lessthanjakejohn · · Score: 1

      GTA3 and GTA:VC are out for Windows

    3. Re:Just games by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      There's this new thing out called a Per-son-al Com-put-er. Apparently, they're all the rage with the kids. Personally, I'd rather sit back with a good book and some Benny Goodman on the Victrola.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    4. Re:Just games by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Good point. Sorry. When I said "no TV", I meant no cable, satellite, or even bunny ears. My TV is just used for my PS2 for games and movies. Thus, my point that I'm not like typical Americans, and am not bombarded or influenced much at all by pop culture, yet there's not much that's more satisfying than shooting somebody in the back of the head at close range with a shotgun. I don't get it. I'm just saying that I don't think that games and culture are necessarily cause and effect.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    5. Re:Just games by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      The GTA games have always been at the center of this violent video game controversy. I've enjoyed all the GTA games myself, and I don't see a problem with them for any mature adult (or teen) who has a firm grasp of reality vs. fantasy. The funniest part is that GTA San Andreas has added a role playing element with player stats for staminia, strength and fat. You eat to regain energy, but if you eat too much without exercising you'll get fat. At the gym you can work out on the treadmill or exercise bike to gain stamina and work off fat or work out on the weights to gain strength. Seems to me it's a not so gentle reminder to the player to get out and get some exercise and not play the game all day. It's a little unrealistic though. Three or four days of working out on the weights is enough to max out your strength.

    6. Re:Just games by redivider · · Score: 1

      Thanks for actually responding to my question. Everyone else seemed to take offense to the fact that I would associate a GTA game with a PS2 instead of the PC. I didn't think about the PC version, mostly because of the context of your comment (you mentioned the alternatives being Mario-clones -- another game always associated with consoles).

      Insterestingly enough, I *am* aware of something called the Per-so-nal Com-pu-ter. I'm using it right now to respond to someone else's post like an adult and not the troll I was somehow made out to be.

      --
      Sinch
  15. Lame. by philovivero · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Video games cause obesity? Huh. That's curious. I sit around on my ass 90% of the time on a yearly basis, and yet I'm well within my ideal weight.

    Oh! But I don't eat fast food. I eat vegetables and fruits and healthy food, and I can count the number of times I went to Micky D's last year on one hand.

    And does anyone seriously believe sexual content hurts anyone anymore? We keep hearing this from the Bible thumpers, but year after year, there's no credible study that links sexual content with any deleterious behaviour.

    Despite the obvious and known links between violence on television and in games, we say a little word here and there about it, but at the end of the day, the gov't wants violent children (pretty easy to get them to shoot defenseless Iraqis in a pile of dead guys, isn't it?), so no-one ever gets serious about that.

    I'm beginning to wonder how enlightened we really are.

    1. Re:Lame. by nomadic · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh! But I don't eat fast food. I eat vegetables and fruits and healthy food, and I can count the number of times I went to Micky D's last year on one hand.

      Well there's your problem. Work on it.

    2. Re:Lame. by wondafucka · · Score: 1
      Of course sexual content causes deleterious behaviour. Playing the game causes erotoxins to form in your brain. Erotoxins that must be removed by being punished.

  16. sexual video games by cshah+1 · · Score: 1

    I agree that sexual video games could really be a bad influence on kids.
    The actual "targeted" audience wouldnt even play it IMO, because the their time would be better spent on a game worth their time.
    However, I dont really see a real link between the obesity epidemic and video games. I think a better point would be junk food is really helping kids get fat.

    --
    KARMA POLICE ARREST THIS MAN HE TALKS IN MATHS- radiohead
  17. Religious Right by goldspider · · Score: 1

    I'm generally conservative-minded in my views, but this is one of those initiatives championed by the religious right that I cannot lend a grain of support to.

    The "science" connecting juvenile delinquency with mature video games is specious at best, and "bunk" most quickly comes to my mind. If any of it were true, you'd better lock me up before I go on a rampage, because I most definitely fit the profile (knowledge of guns, divorced parents, played Doom) when I was a teenager.

    Perhaps these people would be better off trying to be good parents to their own children than trying to force the video came industry to do it for them.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:Religious Right by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      If any of it were true, you'd better lock me up before I go on a rampage, because I most definitely fit the profile (knowledge of guns, divorced parents, played Doom) when I was a teenager.

      Divorce: The columbine kids parents were married. Guns: When was the last time you heard of a Boy Scout going on a shooting rampage, or someone whos dad is in the NRA. Doom) I know for a fact that this type of game keeps a lot of people I know from killing/shooting/strangling people. (Great way to work out frustration is to kill a bunch of bots).

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:Religious Right by goldspider · · Score: 1

      The point was, of course, that those are just a several of those societal "evils" that, we are told, cause children to become hardened, remorseless criminals and/or sexual deviants. Just like rap music, comic books, and cigarettes.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    3. Re:Religious Right by RatBastard · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Perhaps these people would be better off trying to be good parents to their own children than trying to force the video came industry to do it for them.


      They don't care about the children. They care about enforcing their moral values on others. That's ALL they care about. The "think of the children" argument is just a smokescreen to get you to go along with them.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  18. National Institute for Media and the Family by Telastyn · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's see, a thinktank orginized to combat the corruption of minors by video games and other media finds that video games corrupt minors...

    Thanks slashdot. Maybe next you can post an article about greenpeace saying that everything isn't hunky dory with the environment...

  19. They do not want things to change... by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They do not want things to change, they want the donations and funding to keep coming in and if they solved the 'problem' they would lose that money.

    That is why the GOP never does much about abortion and why the DEMS never do much about race relations.

    There isn't money in fixing the problem.

  20. Video games as a medium (rarely well-done) by Mad_Rain · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd try for a "First Post," but I'd like to include some actual content here.

    For those of you not reading the attached article, it is a summary of a report that says that reading an hour's worth of fairy tales to your kids contains more violent imagery than an hour of evening television.

    The difference is the medium - parents reading stories vs. children watching TV (usually without supervision). Parents who blame video games for violent behavior need to take a long hard look at themselves first, before making the leap that violence in games is tied to violence in the real world.

    That being said, I am all for some additional coporate responsibility to not sell violent games to children under (insert arbitrary age between 10 and 14 here). Ultimately though, it's up to parents to help provide context for these things.

    --
    "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
    1. Re:Video games as a medium (rarely well-done) by E-Rock · · Score: 1

      Games aren't free. If Jimmy the 10 year old has $54.99 to buy the latest kill spree, then the parents have already failed.

    2. Re:Video games as a medium (rarely well-done) by Mad_Rain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But there's a difference between an evil witch doing bad things to a princess, as told by parents with a child visualizing the events. And vs a first-person perspective of running down a hallway, chasing another person, aiming a gun at them, blowing them away many times, and seeing their bodily fluids explode out of them, all in perfect graphic detail.

      (sarcasm)
      You're absolutely right - The government should prevent me from using my imagination, 'cause it's much worse than any videogame I've ever played.
      (/sarcasm)

      Again, it's the filter of the parents - they should be there to help distinguish what is right/wrong, and what is reality/imagination. A scary story can be just as scarring to a child as a violent videogame; it is the parent's responsiblity to help that child adjust and learn from either one, and their responsibility to protect them from it when it comes up.

      --
      "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
  21. Tee it up! by lpangelrob2 · · Score: 1
    Cue uninformed knee-jerk responses by teenage slashdotters that don't have teenagers of their own (you figure that out...) in 3... 2... 1...

    In other news, this has happened every year since 1990 or thereabouts (definitely pre-Columbine). I haven't heard much substantially happen since then, and I don't think anything will.

    1. Re:Tee it up! by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      In other news, this has happened every year since 1990 or thereabouts (definitely pre-Columbine).

      Goes back further than that, actually -- I remember this kind of fuss when I was a teenage video-game geek in the early 80's. I was also a D&D geek and a bit of a metalhead, so I was getting it from all sides. Fortunately my parents were too smart to take the hysteria seriously, but some of my friends had really ferocious battles to fight.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Tee it up! by RatBastard · · Score: 1

      And the Beatles before that. And Rock & Roll music before that. And Elvis Presley before that. Before that it was Jazz. Zippers. Buttons. You name it. Anything new is automatically the root of all evil.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  22. Mature content??? by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My local bar had a sign proclaiming the upcomign Halo 2 tournament. You know, a bar, in the US, where you'd need to be 21 to walk in the door (at most bars).

    High School teachers I work with mention having played Grand Theft Auto.

    Whatever statistic you believe, gaming is an extraorinarily succesful mass media, and it's not getting there on the backs of eight year-olds alone. An enormous amount of the success is driven by the kids that grew up with the Ataris, Colecos, and Nintendos, and they are perfectly comfortable playing these "mature" games.

    Kids connect these M-rated games with maturity, rather than the fact that it takes maturity to logically understand these games. It's unfortunate, but the only people that can counter it are the parents and interested third parties. The store I work at throws a warning on the register when an "M" game is being checked out, and prompts us to ask for ID. Failure to follow through can result in termination. More and more stores are following this process, and we're going to be at a point very soon where we can't continue to simply foist the blame off on others. "M" games exist because there's an enormous market for them. 13 year-old kids shouldn't be playing them unless that child's parent is sure that the kid is capable of handling that game. In the meantime, let those of us who can legally drink, smoke, gamble, and be drafted buy Half-Life 2 if wish.

    1. Re:Mature content??? by Zaranne · · Score: 1

      Yes, the rating codes are there for a reason. Its a way for a parent to get an idea of what content lies therein. Why don't parents use it the way it's supposed to be used? Personally, I thought labeling albums way back when was just because parents were lazy, but it seems that now it's become important for parenting skills. I remember when the movie "Interview with a Vampire" came out and my then 13 year old daughter wanted to see it. I went and saw it FIRST before I allowed her to see it because I didn't want to be shocked by something.

      Besides, I'm still waiting to find an "A" for Adult game. Something along the lines of "Porn Maker"...

      --
      So when is the Hawkeye movie coming out?
  23. "obesity epidemic" by ssand · · Score: 1

    Nearly anything can be related something if you look far enough. While i don't disagree that there is a link, you could also link reading, cooking, to this "obesity epidemic". So lock your doors and shut the blinds, if you're kids aren't growing up to be sports jocks they could be apart of that "obesity epidemic"

  24. It won't be long by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 2, Interesting

    before augmented reality is mainstream. From the article:
    even games with beneficial or neutral content can be harmful to children because of the connection between gameplay and our obesity epidemic

    I think good games and physical conditioning are going to merge and really catch on--even with those who are not really in shape. Current barriers are miniaturization of equipment, battery improvements, and HUD improvements, but I think we are close.

    BTM

    --
    That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
    1. Re:It won't be long by corpsiclex · · Score: 1
      I think good games and physical conditioning are going to merge and really catch on--even with those who are not really in shape.
      Yeah, tell me about it!
      --

      eBayDig 1s a typo saerch engien
    2. Re:It won't be long by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 1

      For better visualization of this, imagine playing a near life-sized game of C&C or Warcraft where you are in command, and you are playing head-to-head against another player except that you are physically on a sports field. You will have to change your physical location to change a units orders. You can send them off somewhere, but you will have to go to them to change their orders. Imagine a battlefield where you can give orders to flying units and watch as they do battle overhead.

      Another possibility that comes to mind is "Virtual Geocaching" Where you home in on a series of hidden virtual relics using a HUD GPS.

      Obviously FPS's are probably going to be the first AR games available, but you can do other types of games too.

      BTM

      --
      That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
    3. Re:It won't be long by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      "I think good games and physical conditioning are going to merge and really catch on--even with those who are not really in shape."

      All modern games have cheat codes. If physical conditioning games catch on, it won't be long before cheat codes for things like "movement acceleration" (where a real movement represents some upwardly scaled virtual movement) remove most benefits that such a game would provide.

    4. Re:It won't be long by scribblej · · Score: 1

      Dance Dance Revolution?

  25. Are you from Pitcairn? by jd · · Score: 1

    They've just finished legal procedings against half the male population for just that.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Are you from Pitcairn? by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      You think thats harsh?

      Just wait till wanking becomes illegal in the USA...
      and the only men who arn't in prison are suffering prostate cancer ;)

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  26. Most evils... by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most evils were accepted into the culture after some toning down. Though as anyone should see there has been a segment of the population which resisted many of these things and has had some growth over the past decade. We're seeing more of it and I believe it's a natural thing. Progressive ideas have pressed some hard-headed folks so far that they're finally pushing back. Be vigilant.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Most evils... by kfg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Progressive ideas. . .

      Such as the Bill of Rights?

      . . .have pressed some hard-headed folks so far that they're finally pushing back.

      They're always pressed hard, they're always pushing back. Christ almighty, just look at the Protestant Reformation and the Inquisition. Reading The Name of the Rose would be a good place to start, therefore:

      Be ever vigilant. There is no calm before the storm. The storm is eternal.

      KFG

  27. context by paradesign · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A good commentary on the "morality police" vs violent games 'thing'

    Best quote

    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 read Soldier of Fortune to know that she was opposed to its glorification of killing. "I think it's an irrelevant question," she concluded.

    When will people learn that ignorance is not an excuse.

    --
    I want 2D games back.
    1. Re:context by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      Video games are just a medium and the only reason they are being targeted at all is because it's an interactive medium. Every medium out there from print to music has sex and violence as one of their facets. The only reason video games are being targeted at all is because of the widely held perception that video games are primarily owned and used by children which is completley false.

    2. Re:context by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1


      I never murdered anybody. Therefore I have no moral or logical basis for claiming that murder is wrong and should be illegal.


      And I don't have to have any medical experience to authoritavely assure you that you have an ailment that can only be cured by the snakeoil that I am selling.
  28. Wrong target by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    They aren't silly enough to believe that they will impact the compaines, but they do want to raise awarness in the general population that these games are not for kids. It may sound silly, but I know a lot of clueless parents who don't realise how graphic some of these games are. While the ideal parent would be involved enough in their childs life to montier thier video games personally, many do not have the luxuary of the time required. So hopefully groups like this do cause parents of young impressionable children to take *some* time and look at what their kids are playing.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:Wrong target by UWC · · Score: 1

      but they do want to raise awarness in the general population that these games are not for kids.

      The problem is that their outcries seem to first make the assumption that all video games are primarily intended for kids. Unfortunately, as you also mention, there are a lot of parents with the same misconceptions. While I admire your optimism that these campaigns might at least raise awareness in uninformed parents, I find it difficult to believe that by this point there are parents that aren't yet aware of the presence of potentially objectionable content in some games.

  29. It isn't about the kids... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    This isn't about pandering to the kids, it is about pandering to the kids parents who are too fucking lazy to raise their own kids because they have to have a huge home, 2 vacations per year, and 2 new cars every 18 months...

  30. The Wider Picture by Myu · · Score: 1

    I get the feeling that the Gaming sector is being once again victimised simply because they're a relatively new target. Most of those undertaking the surveys are probably not incredibly familiar with the industry as a whole, for one ("We never had those new-fangled contraptions in my day..."). But you can hardly say they're unfamiliar with violence/explicit imagery, can you? Perhaps this is more of a lunge at a method of transmitting that (already somewhat questionable) content in a format that the policy-makers can't understand? After all, nothing makes people more insecure than something they know nothing about... Perhaps what these watchdogs need to do is to take a step back and look from the broader perspective. Try asking any of those questions to Magazine columnists, Television writers/producers, film directors or whatever; imagine . Shouldn't we be looking at the entertainment industry as a whole rather than zoning in on just one (albeit popular) section?

    --
    Myu: ... The map's upside down...
  31. Ratings are annoying by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    The industry was given a passing grade for the ESRB rating system but the actual enforcement of the system by the retailers was not

    When I bought Operation Flashpoint from GameStop, I actually had to show ID. That annoyed the hell out of me.

    I am almost 30 and I look like I'm almost 30. It's a pain in my ass. The whole business of rating games is just a way to absolve lazy and stupid parents of their responsibility for controlling what goes on in their homes.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  32. Would it be legal to play Doom3... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

    ...in a free speech zone?!

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
  33. Videodrome - and how it relates to this post by Concern · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Videodrome was a crazy Cronenberg movie (1983) about a guy (played by James Woods) who ran a cable company. The show opens with him sitting in a chair defending his network's hilariously sleazy content. "It gives our viewers a harmless outlet for their frustrations and fantasies." His character is so shady, even if you're desperate to believe him, you can't.

    But then the movie turns dark. Woods uncovers a conspiracy to control people's minds using television. The videodrome is a metaphor for the combat of ideas in the media. The idea is, we only half-admit to ourselves that the media controls us. We hop up and down to censor it from violent or sexual content. This shows we kind of realize what appears on hundreds of millions of screens has consequences. But we haven't confronted the philosophical, or political dimensions of the fact.

    We have a collective hissy fit when Janet Jackson shows a nipple. Meanwhile Fox News is on the air for years and we can't muster a coherent notion for fining them a dollar.

    Great quote: "You know, in some countries, like Argentina, making subversive video is considered a criminal act. They execute people for it. In Pittsburgh... who knows?"

    --
    Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
  34. Where are parents on the report card? by Maul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The industry has done a pretty good job self-regulating themselves. I'd agree with the ratings on most of the games I've played, and that it is quite clear what all the ratings mean. I've seen retailers tell kids who try to purchase "M" games to get their parents in a few locations as well.

    On the other hand, I've seen parents completely ignore the ratings and description of the games time and time again. Yes, I've seen parents at retail locations buying their kids copies of GTA and other "M" games.

    I know the ultimate goal for these groups that issue report cards is to get the Government to start regulating the industry. That won't do a thing. The #1 responsibility of if kids or not see "mature" games falls in the hands of parents.

    --

    "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

    1. Re:Where are parents on the report card? by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      "On the other hand, I've seen parents completely ignore the ratings and description of the games time and time again."

      My nephew (11 years old) has played Quake, Quake 2, Q3A, Unreal Tournament, UT2004, GTA3, Medal of Honor; and will soon be playing Call of Duty -- Finest Hour, and GTA-SA.

      Why do I (and his father) let him play these games? Because his father and I play these games with him, and we know that he has his head screwed on right.

      He's not stupid, and he fully understands (and has for years) the difference between a video game and reality. It's up to the adults who know a particular kid well to judge his/her mental maturity. Making the cutoff point for sales based on age is pointless and self-defeating.

      All the above takes a backseat to the fact that video games do not create bad people. Bad people are created in the real world.

    2. Re:Where are parents on the report card? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I think Manhunt was rated too softly. In the game, you play a serial killer and it is your goal to kill as many people as possible in as gruesome a way as possible. That should have gotten an "adults only" rating instead of a "mature" rating.

      Then again, the same thing happens in Hollywood. I think The Passion of The Christ should have been rated NC-17, and I think that the first Scary Movie (the one where a person is killed by having a dildo stabbed through their skull) should have been rated higher than R.

      That all said, the rating boards can't be perfect and mistakes are made. I agree that generally the ratings are pretty good. If anything, I think they were a little too tough on HALO 2.

    3. Re:Where are parents on the report card? by wondafucka · · Score: 1
      On the other hand, I've seen parents completely ignore the ratings and description of the games time and time again. Yes, I've seen parents at retail locations buying their kids copies of GTA and other "M" games.

      That's because some 12 year olds can play GTA without any ill effects.

      Hell, my parents dragged me to the Rocky Horror Picture Show every week for a long stretch when I was four (it was cheaper than a babysitter). It's not like I automatically became an alien transexual scientist who captured hapless preppies and forced them to give in to carnal pleasure, all the while breaking into song. I chose to do all of those things.

    4. Re:Where are parents on the report card? by Maul · · Score: 1

      Maybe I should re-phrase this.

      Many of these "advocacy" groups nail the game industry over games like GTA, etc. and cry for strict government regulation, etc., to "protect the children."

      But it seems like it is parents placing these games into the hands of children, for the most part. I did not mean that this was good or bad, what I meant was that this is a decision for the parents.

      This report card implies that the industry has the responsibility of making sure that "mature" games never fall into the hands of someone under 18, ever.

      People begin to automatically assume that whenever little Timmy plays GTA, the evil industry is to blame, without consideration that little Timmy's parents may have allowed it.

      --

      "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

  35. National Institute of Media and the Family or... by lordvdr · · Score: 1

    nymph er NIMF for short.

    Coincidence? I think NOT!

    --
    If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor - Albert Einstein
  36. Wrong! by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would say that the 60's generation proves that theory wrong...

    1. Re:Wrong! by Monkelectric · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I would say that the 60's generation proves that theory wrong...

      Thats true, as ghallagher said, "This generation went from 'Do your own thing' to 'Just say no.'"

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    2. Re:Wrong! by iocat · · Score: 1

      Further proof that the 60's generation was a bunch of hypocritical creeps. As Phil Ochs said in the 60s, of the "liberal": "10 degrees to the left of center most times, 10 degrees to the right of center when it affects them personally."

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    3. Re:Wrong! by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      Further proof that the 60's generation was a bunch of hypocritical creeps. As Phil Ochs said in the 60s, of the "liberal": "10 degrees to the left of center most times, 10 degrees to the right of center when it affects them personally."

      How is that "proof" of anything? Many members of the 60's generation (male and female) volunteered for service (or served otherwise) in a war that became unpopular and were thanked with disdain and epithets when they returned home. Then they got jobs and paid taxes while being denied service-releated benefits. Now, it's accusations of hypocrisy. You know, I'm having flashbacks from all the LSD you've been told I took back then, and I'm feeling like getting medieval on your @$$. Where's your tent, camper? You're looking a lot like a clueless officer right now. [Fade in with Hendrix tune]

    4. Re:Wrong! by bigsmelly · · Score: 1

      Which war was that?

      There was the Korean War in the 50's
      and then the Falklands in the 80's.

      no war in the 60s.

    5. Re:Wrong! by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      Which war was that?

      For knuckle-dragging trolls, that would be Vietnam, sometimes called a police action, but then so was Korea. There was a Falklands War in the 80's? Do tell. You mean that territorial scuffle where the Brits lost a couple of boats to South American colonists with French weapons? History repeats itself on a much smaller scale - hardly a war.

  37. What about parents by howlinmonkey · · Score: 1

    I don't care how you feel about the content of television, movies, video games or any other media. If you patronize it, you are adding to the very problem you percieve. If you have children, and you find this objectionable, don't buy it. And don't buy products from companies or advertisers related to it.

    The government can't save you from yourself, and shouldn't be expected to. We can't have laws governing every aspect of our existence. That's why the Constitution says any right not discussed within it is granted to states and individuals.

    If you don't like it, don't buy it. If the market isn't there, no company will produce it and the products you find objectionable will disappear.

  38. Give me a list! by jthayden · · Score: 1

    I'd really like a list of the games they find offensive. ( Article is /.ed so don't give me shit for not RTFA ) I generally make an effort to read books banned by schoolboards and see shows banned by mayors of NY and often but not always they are pretty good. Can I get a list of the games they don't like so I know what to play? Point me to more quality stuff like GTA.

  39. Blame game by dead+sun · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I would like to blame all the politicians for the corruption of children in their personal quests for power. The politicians display their win at any cost attitudes openly, shamelessly slander those who oppose them, and are more scandalous than any executive at Rockstar Games could ever be when raking in cash. We should prevent children from seeing anything political, and censor CSpan too, the language used is hideous. Politics must be banned. We cannot have children learning these lessons.

    I'd also like to lay a thick layer of blame on all the moral and religious groups which feel that repressing feelings instead of openly discussing them is the proper way to handle them. I'd like to make a call to remove all children from churches until priests can stop molesting them. Please, think of the children. Further, the lessons in the bible are too graphic, depicting things like brothers slaying each other. What is this world coming to? How about reading Sesame Street books on Sunday instead, those are wholesome. I'd like to further blame religious figures who lambast the teaching of sexual education, though most parents will never bring up the topic until it's too late and their childrens' curiosity provides the lessons. How many children's lives must be ruined because adults are too embarassed to speak about sexuality? Can't we for once actually think of the children?

    Finally, I'd like to thank the video game industry, for providing children with an outlet for excess energy that doesn't involve killing people. Sports games, platformers, puzzle games, there are all sorts of interactive outlets for children apart from just watching after school cartoons. I'd like to yell at parents that give overly young, impressionable children mature games. What's wrong with you? I'd like to thank all parents that have decided their 16 year olds are or are not mature enough to play GTA, and took the trouble to, you know, actually think about their child instead of blaming others for their poor parenting.

    --
    If not now, when?
    1. Re:Blame game by corpsiclex · · Score: 1

      Yeah that's a real fucking bright idea...keep everyone nice and ignorant about the reality of corrupt politics while they're growing up so you can ensure it never gets any better in the next generation.

      --

      eBayDig 1s a typo saerch engien
    2. Re:Blame game by dead+sun · · Score: 1
      It's called turnabout, it's fair play, and I'm simply applying the same lines of argument that the politicos and moral censors are applying to video games in this instance. I don't actually want government and politics to not be discussed in schools. It's an argument through adopting the opposing logic and applying it to absurdity. But thanks for taking everything you read literally.

      Honestly, while I'd like to see systems of government and how our own government is designed to work taught in schools, I'm not sure the Machiavellian maneuvering, the personal quests for power, the scandal and kickback needs to be shown to third graders. But that's not even taught about in most high schools. It's just taken as a granted that most politicians are crooked. Why don't we teach young adults to blame the adults and the politicians that allow things to carry on this way?

      --
      If not now, when?
  40. Speaking of mature content... by Txiasaeia · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm a fairly conservative Christian and even I have problems with chick.com. Among the more obvious problems, even the supposedly "accurate" portrayals of various events are inaccurate (for example, child molestation in Sodom & Gomorrah). I emailed their site several times to protest this, but they basically told me to shut up and never email them again.

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    1. Re:Speaking of mature content... by mekkab · · Score: 1

      I emailed their site several times to protest this, but they basically told me to shut up and never email them again.


      Funny, same thing happened to me when I pointed out some flaws on Slashdot...

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    2. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Jack Chick reflects Christianity the way Weekly World News reflects journalism.

      (I was going to say Dan Rather, but some people might not have caught the irony.)

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    3. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the contrary, Jack Chick is the logical conclusion of christianity. Once you reject science and reason in favor of a sky fairy whose presence can be detected by a feeling in your heart, you might as well just start making other shit up, which is exactly what Chick does daily.

    4. Re:Speaking of mature content... by tijnbraun · · Score: 1

      mmmm chick in holland is definitely preaching something else...
      Probably not related...
      Or maybe the dutch relative is the black sheep in the family

    5. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Living under the anti-science, anti-reason, faith-based regime of a hyprocritical, warmongering, theocratic jerk puts me in a bad mood, I guess.

    6. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Yakko · · Score: 1

      You answered your own question. This is Slashdot, where one is free from accountability.

      I don't exactly hate religion. I do respect others' rights to practice whatever religion they want as long as they respect my right to be free from religion.

      --

      --
      Me spell chucker work grate. Need grandma chicken.
    7. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between 'conservative' and 'wack job' christians. This guy isn't conservative, he's just a hate-spouting fool. His drawings remind me of the old WW2 cartoons, the ones where japanese people had fangs and pointy ears.

      It's a kind of visual ad hominem attack, and it underscores the weakness of his position.

      Don't worry, we godless heathens don't lump the intelligent Christians in with this nutjob and his ilk.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    8. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      mmmm chick in holland is definitely preaching something else...

      I'm going have to agree with that. Definitely not the same message... and not having crude pencil-drawn pictures is probably a plus.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    9. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      You're free to leave any time you want.

      Here's some life advice. Quit ingesting your philosophy uncritically from the shrill, hysterical talking heads and go out and try experiencing the real world for yourself.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    10. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      I don't hate religion. Nor do I believe in it. I am sometimes an asshole...

      If it helps, it IS frustrating to live in a society (nearly any western country will do) where most people claim to believe in an imaginary (to an atheist), so a lot of that nastiness is just venting frustration.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    11. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Did you get this upset when clinton was in office? He has given more speaches from Churches that Bush has. It must also have really upset you when Kerry quote the Bible multiple times during the race.

      But you are right! Bush did proclaim Thursday Thanksgiving so he must want to erase all laws and rewrite them using the Bible...

    12. Re:Speaking of mature content... by corbettw · · Score: 1

      it IS frustrating to live in a society (nearly any western country will do) where most people claim to believe in an imaginary (to an atheist), so a lot of that nastiness is just venting frustration.

      It's called "tolerance", go get some.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    13. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Senobyzal · · Score: 1

      As someone once said: I don't have any problem with God. It's his fan club that worries me.

    14. Re:Speaking of mature content... by kookbox · · Score: 1

      I hate religion, and I'm not a complete and total asshole. I feel sure I'm not the only one.

      (This might be my first reply that doesn't relate to libraries, video games or HD-based mp3 players.)

    15. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      And what was wrong with my post?

    16. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Deal with it.

      Why is it that Christians have to "Deal With" things they do not like, but if they speak out about it they are called all sort of names, but when the groups they are speaking against speak out against religion its OK?

      Kind of like how NOW kept silent during the Clinton issue but didn't during Clarance Thomas. Or how NOW almost never speaks out about the treatment of women in Muslim countries.

    17. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Then my post wasn't meant for you, it was only meant for those that fell the need to go off like the OP did. It's one thing to debate it, its another to act like you are twelve. ;->

    18. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Assuming this wasn't just a random flame (in which case, sir, go fuck yourself), what indicated that I wasn't tolerant? I don't go around telling people that they are wrong (.sig excluded), yet most religions I know spend a LOT of time telling me that I am. Where's the tolerance there?

      I wasn't even saying that the nastiness was acceptable, just suggesting an explanation. If THAT is enough to 'offend' you, then you are hardly in a position to be giving character advice to others.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    19. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We DO deal with it. Most of us (non believers) aren't rabidly attacking churchy people.

      But since you ask, it is ok to "speak out against religion" because it fails a basic test that all other areas in life have to pass to be regarded as truth.

      I can explain why:
      the lights turn on (physics/electronics)
      fire burns (chemistry)
      the building stands (physics/engineering)
      medicine works (biology/chemistry)
      etc.

      The list goes on forever. All of these things are testable, and (more importantly) self-correcting through study. This is the great advantage of science. As time goes on, we get a better understanding. Religion doesn't work that way, it sets certain unquestionable premises and expounds on those.

      Look, I understand _why_ people are religious. It's traditional, and it's comforting. I'm not going to say that you don't have the right to believe whatever the hell you want. It's your mind. But the argument that religion stands a chance against science/rationality as an explanation of the world is incorrect.

      Before we had means to examine the universe in detail, religion was a decent answer. But that time is long past, and yet people cling to old beliefs.

      Some of us feel that it is important to move beyond ancient superstitions. Hopefully in a dignified manner that does NOT devolve into name-calling.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    20. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Do you attack religion on /.?

      If you do not then the post isn't directed at you.

    21. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Alternately (instead of my long-winded answer), people who chose to ignore evidence in favor of preference are intentionally sheltering themselves from reality.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    22. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Other than my .sig (which isn't an attack, just an observation), no. You did however reply to my post, so I kinda concluded that it was a response to me.

      I _would_ be interested to hear your response to my arguments, if you like.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    23. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      How has the Bush Agenda (tm) interfered with you life?

    24. Re:Speaking of mature content... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      I don't think that you can use such a broad brush.

      For example, I hate monotheism (well, strictly speaking not even monotheism, just the judaeo-christian-islamic cults that *call* themselves religions but which are actually geopolitical movements of ancient times which have survived into the modern world (but thats another story)), but not religion as such.

      I'm a pansapienist and not a complete and total asshole. Just a bit of one.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    25. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      You are making the assumption that if one believes in God that they are do not believe in science.

      I happen to believe in both.

      Besides, you responded to my post first. ;->

    26. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Well, scientific principals (basically, prove it or it's not real) carried to the logical extreme do rather preclude a god.

      I know there are a whole bunch of scientists who claim to be religious... I've never understood that myself.

      Of course, I also know a biologist who believes in creationism... we're an intellectually lazy species sometimes.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    27. Re:Speaking of mature content... by corbettw · · Score: 1

      You said you're frustrated with what other people believe. Not a very tolerant position, is it?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    28. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Shhhh - now some ISP is going to start redirecting the offensive site to the wholesome one.

      I'll leave it as an excercise to the reader to guess which site is the offensive one.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    29. Re:Speaking of mature content... by HybridJeff · · Score: 1

      But the talking heads, they're so loud.

    30. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      I'm a pansapienist

      You believe all men are bread? ;-)

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    31. Re:Speaking of mature content... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Kneejerk reaction to the asshole religious people.

    32. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      I could honestly give a damn what someone else believes. I am frustrated when their beliefs infringe on my freedoms (see FCC, 'creation science', special priveleges given to churches, etc).

      That said, I recognize that I am in the minority, and this isn't likely to change.

      I absolutely respect your right to believe whatever you want. This does NOT mean that I necessarily respect the belief itself.

      That difference is subtle but crucial.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    33. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, the religious are not demading just tolerance. They're demanding respect, and that's a step too far. Everyone deserves tolerance by default, but RESPECT has to be earned. You have every right to believe as you wish, and every right to demand that others allow you to believe as you wish. But you don't have a right to insist that other people must find your beliefs worthy and respectable. Ridicule is a right of free speech.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    34. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Well said, sir.

      Also, I would add thay religions want an advantage... they want equal status as science, without having to pass the same tests (evolution vs. creationsism comes to mind)

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    35. Re:Speaking of mature content... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1
      I happen to believe in both.

      When it gets down to a conflict (religious authority sez: "this is the reality", science says: "BS!"), how do you make up your mind?

    36. Re:Speaking of mature content... by rhakka · · Score: 3, Funny

      so it's ok for christian groups to use whatever flimsy evidence they can to point fingers at non-causal relationships, push for leglislation that supports their oppressive version of moralism, and generally shout from the top of their lungs how we're all going to hell in a handbasket... literally... because we like blow jobs or RPGs but someone is an asshole for shouting at the top of his lungs that christian groups are often full of shit?

      I suspect you of a slight double standard here.

    37. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Please give me an example.

    38. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      I believe the biggest superstition (at least around here) is that reason and relgion are somehow at odds with each other.

      Religious belief does not put one in conflict in science any more than the belief that people have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

      Science has not, and cannot, answer all the questions, and it certainly has not disproved religion (leaving the Mormons aside for the moment).

      It's a false conflict, one that has been played up a lot in light of the recent election by people who wish to cast their political opponents as ignorant and backwards. It's based on a stereotype drawn from the exaggerated extremes.

      I don't find your comments out of line, even though I disagree with you, but comments like those Jeffrey_Baker is making imply they are coming from knuckle-dragging bigots.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    39. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Ridicule is a right of free speech, provided it doesn't go so far as slander (which requires that you publish provably false facts about someone, not just that you publish derogatory opinions of them). You have every right to demand tolerance for your beliefs, but you do not have a right to demand respect for them.

      (And you are very wrong if you assume the ridicule is only going in one direction.)


      NOW almost never speaks out about the treatment of women in Muslim countries.

      Not surprising, since the "N" in "NOW" stands for "national", not "world".

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    40. Re:Speaking of mature content... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      and all women... :-P

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    41. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      One of my neighbors has a 'God, save me from your followers' bumper sticker :)

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    42. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      I hate religion, and I'm not a complete and total asshole.

      Maybe not. But seeing fit to "hate" something intangible is certainly a strike against you.

      I know what I'm talking about. I hate Microsoft, and it's a very immature attitude.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    43. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      The problem is that being 100% honest often has the side effect of attacking religion. By asking people to refrain from attacking relgiion, you are asking them to refrain from stating their honest opinions.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    44. Re:Speaking of mature content... by xSauronx · · Score: 1

      because the ones who arent...arent in a basement ;)

      --
      By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
    45. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Here's where I see a conflict:

      The basis of science is evidence and tests. The conclusions drawn can be overturned at any time, by (properly obtained) evidence and tests. We can also extrapolate nearly (we still have gaps) any complicated theory from base principles. The only real assumption is that the universe is not intentionally deceptive.

      The basis of religion is ancient (usually) testimonials that cannot be tested. You may believe it, but you cannot prove Noah talked to god. These ancient stories and rules generally cannot be challenged or changed (Except apparently by the Roman Catholic Church). The assumption is that [insert religious book/scroll/tablet here] is correct. This is a fairly large assumption, given than many stories, rules, etc. are contained within a given book.

      Science is a 'small pieced added together' approach, where skepticism is required. Religion is a more like 'here is the whole truth, nothing can change' approach, where skepticism is discouraged or not allowed.

      Science is testable, religion isn't
      Science is reproducible, religion isn't
      Lacking evidence, Science doesn't attempt an explanation. Religion often does.

      They are just different approaches. This has nothing to do with the recent election, it's been a conflict for hundreds of years. Death, the environment, the stars... these were all once explained by religion, but we've moved on.

      You _could_ still explain the stars as a gigantic shell around the planet, but a man from the 1600's would laugh at your old beliefs.

      Science hasn't disproven religion. True, you can't prove a negative. Moreover, 'proof' involves tests, something that religion disregards.

      There IS a fundamental difference between the rational and faithful mindset. They have been in conflict for a long time. Science has been gaining ground for hundreds of years, religion's last bastion is the 'afterlife', something that has no evidence, and thus is immune from scientific inquiry. Since most of our non-mortality related experience is rooted in rationalism, it seems a wise way to go.

      Whew.

      Now, all that said... to dismiss any given religion's followers as stupid is a bad idea, and just plain rude. I know lots of decent faithful folks, I just disagree.

      And, as Dennis Miller says (and history shows), I might be wrong...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    46. Re:Speaking of mature content... by rpj1288 · · Score: 1

      So sign em up for a few porno newsletters. I'm sure they'd love that. ;)

      --
      Marvin knew: "Think of a number, any number..."
    47. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      How is religion demanding respect?

    48. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

      Well I guess you are incapable of clicking on links, so I'll condense it for you. Bush's evangelical wingnut functionaries in the FDA overtured a 24-3 recommendation of a panel of physiciand, to allow emergency contraceptives to be sold over the counter. Emergency contraceptives hold the possibility of preventing millions of unwanted births and abortions. But to Bush's unthinking bureaucrats, there's just something magical about a sperm and an egg that the sky fairy doesn't want you to fuck with.

      If you can't figure out why emergency contraception is interesting or important, ask your wife of your girlfriend or your sister or mother.

    49. Re:Speaking of mature content... by kcbrown · · Score: 1
      Before we had means to examine the universe in detail, religion was a decent answer. But that time is long past, and yet people cling to old beliefs.

      What's worse is that quite a few of those very same people use the very same methods that science uses to deal with the world around them in their everyday lives, yet at the same time dispense with the results of science whenever they conflict with their beliefs.

      You don't see these people asking "god" to fix their cars when they run out of gas, right? Instead, they go to the gas station and fill the car up with gas themselves, because they've learned through observation and experience that it's what they need to do. That's just an example, and it obviously involves human-made tech, but hopefully it illustrates the point.

      It must be convenient for them to be able to pick and choose their beliefs without regard for anything but whether or not they like it...except for when the pesky real world asserts itself in their face.

      --
      Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
    50. Re:Speaking of mature content... by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Why do you assume atheists should be tolerant?

      In Soviet Russia the atheistic government lined people up against the wall and mowed them down if they disagreed. Not that they killed all christians just for being christian, but they were not very tolerant of those who disagreed with them (including Jews).

      That said, some atheists are quite tolerant. I guess there is some variability there, just like there is among the christian community (i.e. some christians are more tolerant than others).

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    51. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ZB+Mowrey · · Score: 1
      Here's my way of determining the extent of a religious person's stupidity: Does my declaration of agnosticism prompt an immediate "you're going to hell" type of response? If so, proceed to A. If not, go to B.

      A. This person is functionally brain-dead, or has no ability to see outside his or her blinders for long enough to realize that the sun shines on everyone else, too.

      B. Does this person accept agnosticism as the "I don't believe, but am willing should the evidence crop up" philosophy it is? If not, proceed to C. If so, go to D.

      C. Does this person honestly believe that no other belief system could be handed down from God to other men? If so, go to A.

      D. This person appears to have a functional mind, which can be verified with futher observation.

      For the record, my primary reason for having faith in Science is not the men who have practiced it, or the writings that came from them. My reason for believing in science is that it is one of the only philosophies around that will actively admit it is wrong. Science, and the rules behind such things as the Scientific Method, assures me every day that we don't know it all, and that the wrong answers will eventually be sorted out... assuming that we don't have religious/political resistance to actually finding the truth. (Which, sadly, happens a lot.)

      --

      Self-referential sigs are rarely entertaining.

    52. Re:Speaking of mature content... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Your posts here are an example. If you don't see that already, then I don't think I could ever convince you of it.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    53. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      "Science is testable, religion isn't"

      Read the bible (bare with me) there are a multitude of instructions that say "do this, and that will happen" so I went and did what it said and lo and behold, what the bible said would happen happened.

      Isn't that as good as the proof Science needs as stated in previous posts?

    54. Re:Speaking of mature content... by fbjon · · Score: 1

      That's last post was just crap. Everyone knows women are made from sand.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    55. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      I don't ASSUME that they are tolerant, I am suggesting that we should be.

      Human nature being what it is, I don't hold out a lot of hope.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    56. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Probably not. Depends on the test, and if it is repeatable. If you're talking about "It said to pray and I'd be happy, I did and I am", you're mistaking emotional reaction (and a possible placebo effect) for a result.

      That said, the prayer might still be a useful tool, if indirectly. If you've got the time, I suggest you read Douglas Adams' (of the hitchhikers guide) speech "Is there an Artificial God?"
      http://www.biota.org/people/douglasadams/

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    57. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      That it's been won a hundred times (by science) and that religious folks keep changing the name (I like 'Intelligent Design') and trying to start the debate again.

      If you expect me to have the debate here on slashdot, you're gonna be disappointed.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    58. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      A second answer: There is in fact good advice in The Bible, as there is in many holy books. All the mysticism aside, most of these books say "be decent to people, don't: steal, rape, murder, etc." which is all good advice.

      There's a good reason these basic themes and taboos are nearly constant across the world (including in places that have never heard of the bible), they are rules that keep harmony within a community. For all its faults, religion does a decent job of keeping MOST people in line.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    59. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ATMAvatar · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it's better to say it's frustrating to live among people who wear their christian beliefs as a badge of honor, with the obvious insinuation that a lack of belief is unacceptable. My parents and extended family constantly try to push me towards their catholic faith. Boy, was I glad when I was able to move out and go to college.

      Now I get to deal with it at work.

      Many people I interact with on a daily basis like to constantly remind everyone of their belief in a christian god. I put up with it, but I can't say I care for the feeling that I have to hide my lack of faith to avoid possibly negative consequences.

      At the very least, I know I would be drawn into a long, pointed inquiry about why it is I don't believe. After all, it's only natural for a rational being to assume that there's some omnipotent, invisible man that created and controls everything, demands our total and unending devotion (but conspires against giving us any solid proof of his existence). Clearly something is wrong with me if I don't accept a christian god as a given.

      Of course, I get to deal with it in politics as well. I've yet to catch a Presidential speech this administration that doesn't like to wave the "I'm a devout christian" badge around as much as Kerry liked to point out his purple hearts.

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    60. Re:Speaking of mature content... by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it's better to say it's frustrating to live among people who wear their christian beliefs as a badge of honor, with the obvious insinuation that a lack of belief is unacceptable.

      But it's OK for atheists to mock those beliefs? How does that make you any different from the people whom you profess to dislike?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    61. Re:Speaking of mature content... by rhakka · · Score: 1

      well, it's certainly legitimized the oppressive attitudes my gay friends have to deal with,

      it's run my country into massive debt and stuck us with a war that is fundamentally rooted in his firm belief that his actions are the will of god and thus can never be wrong and are destined to succeed against all reason, one that has killed people I know and many thousands of more I never will,

      it's diverted funds from organizations that do real good to faith based initiatives that just say "hey, don't have sex, really, it's cool" and leave it at that, expecting a fully functional biological adult to buy that as a good reason to ignore the most basic biological urge we have as human beings,

      and it managed to coalesce the previously weakening religious right, a fact that scares me to fucking death.

      but I guess if I don't have men in black knocking on my door... yet... trying to forcefully convert me to some kind of bizarre christian cult I shouldn't be concerned, huh?

      "First they came for the homosexuals....and I didn't care, because I wasn't homosexual.. then they came for..."

    62. Re:Speaking of mature content... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Actually as soon as I hit submit I realized that "pansapienist" probably has something to do with intelligent cookware.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    63. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      "Well, scientific principals (basically, prove it or it's not real) carried to the logical extreme do rather preclude a god."

      Despite your awesome grasp of vocabulary you are wrong.

      The primary goal of science is to observe nature.
      The secondary goal is to predict future behavior based on the previous observations.

      IF you will notice, nowhere in there does science explain any of the fundamentals of the universe!

      All SCIENCE knows is that if you have two sheep, and two more sheep wander up, that it is likely you will then have four sheep.

      It says nothing about where the sheep came from, how they got there, where they are going next or who feeds them. :-)

      Besides this glaring inaccuracy in your previous statement, you have another problem.

      There is a statement that says, roughly, "You cannot prove that something is impossible." A related view of this would be that "You cannot prove that something doesn't exist."

      Therefore you CANNOT reasonably claim that "..carried to the logical extreme do rather preclude a god." That statement is a logical FALLACY. If you'd spend less time in your dictionary and more time in critical thinking you would be able to see that.

      I'm not arguing for or against God, my beliefs are my own and are frankly none of your business.

      That does NOT mean however that you have the license to misrepresent science, what it does and how it does it.

      Beyond that, I just like body checking people with more diction than sense! :-P

    64. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Yeah, uh huh. Ramblings without evidence do not an argument make, sparky. Nor does some perceived conspiracy.

      See, this is exactly why they say not to talk to the crazy people...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    65. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Heh... and somewhere someone of the 'its better to be sure than right' camp is nodding :)

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    66. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I phrased that wrong. Science does not disprove god, nor does it disprove the easter bunny. However, neither is suggested by the evidence either. Luckily, people can make up any damned fool idea and say 'BUT, science doesn't PROVE it's wrong'.

      Whatever. Believe whatever you want, but don't expect to be taken seriously.

      And if 'preclude' was supposed to be fancy diction... you need to read more books, my friend :)

      (As a side note, there ARE people who believe that god is demonstrably impossible. I'm not one of them)

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    67. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, you have to abandondon science at some point to fit preconceived faith-based notions...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    68. Re:Speaking of mature content... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      How 'bout abstinence (and only abstinence) being the most effective thing you can teach to teens to stop them from getting pregnant & picking up STDs?

    69. Re:Speaking of mature content... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      and repeateateat parts of words...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    70. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Rares+Marian · · Score: 1

      You might find it funny to know that both Tolkien and C.S. Lewis were theologians and pretty good buddies too.

      You might also find it funny that Max Planck the father of quantum mechanics held that quantum mechanics convinced there was at least an intelligent mind at work.

      Or that Darwin was a theologian as well.

      Look it up his father thought he would amount to nothing so he got him working in the church.

      The problem most people have is they think religion and science are at each others throats. Well no not quite but religion past 400 AD was made by rulers and so it really amounts to politics as to why religion is in such an inadequate state. Nevermind even most religions deny that God has any power to do anything nowadays like cause miracles. Try asking Him what's up one day see where it gets you.

      The process of developing knowledge in religion requires work (test it) with a dash of ever increasing faith.

      The process of developing knowledge in science requires work (test it) with a dash of ever increasing humility.

      Not so different after all are they?

      Anyone who tells you that faith means mastering a ridiculous blank stare in the face of problems is a much a charlatan as the one telling you that you have to master the same ridiculous blank stare into far out space regarding science.

      Do something peculiar but not obnoxious for a couple weeks and see what happens when you develop a routine.

      --
      The message on the other side of this sig is false.
    71. Re:Speaking of mature content... by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      Well there are things like (for an example) "if someone wrongs you, do something good for the person and God will deliver the just punishment, but if you are happy with the punishment (meaning you find pleasure that your "enemy" is being punished) the punishment will end"

      I have tested this a few times and it does work, both the retribution God visits on the "enemy" and it's end once you find pleasure in it... there are other things like this which I could elaborate on if you wish ;)

      Ill check out that link though.. thanks :)

  41. parents by thundercatslair · · Score: 1

    Its the lazy parents, they should get the fail. They should fail for beening so lazy

  42. It takes cameras and some processing by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 1

    I was working on a game where you had 2 swords(actual plastic swords), and 5 cameras took input from various angles. I was able to detect where the sword was when you held them, and roughly where your body is... But there was a BLUR when you swing a sword that I couldn't figure out. Maybe when cameras become more advanced to be able to tackle more fps,(like 100+), you'll see games where you wield real life objects and fight things that come at you on the screen(or VR headset). Man, the world really needs to upgrade its computer vision technology. With today's hardware you should totally be able to use a camcorder to video tape an area of land and building, then render it into a 3d world. Its just software isn't there yet, but its being researched.

  43. Adult gaming by fireteller2 · · Score: 1

    I think the gaming community is getting older. Games are starting to market more and more to older men. This is a good thing in most respects as this will lead to gaming becoming a more legitimate art form and communication tool. Games are getting more mature, starting to address more complicated issues then weather a white block will fall out of bounds. Some times the topics will be uninteresting to some people. For most people they are in a faze that is a bit to graphic or literal for their taste.

    As with any mass media it is definitely wise for parents to make a conscious choice as to what games are appropriate for children. Once movies could be seen by anyone, now some are better for adults. Once cartoons were a kids genre now adult teamed anime is either uninteresting or inappropriate for children.

    In other words it is not meaningful to say that the game industry is not doing a good job for kids. That concept assumes that kids are the only audience. It is the view of the audience that must change.

    Perhaps it's time to start taking those ratings on the box more seriously. Perhaps it's time to get a better rating system. But it is completely futile to try to contain video games in a kids only entertainment format, as it has been futile in every instance before. The world is not kid safe, and thinking that it can be made so is unsafe for your children.

    -fire

  44. One side versus the other by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
    over the years I always see two basic arguments in relation to societal ills and their causes. In the context of video games, these arguments break down into society influences the games OR games influence society. Of course there are variations on the two themes, but IMO these are the basics.

    However, I have NOT seen many instances where one side will say 'Hey maybe it's my fault!' This, however, is not an attempt to blame one side of the other. I think that we, as a society, need to realize that cause/effect do not always matter very much. What we need to realize is that, again using violence/video games as an example, these things most likely have an effect on EACH OTHER.

    No matter the initial cause, I think that these influences end up bolstering each other, i.e. games get more of a certain nature, society gets more of a certain nature. AGAIN, this doesn't say which one starts it. Who cares. What we need to start realizing is that there are many variables, each of which should take a look in the mirror and say 'what can I do to make the world better', and NOT say 'It's not my fault, it's the other guys fault and I'm just following suit'

    Hope this wasn't too incoherent, I had a long night and a long day.

  45. Obesity? by the+web · · Score: 1

    1) Purchase video game with questionable content.
    2) ...
    3) You are now fat.

    Dude, WTF!?

    --
    __
    Thou hast besquirted me, O leotarded one.
  46. Wolfenstein warped my mind... by nathan+s · · Score: 1

    ...when I was a little 13-year-old kid playing games. That's why I'm now a 23-year-old master's-degree-wielding, extreme-left-leaning monster who will corrupt your children even more. Ban evil, violent video games before they create more like me!

  47. Bringing God to the PlayStation by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 3, Funny

    I for one am taking the high ground here and currently producing "Christian Cell" a first person action game that will teach children about the bible while they infiltrate godless liberal political organizations before they can put Hillary Clinton into Office and outlaw the bible.

    After being air-dropped in the middle of the night your role as a member of Christian Cell will be to use your bible knowledge, high tech gadgetry and stealth skills to sneak up behind enemy targets, collect information and ultimately destroy the leaders of this terrorist organization.

    1. Re:Bringing God to the PlayStation by goldspider · · Score: 1

      Personally I think I'd prefer the one where you play a Robbin' Hood (not to be confused with the Sherwood Forest legend) going around the city shaking down businesses and old rich white men for the money that they "owe" you.

      Your ultimate goal is to pimp out your fly El Camino without ever spending a day at work.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
  48. Priorities by verloren · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is exactly the kind of thing we all (not just /.ers) need to get worked up about! Video games do far greater harm to our kids than moldy old school buildings that should have been gutted decades ago.

    Blasting fantasy aliens will shorten a child's life way more effectively than spending a year without health insurance.

    Better we concentrate on ending the nervous twitch that excessive gamepading can cause, rather than the total ego destruction that occurs when a parent/teacher/priest molests the child.

    Let's deal with children with the warped perception that Master Chief is 'cool', and we can get to the constant cramming of blipverts selling piece of crap aspirations that can never, ever be realized later.

    Let's stop the mega-corporations poisoning the poor children's minds with comic ultra-violence, so that they can concentrate on poisoning their bodies with chemicals in the environment, in the water, in the sludge-matic pound 'o' lard flame-wiped shite burger at the local worker exploitation outlet that embodies their future.

    OR

    We might pick something that actually matters, but that might require the expenditure of actual effort, and change it instead.

    It's a judgement call, I guess.

  49. Yes it has an effect by wondafucka · · Score: 1
    it's called self-censorship

  50. esrb can smbfhb by JVert · · Score: 1

    World of warcraft collectors box is really sharp looking. No copyright notices, system requirements all that junk. All that is on a soft glue paper attatched to the back. Its flawless except for....

    THE %#*%#@ ESRB NOTICE RIGHT IN FRONT!

    Now I can put the box up for display and show to everyone that this game is rated teen.

    YAY...

  51. Re:The Legend of Zelda by stratjakt · · Score: 1

    So what?

    It's about the developers right to produce whatever kind of game/story he wants, and my right to play whatever kind of game I want.

    There are fun games that don't involve shooting. There are fun games that do.

    If these guys had their way and got GTA et all banned, they'd come after the rest later.

    I remember EA being slammed way back in the early 90s because there was fighting in their legendary NHL games for the Genesis/SNES. It promoted bad sportsmanship and taught kids the wrong things about hockey, blah blah.. The next year it was gone, the game sucked, the next year it was back.

    So, yeah, the sports games are definately on their list. Especially something like NFL Blitz, NHL Hitz, or NBA Jam, because they all "glorify violence".

    People complained about Donkey Kong back in the day. A game where you try to hurt an ape? How cruel!

    They'll come for your precious Zelda, just as soon as the next time some kid loses an eye to a homemade slingshot or bow and arrow and they find a copy of Wind Waker in his gamecube.

    And you've obviously never seen the sexually explicit cutscenes in Ms. Pac-Man.

    These people are kooks, they hate everything electronic. There's no rationalizing with them.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  52. TV's Message by DannyO152 · · Score: 1

    Frankly, I think a primary subext of television (news, adult dramas and comedy) is that the outside is very dangerous, especially for children. Self-serving answer: stay in the house and get "reality" through visceral experience. What a sign of the times.

  53. No, The Best Quote was... by jimbro2k · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the commentary: Perhaps the most telling moment of the entire call came when a reporter asked in essence, "Why is it that crime rates are falling just as videogame content is getting more violent?" Without irony, New York City councilman Eric Gioia replied, "I'll take a stab at that" You see Councilman Gioia, context is everything.

    --
    There is not nearly enough love in the world, but there is far too much trust.
  54. Correlation vs. Causation: An easy solution by Tackhead · · Score: 1
    > Congradulations. You have just discovered the dificulty in figuring out Cause and Effect vs. Correlation. This is the hardest thing for scientists and psychologists to figure out. Do I have a correlation here? Or do I have a cause and effect?

    And that's the problem, but there's an easy solution: all them scientist-types need to go to law school, so they can become politicians.

    Have you ever met a politicians who had trouble deciding the difference between correlation and causation? Of course not -- it's always causation!

  55. "What about the children?" by DroopyStonx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fuck the children. Seriously.

    Everything's about protecting children, and it's POINTLESS.

    You think you should censor movies with swear words? Well think again: they pick em up in the schoolyard regardless.

    Afraid to show them boobs? Well, guess what they'll be seeing as a teenager anyway? I'm not saying show them some hardcore porn, but really, Janet Jackson's ugly tit won't fuck your child up.

    Afraid to show them violence? Oh, hah, no. Violence is okay in movies, but not in interactive games!

    Do your fucking job as a parent and there shouldn't be any issues. The end. Simple, really... unless you're a shitty parent.

    Society is hypocritical. Thankfully, the smart ones ignore stupid complaints from the ignorant.

    --
    We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
    1. Re:"What about the children?" by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      exactly.

      Fuck the children and fuck the bible thumping white house wives who suck their husbands dick in private but in public feel so ashamed of it, that they have to shelter the rest of the world from their own guilt.

      What happened to respecting each other? Live and let live?

      Unfortunately we just sit here and bitch whenever stories like this come around, while these organizations are proactive and lobby our government etc.

      We're going to lose.

    2. Re:"What about the children?" by Uncle+Jimmy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Fuck the children. Seriously.

      I believe that's illegal, but the rest of your post is spot on.

    3. Re:"What about the children?" by Highpriest · · Score: 1

      That was a ridiculous comment. Environment is half of the influence on your development. Even if the parent is working one fifth of the time the child is at home, a video game can be a strong developmental influence. Obviously you are taking a biased view based on the fact that you turned out alright. I love video games, no doubt, but when GTA 3 came out I sure as hell wasn't letting my younger kin play it. Would you let your 12 year old kid play a game that you can take a prostitute into the woods, have intercourse with, then murder her and take back the money?

    4. Re:"What about the children?" by DroopyStonx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It wasn't a ridiculous comment. People need to seriously get over this shit and start looking at the REAL problem: bad parenting.

      My cousin is 12 and is properly educated on these things. He owns San Andreas and Vice City. He's fine. He's a straight A student. At that age you can educate them to the fact that IT'S JUST A GAME. 6 years old? Eh, maybe not. 12? Without a doubt. They get worse shit from school as it is.

      Just because a few idiot kids whose parents are total jackasses decide to go out and steal a car doesn't mean you blame it on the game.

      Environment doesn't have influence on development as much as a good parent/child relationship. It's a cop out when people say that shit, because think back to when you were a kid and how much your parents tried to shield you from that stuff - yet you always found ways around it (you know you did, so don't deny it).

      Did you turn out fucked up?

      --
      We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
  56. Terminology by Macrobat · · Score: 1
    I'm always amused that they call these games (and books, and movies) "mature" when they offer a pretty peurile outlook on things. Blow stuff up, shoot people, it doesn't matter if they shoot back 'cause you're indestructible. Or at least, you can respawn. Sounds more like a thirteen-year-old mentality than an adult one.

    A real adult game would end when you get shot, and as a further measure short-circuit the console so you can't use it again. That would give the kiddiez a realistic message about how fun killing and dying is.

    Oh, who am I kidding? I like violent movies as much as the next guy. Granted, I think they're appealing to something that never quite grew up with the rest of me. But even the ones I like don't celebrate violence the way something like GTA does.

    Ah, never mind me. I've just gonna crawl off and mutter to myself about all the whippersnappers out there...

    --
    "Hardly used" will not fetch you a better price for your brain.
  57. MOD PARENT UP. by The+One+KEA · · Score: 1

    Precisely!

    I am shocked at the things which are trotted out as measures designed to "protect the children." I'm all for protecting children and keeping them from experiencing unlawful or disgusting things, but sometimes it seems as if people take it to an extreme.

    --
    SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
  58. Used to work at a game store... by EFGearman · · Score: 2, Informative

    And a few Christmas's ago, had the following conversation with a customer who walked in to buy a game:

    (Me): Thank you for coming to [store]. Can I help you find anything.

    (Her): Yes, I'm looking for that game.

    [slight wait as I realize no more information is forthcoming]
    (Me): What game would that be ma'am? We carry a lot of games.

    (Her): It's a driving game. It's fairly new.

    (Me): Ok. [I list off the more popular driving games, ending with..] and finally GTA:Vice City.

    (Her): That's it. Do you have it?

    (Me): Yes we do. Here it is right here. Do you want to get the strategy guide with that? It's five dollars off the guide if you get it with the game.

    (Her): No. My son likes figuring these things out on his own. This game is appropriate for a ten year old, right?

    (Me): No ma'am, it's not.

    I proceeded to explain what the 'M' meant and showed her that while some games only had one or two 'blurbs' on the back listing what made them mature games, that GTA:Vice City had several more.

    Needless to say, she not only did not get the game, she got something else and went home to have some words with her son.

    My manager was impressed with the way I handled that, because we had a couple salesclerks that would have just sold her the game.

    --
    Atomic batteries to power! Turbines to speed!
  59. News Flash! by killermookie · · Score: 1
    Content aside, the amount of time kids spend playing games, even the good ones, is contributing to the obesity epidemic among American youth. For too many kids, the only parts of their body they are exercising are their thumbs. We are particularly concerned, therefore, about the launch of games this year aimed at children as young as two. We know that the industry wants to expand its customer base and that it is in their economic interest to hook babies on games. This trend, however, raises serious implications for our children's health.


    Children going to the movies and eating butter-loaded popcorn gain weight. Blame the movie theaters!
    Children sitting at home watching too much TV and eating too many snacks gain weight. Blame the TV stations!
    Children who sit around and play too many video games gain weight. Blame the video game industry!

    I have an idea, how about we start blaming the parents and caretakers of these children for allowing them to be so inactive. It's not the video game industries responsibility to make sure children are participating in outdoor exercises. Besides, I do remember a game called Dance Dance Revolution that was such a big hit that you can now play it at home. I'd say that's a damn good indication that the industry can create games that are physically healthy.
  60. How seriously can we take an organization... by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 1

    ...that uses the phrase "Killographic Entertainment."

    Seriously.

    Reading their website makes my brain shut off as fast as any game that promises to be "extreme" and "in my face with an attitude!" I'm betting that most of their supporters are people who would really like to have children of their own to protect, but can't figure out how to do it without subjecting themselves to all the nudity and squishy wetness that making babies requires.

    1. Re:How seriously can we take an organization... by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Killographic Entertainment?

      That's a kick-ass name for a gaming company. I'm surprised it hasn't been picked up yet.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  61. Cause of obesity? by Ken+Hall · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Funny, I don't ever recall reading any studies connecting the compulsive watching of television sports while drinking beer and eating junk food as a contributor to obesity.

    Or paintball as a gateway to violent behavior.

    Maybe I'm not reading the right stuff.

    A guy I know had a bumper sticker on his car:

    "Kids who hunt, trap, and fish, don't mug little old ladies".

    No, they just torture and kill defenseless little animals. Kids who play video games (or D&D) don't usually do that either.

  62. child by thundercatslair · · Score: 1

    won't someone please think of the childeren!? if we don't, who will, god?

  63. Americas Army by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

    WTF, Does she know the US government paid for the development of just such a game? And it's avaialable for free download too...

  64. ..It breaks my heart.. by phlegmofdiscontent · · Score: 1

    I like this quote from our friend, Joe Lieberman...

    "The fact that the assassination of President Kennedy, which broke our hearts and altered our history, could become the subject of a video game from which people are making money is just outrageous, it is despicable, it's unbelievable," Lieberman said.

    Change it to
    "The fact that the Second World War, killed millions of people and altered our history, could become the subject of a video game from which people are making money is just outrageous, it is despicable, it's unbelievable," Lieberman said.

    While I agree the subject matter is tasteless, even suggesting censoring the game based on its subject matter is would be just another step on the road to banning all video games based on their subject matter. Except, of course, "Billy Graham's Bible Blaster"

    Bart: When I'm feeling low, you know what always cheers me up?
    Todd: Is it love?
    Rod: Kindness?
    Bart: Ooh, tough room. Videogames! Whaddya got? [grabs a videogame off the shelf, and reads the title] "Billy Graham's Bible Blaster?"
    Rod: Keep firing; convert the heathens! [cut to a pixilated video screen. Heathens cross the street, as a Bible gun shoots the Holy Book at them. When a heathen gets hit, he turns into a conservatively dressed man with a halo]
    [cut back to the boys]
    Bart: Got him!
    Rod: No, you just winged him and made him a Unitarian.
    Todd: Look out, Bart! A gentle Baha'i! [cut back to the video screen. A Baha'i, sitting cross- legged and wearing a turban, floats past. Bart zaps him, and turns him into another suit-wearing conservative]
    [cut back to the boys]
    Bart: All right! Full conversion! [puts his arms around Rod and Todd] Thanks guys, this really cheered me up.
    Video: Second Coming! Reload, reload!
    Todd: Can we play now?
    Bart: We are playing. We're a team.
    Rod + Todd: [pause] Yay!

  65. Games never affected me. by jd · · Score: 1
    I'm a perfectly ugggg..... normagl.... Perrrrrrson.... hooooooooowwwwwwwlllll!!!!!!!


    Seriously, I think there are some things that could be improved on. Games are way too formula, with 99% of development going into producing better graphics to conceal the crappy gameplay.


    However, that's not something you could easily pass a law on. "It is illegal to write crappy programs for computers" is too subjective. Although there is a good chance it would finish off some of the worst offenders in both games and business software.


    I do think there should be a "lemon law" for computer software. (At present, there isn't, because you only buy the license, not the product, and the license is going to work just fine.)


    I also think it wouldn't hurt if the Government sponsored lone software developers who could show they had a truly innovative idea for computer software - including games. It would keep a lot of otherwise out-of-work tech guys in the loop and in some kind of work, which would almost pay for itself.


    Finally, when people target games, they seem to be thinking in terms of Quake, Doom, Command & Conquer, Barbarian, etc, which are/were certainly popular and somewhat mindless, but they were never the sole influence in the gaming industry.


    How come these critics never talk about FreeCiv, Empire, Elite, Flight Simulator, X-Plane, ACM, XTank, Core Wars, Trade Wars, NationStates, GB Ltd., etc...


    Could it be because there are just as many games that exercise the mind as exercise the wrist, and that admitting this would blow their theories into the ninth hell of political oblivion?


    Or could it be that they enjoy hating things - ANY things, they're not fussy - that they don't bother to examine the subject to any kind of depth?


    I'd like a "lemon law" for computer software, but I'd truly love a "lemon law" for broken ideologists and defective propoganda.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  66. I would have been impressed as well by Run4yourlives · · Score: 1

    if you worked for me.

    Of course, I would have been more impressed if the mother was actually a mother instead of just a woman with kids.

    1. Re:I would have been impressed as well by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      The woman got a request for a video game from her son, and she apparently knew nothing about it. Rather than go out and blindly purchase it, she went to a store, found a clueful clerk, and pointedly asked him if it was appropriate for a child of her son's age. When the answer came back, she listened, and did not buy the game. Why are you insulting her? This sounds like perfect behavior to me.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  67. Re:The Legend of Zelda by stratjakt · · Score: 1

    Yeah, PETA.ORG.

    Those guys are freaking insane. Actually, they're about an hour past insane. They really did bitch about Donkey Kong and it's been a running joke ever since. I'm trying to find a serious google article about it, but it's clogged with jokes/parodies.

    Last thing from them I read was about how terrible it is for humans to enslave the noble honeybee. Apparently collecting all that surplus honey (read: the bees don't need it) and giving them a safe stable environment to live in is cruel.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  68. In Other News... Videogamae players find... by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

    In Other News... Videogamae players find... that bible thumping white retarded house wifes organized under acronyms that have the world FAMILY in them are ruining this country with their hypocracy and quest to rule the world.

    Dear god folks! cant you see... Half Life 2 is bad for you! It will make you masturbate and forget to go to church!

    Please stop playing Half Life 2 and Masturbating.. you're waisting your seed... That seed belongs to Jesus, or atleast your local town kiddie fucker...

    oops i meant preacher.

    You are the devil you shameful porn enjoying human beings. HOW DARE YOU fuck another woman without marrying her. HOW DARE YOU have sex for fun. HOW DARE you be a homosexual. HOW DARE YOU!

    There is only one thing i have to tell these family organizations.... and that is:

    If you continue this holy quest to control our lives, i will be forced to buy a gun a kill you. Many others will pick up arms like me and fight side by side in a civil war to prevent this theocracy from infecting our lives any further.

    It is not books, music, and entertainment that make us jack off, fuck each other and enjoy life... Thats our natural behavior as humans. Its about time you stop trying to control humans with your religious fairy tales and start jacking off like real human beings do.

    Its not the games that make people violent, it's the lack of freedom that makes people violent. What makes people violent is when they feel they are out of control their lives and have been tortured by other human beings without a single care for their well being.

    Time and time again that has been proven through out history.

    Leave my sex and violence alone, and i'll allow you to enjoy your even more offensive bible. The fairy tale books that you retarded dumb house wifes read say other things that just "violence is wrong, homosexuals are wrong, jerking off is wrong, and abortion is wrong". I suggest you learn the other aspects to your religion such as tolerane.. and if you cant....

    Here is a fucking clue...

    It's America, and tough fucking titty.

    If the jesus freaks really want to go down this route... Lets do it. Civil War.

    Its not the idea of losing my entertainment that makes me violent over this... its the idea of losing my country and allowing these fucking morons to own it, that makes me insane.

    Try reading dr sues books instead of the bible.. Start there you fucking culture nazis

    1. Re:In Other News... Videogamae players find... by StormMoon · · Score: 1

      I agree. The Bible thumping, child molesting, Windows using Christian right need to jack off. If they don't like certain things, don't buy them. Don't like TV, don't watch or watch Christian channels. Don't like modern music, don't listen. I say we give these punks an island for them to live on away from us. Since when did America let these kinds of nuts make laws?

      --
      Vote Democrat: The ass you save may be your own.
  69. They put the ratings on the box....... by planetgman · · Score: 1

    that is good enough for me. I don't let my kids play anything without looking at the rating. Why take the companies to task? They are the ones that came up with the rating system and are still crying over violence or content? Just like a tv. If you don't like it change the channel or turn it off. They are just giving themselves more exposure....and at the same time, the same video games they are criticizing.

  70. it was sarcastic... by Run4yourlives · · Score: 1

    doofus.

    Good grief it's like talking to children around here somethimes...

  71. Don't live in the city.... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    Then do not live in the city, there are a lot of places in the USA that do not have near the crime problem that the large cities do.

    1. Re:Don't live in the city.... by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      and most places in "the city" are extremely safe, too.

      what we have here is good old fashioned unreasonable paranoia.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    2. Re:Don't live in the city.... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Not really, most places in Dallas/Fort Worth/Hurst/Euless/Bedford have crime rates that are significantly higher than more rural areas. Please understand that I am not saying the cities are crime havens, it just that more rural areas are, as a rule, safer.

  72. I did Jesus on the pooltable by gelfling · · Score: 1

    And verily it was some good shit.

  73. Video Games are destroying our youth. . . . by jhobbs · · Score: 1

    First I was personally responsible for destroying America cause I'm gay. Now they want my Xbox too? Well they can pry GTA-SA outta my cold, dead hands.

    1. Re:Video Games are destroying our youth. . . . by jhobbs · · Score: 1

      Fingers crossed dude. It will happen.

    2. Re:Video Games are destroying our youth. . . . by jhobbs · · Score: 1
      Okay, okay, so I'm not on your Christmas card list. My point is that everone seems to have all sorts of problems with all sorts of other people. There are six billion of us all with different opinons. (thank God they aren't all Mac zealots) Maybe a little more "whatever the fuck, leave em alone, mind your on bid'nes" would do us all some good.

      I think Wal-Mart has a holiday discount on senses of humor, might wanna check that one out.

      Oh and BTW, I saw your kids, I wouldn't want them any more than I would wnat your fugly ass.

  74. Derided? by pvg · · Score: 1

    Are the submitter, editor and the 100 odd posters so incensed by this as to forget the meaning of common English words?

    Dictionary definition:

    Main Entry: deride
    Pronunciation: di-'rId, dE-
    Function: transitive verb
    Inflected Form(s): derided; deriding
    Etymology: Latin deridEre, from de- + ridEre to laugh
    1 : to laugh at contemptuously
    2 : to subject to usually bitter or contemptuous ridicule

    Or did I miss something when reading the story, perhaps there was a reference to Senator Lieberman subjecting amoral game publishers to a withering barrage of yo mama jokes.

  75. Epidemic by parbot · · Score: 1

    Obesity. They say we're in the middle of an obesity epidemic. An epidemic like it is polio. Like we'll be telling our grand kids about it one day. The Great Obesity Epidemic of 2004. "How'd you get through it grandpa?" "Oh, it was horrible Johnny, there was cheesecake and pork chops everywhere." Nobody knows why were getting fatter? Look at our lifestyle. I'll sit at a drive thru. I'll sit there behind fifteen other cars instead of getting up to make the eight foot walk to the totally empty counter. Everything is mega meal, super sized. Want biggie fries, super sized, want to go large. You want to have thirty burgers for a nickel you fat mother fucker. There's room in the back. Take it! Want a 55 gallon drum of Coke with that? It's only three more cents.

    Sometimes you have to suffer a little bit in your youth to motivate yourself to succeed in later life. Do you think if Bill Gates got laid in high school, do you think there'd be a Microsoft? Of course not. You got to spend a long time in your own locker with your underwear shoved up your ass before you start to think, "You'll see. I'm going to take of the world of computers! I'll show them."

    From "Underwear goes inside the pants" by Lazy Boy

  76. Actually.. by k98sven · · Score: 1

    Unsurprizingly.. there was a lot of criticism of video games even back in the Pac-Man days.

    Although not for violence. The big scare back circa 1982, if I recall, was that kids would become so addicted to arcade games that they'd start commiting crime to get money to play them.

    Well, it's 20 years later and the crime pandemic seems not to have happened.

    (Although there is more 'power-pill' related crime now. Doesn't seem like the kids learned to 'Just Say No' either..)

    1. Re:Actually.. by sunking2 · · Score: 1

      I dunno, at $65 a pop I'm sure many a petty theft has occured in order to buy a video game or two.

      Actually, just the fact that they are that expensive in the first place should be considered theft.

    2. Re:Actually.. by mink · · Score: 1

      I think it is much less trouble to steal the game (one way or another) then it is to commit some other crime (or a string of crimes) to get money to buy a game.

      But maybe I'm more of a lazy criminal speculator. Maybe my guesses of criminal behavior need to be more proactive and leverage the synergies the marketplace for petty crime.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  77. Meanwhile in Bronze Age Crete by panurge · · Score: 1
    Bards were being taken to task for the effects on minors of the so-called Epic industry. Under-18s are spending their spare time hanging around the edges of feasting halls listening to the morally dubious output of singers like Homer, and this would be fueling an obesity epidemic if we could only find a way to grow more food.

    For those who have missed this stuff, Homer's latest efforts encourage minors to daydream, imagining themselves fighting pointless battles against African coastal cities,killing the men, enslaving the women and carrying off the treasure. Frequently the good guys get killed by the bad guys, and in the latest release the player who scores the most points does so by shooting large numbers of men and hanging prostitutes from a clothesline, after completing a set of tasks which include having frequent sex with a variety of women none of whom seem to have any male relatives to take care of them.

    In a press conference, a High Priest of Ba'al said that listening to this kind of thing would lead in the end to anti-social behavior such as refusing to take part in infant sacrifice....oh, I can't go on, it's impossible to satirise these guys. Even the Onion finds that reality just outruns their imaginations.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  78. bar full of dorks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    what a geeky bar -- lots of hells angels there?

    I think I remember the scene in Roadhouse where they are all playing Halo2 and some guy comes in wearing a Marios Brothers costume and picks a fight..

    1. Re:bar full of dorks? by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, I think you're mistaking the world's attitude towards videogames today for the one ten years ago.

      College campuses are full of people, not guys, people, who play games. It is a fully acceptable hobby for people other than geeks now. And while it's not the sort frequented by Hell's Angels, it's not anything other than an ordinary college town bar.

  79. Anyone catch the proceedings on CSPAN? by freqres · · Score: 2

    Anyone out there besides me catch congressional proceedings about this on CSPAN? There was more nudity on there than anything else I've seen on 'normal' cable tv (green wobbly scrambled porn doesn't count). They showed a bunch of tit shots from The Guy Game and some clip of a piece of wood humping some cartoon girl in all sorts of different positions. Freakin' hillarious. Nothing was blurred out, just some message on the bottom saying the program may contain nudity and adult content. Makes me glad I didn't program out CSPAN and CSPAN2 on my TV. I wonder how many complaints the FCC will get about this. Went way beyond some 2 second flash of Janet's boob.

    --
    Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    1. Re:Anyone catch the proceedings on CSPAN? by jdunlevy · · Score: 1
      I wonder how many complaints the FCC will get about this. Went way beyond some 2 second flash of Janet's boob.
      Except that Janet's boob was on broadcast television. CSPAN is cable. Not regulated in the same way -- although that could change.
  80. Thanks for the boobage, CSPAN! by Larthallor · · Score: 4, Funny

    They had a video during their live presentation which was attended by Senator Lieberman and covered by CSPAN. I didn't realize what it was, at first, because I was flipping through channels when I saw DOOM III being played. It turns out the video they were playing was a montage of various "problematic" games, including GFA and others, designed to show just how inappropriate to kids they were.

    Towards the end, they showed the latest Leisure Suit Larry game and something called The Guy Game. The Guy Game, for those of you that aren't familiar with it, seems to be a trivia-type game that allows you to see real video of real girls taking off their tops when you answer correctly. Can you guess where this is going? Sure enough, their demo showed full boobage, which CSPAN did not censor. There were a good 5-10 seconds of actual, real (or at least not simulated) breasts running on CSPAN! This has got to be a first. Thank you, Senator Lieberman!

    1. Re:Thanks for the boobage, CSPAN! by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      Yup, its Senator Lieberman who does this every year.

      And its carried by Cspan every year. (i love cspan btw)

      Senator Lieberman almost became our VP. Pretty sad. One of the key reasons i voted for Nader in 2000. That and well the democrats suck the corperate dick.

      Senator Nazi Super Jew loves do this every year. It helps make him look like hes actually doing something when infact hes not and has done so little for our country.

      He's a scary man. Ultra religous and he certainly has his idea of what your life should be. ODD that a jew in power would be so much like hitler.

      Scary world.

    2. Re:Thanks for the boobage, CSPAN! by StormMoon · · Score: 1

      I bet they're getting chewed by the FCC right now. Heh talk about morality.

      --
      Vote Democrat: The ass you save may be your own.
  81. Gameplay = Fat? by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    Jesus, you've brought it hook line a sinker.
    1: Working in an office makes you fat, so sue your imployer for not making you do manual labour.
    2: Don't east do much you fat fucks.

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  82. Report card presentation by JAFSlashdotter · · Score: 1
    I only skimmed the FA, because I actually watched the presentation from the NIMF as it was aired on C-SPAN yesterday (and you can, too if you don't mind RealPlayer - there's a link).

    From what I saw, they did raise a few interesting points -- the AO rating, for example... Based on some of the clips they showed from the M rated games, even I began to wonder what it took to bump a game from M to AO. I guess only the makers and purchasers of "Singles" know for sure. I figure that ESRB M is sort of like MPAA R (just like NC-17, apparently few retailers will carry AO), and I'm thinking that if they were from movies, some of those clips would would have pushed the MPAA to NC-17, especially if you consider Team America had a tough time getting an R, and it's all puppets. The speaker essentially said why have an AO rating, if there isn't anything that can bump you into AO teritory?

    On the other hand, you could easily argue that these rating systems make parents feel they don't need to pay attention to what their children are playing, and that's probably bad.

    --
    We apologize for the preceding message. All those responsible have been sacked.
  83. Games arent just for kids anymore by doormat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If porn is legal, and violent R-rated movies are legal, then whats the problem with GTA?

    --
    The Doormat

    If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    1. Re:Games arent just for kids anymore by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Video Game companies don't donate enought money to the whores in DC. One they do, this will go away.

  84. Parental Evasion of Responsibility by Senobyzal · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I totally agree that a lot of these games shouldn't be in the hands of minors. Grand Theft, Manhunt, maybe even some of the most grisly shooters.

    But as other posters have noted, even if most stores honor their ratings code and don't sell, the kids will still get these games if they are available. Children are canny consumers. I remember as a kid growing up, most young people of my peer group knew the places where you could buy cigarettes and alcohol, for example. And with the Internet there are other ways to get ahold of a game, making it even easier to get the content.

    So ultimately, you can't really "save" a kid from being exposed to this sort of media. So the ones who affect how they deal with that exposure are the parents. If they are actively involved in their child's life, they are the ones who can be at least generally aware of what they are doing on their computers or console games. Of course, parents cannot protect their children 100%, since the kids can always go over to a friend's house to play, but they can inculcate in the child the values needed for a child to place the violence in his/her surrounding culture into the proper context.

    Unfortunately, these days many (not all) parents are dodging these responsibilities, and leave the media to raise their kids (television, video games, the Internet, peer groups). Then they bitch when they come home and see their kid playing GTA. In this context, the easiest solution from their point of view is to ban/regulate the content.

    You can't put the genie back into the bottle. Porn, violence, a whole slew of sick shit... it's out there, and it ain't going away no matter how much the radical right shrieks and moans. People want this content, and not just the depraved liberals and scrubby proletarians.

    I thought it was ironic that there was a piece in my local paper last week juxtaposing the triumph of "values/morals" in the recent election with the popularity of trash TV. The conservatives get all bent out of shape when a naked woman embraces a football player on TV, and yet ratings show that the smutty dramas and vapid reality shows are being watched eagerly by these same people who voted the "moral" ticket. Hypocrites.

  85. Quick check of ESRB effectiveness by JAFSlashdotter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OK... any under 17 /.ers ever been carded / refused when trying to purchase an "M" rated (17+) game? An "AO" (18+) game? If so, where?

    --
    We apologize for the preceding message. All those responsible have been sacked.
  86. Six simple words by retinaburn · · Score: 1

    All your base are belong to us.

    It did affect, not in any large sense, but it was affected.

  87. Damn by Pope · · Score: 1

    So tell me, how do you get the bloodstains out of your pillowcase?
    <P>You just reminded me, I haven't stopped beating my wife yet!

    --
    It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  88. On the plus side by suso · · Score: 1

    Even games with beneficial or neutral content can be harmful to children because of the connection between gameplay and our obesity epidemic.

    Yeah and one benifit of adult games is they give you a little exercise.

    *snicker*

  89. So what? What I want to see is... by eclectic4 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...more adult content.

    I'm in my early 30's. Card me all you want at the counter. Grand Theft Auto should not be in the hands of minors anyway. But at the same time present me, a "grown-up", with the choice of titles with pure adult content.

    Then we will all be happy. Well, until they decide to take their crusade further, which is the fear I suppose.

    --

    "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
  90. Re:Full Of Shit by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

    you're not killing demons, or humans -

    you're controlling pixels that shoot at pixels.

    --
    ... hi bingo ...
  91. Not *enough* adult content by bee · · Score: 1

    As far as I'm concerned, there's not enough adult content out there in games. I can find better adult entertainment in 5 minutes on the web than in all the Playstation & PS2 games made.

    --
    At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.
  92. Quote from High Fidelity by mog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm reminded of a quote from one of my favorites, High Fidelity - "What came first, the music or the misery? People worry about kids playing with guns, or watching violent videos, that some sort of culture of violence will take them over. Nobody worries about kids listening to thousands, literally thousands of songs about heartbreak, rejection, pain, misery and loss. Did I listen to pop music because I was miserable? Or was I miserable because I listened to pop music?"

  93. The irony of Drudge the same day by michaelmalak · · Score: 1

    The same day the Senate was holding a meeting on this in the Dirkson Building (and C-Span was headlining it), Drudge coincidentally was running a story about a 13-year-old boy seemingly reenacting some of those videogames in real life.

  94. It's about teaching them when by phorm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's nothing wrong with violence, sexuality, etc etc - it's all about placement. Teach your kids that stress relief by acting out frustrations on your opponents is different than whacking around another kid in a playground. Hunting in the wilds is different than blowing people away with a shotgun, etc etc.

    Personally I'm still more afraid of the influence upon children of today that post 9-11 is giving (hey, let's go blow up some countries because they might harbour terrorists, and it's ok to lock up a few innocents and torture information out of them because we need to catch the real bad guys).

  95. Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

    Marijuana is addictive. To prove this to yourself, simply stop taking marijuana for the next 6 months. Don't toke even once. Not so easy to do, is it? (Note, this only works if you currently smoke marijuana.)

    Anyone who has smoked heavy amounts of marijuana or has smoked regularly and then quit for one reason or another knows that marijuana is indeed addictive. It just doesn't feature the same depth and width of withdrawal as many other drugs and alchohol has.

    Every Pothead likes to claim how marijuana isn't addictive, but when pressed to quit, they come up with excuses or even say that they can't get by without it.

    I have a friend that moved back from across the country that was desperately wanting to get ahold of some marijuana and was at an elevated emotional state proclaiming to me how much he needed it in his life. He heavily suggested to me that if I didn't help him, he was likely going to become an alchoholic because if he couldn't smoke pot, he was going drink large quantities of beer. That's a fact.

    I know more then a few people in that boat and was in that same boat myself. Luckily, I quit, moved on from that part of my life and have found that no longer smoking pot was the most positive thing I ever could have done.

    Yet, you claim Pot isn't addictive. Hmmm...

    --
    If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    1. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by blkwolf · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I had the exact opposite experience

      Back in highschool, for about 2 years, the question wasn't "was I stoned" but instead what days I wasn't stoned.

      A small group of friends and I smoked pot constantly, daily, until one day one of our major sources moved away.

      At that time we basically decided that was fun, now time to move on with our lives.
      And we did, there was no cravings, no elevated emotional states, or any other addictive type symptons. We just quit, simple as that.

      Now it's about 20 years later, and while I've smoked the occasional bowl a few times within those years, I've never gotten addicted to it nor even bothered to try any of the hardcore drugs that pot is supposed to lead you into.

      As for your friend, he sounds like a very addictive personality that runs the risk of becoming addicted to anything. There are people like that, who I wouldn't advise using pot, but then I wouldn't advise them to start playing EverQuest either.

    2. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      The addiction is to having an altered state of mind. Some people smoke pot simply to relax and have a good time. Some people drink beer to relax and have a good time.

      Some people smoke pot, simply to reach and or maintain that altered mental state. Some people drink beer to reach and or maintain that altered mental state.

      The difference is one is truly an addiction and the other is not so much of an addiction.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    3. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      Like I said, the withdrawal symptoms aren't quite as strong as other drugs or alchohol. Relating that part of your life as 'When was I not stoned' is a sign that, at the time, you were addicted to that behavior.

      When your 'source' moved away, you and your friends, possibly fretted about it for a few days, maybe you looked elsewhere and in the end decided it wasn't worth your time. You may not remember those three or four days of being slightly agitated about losing your 'fun' thing, but that most likely happened. After a few days, that passed because the withdrawal symptoms are light and fade quite quickly with marijuana.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    4. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by mpaon · · Score: 1

      Life is addictive.

      Workaholics, Chronic overeaters, people who play Everquest... you can get addicted to anything. The question is, does the withdrawl kill you? You might miss doing it, but stoping (by choice, or by force) isn't going to send you into shock, like from heroin or barbituates.

    5. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Marijuana is addictive. To prove this to yourself, simply stop taking marijuana for the next 6 months. Don't toke even once. Not so easy to do, is it? (Note, this only works if you currently smoke marijuana.)

      Why should I exclude something that enriches my life so much from it for such a long period of time? I quit for about 8 or 9 weeks last semester because I needed to hunker down and work hard. It was not particularly distressing, but I was glad when I could relax and do the things I enjoy again.

      You could say the same thing for almost any activity, whether it's television or counterstrike or eating meat or coding, or anything else. It would be about as hard for me to stop juggling for 6 months as it would be to stop smoking pot. Not because it's addictive, just because it's fun.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      You aren't differentiating between physical addiction and psychological addiction.

      Physical addictive substances are much harder to quit. These include heroin, nicotine, caffine, etc.

      Psychologically addictive things are just things that we like to do that can get out of hand. Another poster compared marijuana to juggling. Take it from someone with an advanced degree in experimental psychology who has studied the topic in depth: that's a very fair comparison. It is no harder to stop using marijuana than to stop any other activity you find fun and pleasurable. The key difference is that heroin addicts and smokers cannot quit even when their activity has ceased to be pleasurable.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    7. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      If it 'enriches' your life so much, why did you have to quit for about 8 or 9 weeks last semester to 'hunker down' and 'work hard'?

      If something enriches one's life, then it should be that you would be capable of hunkering down and working harder by having that part of your life, right?

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    8. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by TechnoFreek · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've stopped smoking for the past seven months. no problems. no withdrawl, no burning desire to light up again. marijuana isn't addictive. an addictive personality can equate the good feelings of toking up as a necessary part of life, or just getting through the day, and can THINK they're addicted. And I was a pretty heavy "stoner" before that. Making good grades in school while responsibly maintaining my work and extra-curriculum activities without any fault too, by the way.

    9. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by gravyfaucet · · Score: 1

      your argument is horeshit. Do you think Lance Armstrong could get an applied mathematics degree while training for the tour de france? Oh well then, I guess his 7 victories did nothing to enrich his life, eh? bullshit reasoning is why no pro-legalizaion folks take the "just say no" fucks seriously.

      --
      Yes! Evil rules! Good can suck it! Suck it, good!
    10. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      I am not one of those 'Just say no' folks. My contention is that if some behavior or activity enriches your life, then you shouldn't have to quit, even termporarily, that activity to still succeed at your primary goal.

      Your exmple of Lance Armstrong is very illogical. Both training for the Tour De France and an advanced mathematical degree are both extremely time consuming and great endeavors, both of which require almost 100% attention in order to be successful at it. Both also enrich one's life, although through very different approaches.

      My example is asking why he/she (the parent poster) should quit a recreational activity that so enriches his/her life, in order to be able to work hard at his or her primary task. You are suggesting a choice between two arguably primary tasks.

      I am certain that advanced mathematics degree seekers and Lance Armstrong both have their recreational activities on the side that they continue to pursue while seeking out their primary goal. People need recreational diversions, we would go pretty nutty if we didn't have any.

      I was only asking the parent poster why he/she finds his/her life enriched by consuming marijuana and at the same time finds that substance to get in the way when he/she needs to buckle down and get to work, to the point of quiting for upwards of 6 to 8 months. To me, that doesn't say life enrichment by smoking marijuana, it kind of says the opposite.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    11. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      What exactly is and advanced degree in experimental psychology? Is that a respected and generally accepted medical science or is it more of a fringe science that isn't generally accepted, kind of like paranormal science? I need to have that qualified before I can properly address your statement.

      I have to ask to clarify that, because when you toss on 'Experimental', to me, that significantly calls into question the basis of your statements. It's not your fault that I have to question where you are coming from, you can blame 'Creation Scientists' for that. These days, I have to be extremely skeptical of anyone that claims certain scientific knowledge that is practically the opposite of generally accepted scientific knowledge.

      From my, albeit, limited understanding of psychology and general medical, THC is a drug that alters the physical chemistry of the brain. This has a psychological effect that is well documented. It is true that THC has less intense side-effects on the human brain chemistry then say, Heroin, Nicotine, Cocain and caffine. However, there are still physcial chemical changes in the brain.

      Eventually, just like other drugs, the brain adjusts and becomes used to that altered state of operation and the user of that drug often wishes to maintain that altered state of mind. Some users end up consuming more and more of a given drug, including Marijuana, and will often come up with excuses as to why they 'need' it in their life and how they simply cannot live without it.

      Most people can easily adjust to no longer having that drug available and can quickly quit with barely noticeable side effects. Some people can continue to use small amounts of a given drug without increasing usage or lowering usage and will experience barely noticeable side-effects in day to day living. You can be an addict, to Marijuana, and have that have little impact on your life. You can quit at anytime and have negligable withdrawal symptoms that are typically so minor that they are barely noticed by most people.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    12. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by mink · · Score: 1

      I wish you could pay attention to your sig when posting this BS about people you dont even know.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    13. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by mink · · Score: 1

      You do realize that any substance taken into an organism is a "drug" by the fact that all substances (even food necessary for sustaining life) affect the function of said organism in some way.

      Last I check in any textbooks (I must admit they are about 10 years out of date), THC can only be psychologically addictive, has no physical withdrawal symptoms (as there is no physical addiction), and not everyone becomes psychologically addicted.

      If you are arguing from a standpoint of faith in something you heard or you think is right, try to educate yourself on the details of the issues (be it drugs, religion, or video game violence) instead of doggedly sticking to incorrect information.

      If there is some new scientific basis for your arguments I'd like to hear them as well as get some links so I can update my information about this subject.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    14. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      The textbooks that I read, newer then 10 years BTW, detailed what I had stated above. I am not taking this on faith. I am taking my statements based upon the information that was in a psychology textbook for a class that I took about 4 years ago.

      Ten years ago, it wasn't possible for US researchers to use Class 1 Controlled substances, like Marijuana, for scientific study. So, most of the data from back then and earlier is out of date, couldn't be tested and proven, without criminal charges being levied on the researchers.

      In recent years those restrictions have changed somewhat and some studies have been allowed in the US and studies from outside the US could then be verified by US research scientists.

      Look, I am all for legalizing Marijuana, because out of most of the drugs out there, it is relatively benign, mostly affecting long-term memory and some other minor side-effects. Which recent studies have proven.

      Anyway, back to your contention that it is only psychologically addictive. I have to say that's bunk.

      Slashdot, Everquest and other similar entertaining pursuits are psychologically addictive, because they don't alter the physical chemistry of your brain or body, you don't take magic EQ or Slashdot pills in order to enjoy EQ or Slashdot. You simply load them up on your computer and enjoy.

      Marijuana, on the other hand, chemically alters your brain chemistry. It affects your neurotransmitters, through a physical chemical reaction. This brings on the psychological effects attributed to marijuana. Over time, the brain becomes used to and wants to continue to be in that state. Which is why so many potheads, whom I was once one of, like to come up with all these ideas and excuses about how and why Marijuana is needed in their life, how it isn't addictive and all other sorts of made up on faith beliefs, or repeated by enough people that it simply must be true, right? You know the old saying, "a million can't be wrong", right?

      The great thing about marijuana is that the physical addiction symptoms are so negligable that they simply don't negatively impact most and I do mean most users, when they quit cold turkey. Due to that fact, it is one of the easiest drugs to stop taking and that's a fact.

      You should pick up some more modern books on the subject and quit taking the words of 'High Times' and other pothead's as the gospel in regards to the physical effects of THC and long-term marijuana use.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    15. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      My sig says nothing about posting 'bs' about people I don't know. It's simply about tools with multiple uses.

      If you reread my statement, it was a hypothetical possibility, I didn't proclaim that the parent poster did indeed feel those symptoms, I simply suggested that he/she *may* have felt those for a few days or so and most likely didn't think anything of those symptoms. Which is entirely possible, due to the low level of withdrawal symptoms with marijuana.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    16. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by mink · · Score: 1

      Can you point me to any published papers available on the net, as my budget for textbooks is rather limited to things directly related to my vocation?

      I'm sorry, when did I mention High Time? I don't subscribe to it or read it. It's shit like that that makes people react so negatively to your posts.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    17. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by cnelzie · · Score: 1

      When did you provide links to the information you were presenting?

      You had stated the marijuana user mantra, that has been repeated often in 'High Times' and by many of the marijuana user's that I have interacted with throughout the years. It doesn't matter if you read that publication or not, I have read and had those statements recounted to me from that publication and have heard that gospel preached by many users of marijuana.

      Heck, I used to believe that same thing myself!

      Here's some links... The first one gives me reason to question whether or not Marijuana should be made legal...

      Link One

      Here's a High Times piece that ignores much of the additional scientific information in the previous link, in order to 'justify' the legalization movement. Perhaps the writer suffered from memory loss revolving around the rest of the scientific information that was available at the time the discovery of the brain receptor he wrote about...

      The following quote comes directly from the above listed 'High Times' article...

      This latest research confirms and explains Hollister's 1986 conclusion about cannabis and addiction: "Physical dependence is rarely encountered in the usual patterns, despite some degree of tolerance that may develop."

      It says 'rarely encountered in the usual patterns' that doesn't mean that physical dependence is rarely encountered, just that the usual patterns, like the intense almost crazy cravings for the drug aren't usual. Even 'High Times' agrees with me that Marijuana is physically addictive!

      You really don't have to like the facts, just understand the facts exist. I am still for the legalization of marijuana, but you won't ever see me using it. That's just not something that is part of my life, for many reasons.

      I am not preaching and saying that anyone shouldn't use marijuana or any particular drug, I am just pointing out the fact that it is indeed addictive. I also qualify that by stating that it is well known that the withdrawal symptoms are quite minimal, in comparison to a great many other drugs and that many current and past users of marijuana simply don't believe they are or were ever addicted, because withdrawal is so minor.

      --
      If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    18. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      An advanced degree is either a Master's degree or a PhD. I have a Master of Science Research in Experimental Psychology.

      Experimental Psychology is a branch of psychology that is centered on scientific research into psychology (as opposed to clinical practice.) It has nothing to do with creation science.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    19. Re:Marijuana is indeed addictive. by mink · · Score: 1

      As I said my texts are old by more then 10 years, so what good is linking to any information about them? I posted about the last things I had read that had any scientific basis. I even disclaimed how accurate it might have been due to the age of the information. I asked for some links since you seem to be saying your right and you know this because you are up to date on this information.

      So not knowing any facts about where I was coming from (besides the admission my information is probably out of date) you label me as some drugged out hippy who can't accept facts. I asked for some, but I want more then your word.

      I am not saying facts do not exist, but I see you arguing from a standpoint of having the "facts" and not willing to share.

      You mention the latest research and someone named Hollister, can you perhaps give me more to google/library search with then that (like a first name)?

      As to your initial link, it's sounds a bit "refer madness" at the start. I dislike how they ignore it's effects related to ingestion and only cover smoking. I really like this line "We caution, however, that most of this research, although extremely useful, assumes a mechanistic view of the brain's functioning." This to me means they are not sure about what they are saying.
      How about this:
      "In 1990, Lisa Matsuda provided conclusive evidence documenting the damage of marijuana on the cognitive faculties, after cloning a gene for the cannabinoid receptor in the rat brain which, in collaboration with M. Herkenham, was found to be 97 percent identical with the human receptor"
      Followed in the next paragraph by this:
      "Naturally, the rodent brain, or that of any animal, for that matter, cannot be compared to the human brain."

      I see what they are saying but it seems a little less then as conclusive as you are making it sound.

      "Although these two discoveries contribute to our knowledge of how cannabinoid action works in the body, they also raise some puzzling new questions. For example, in laboratory rats, anandamide was shown not to have the same strength of effect on spatial memory in rats as did delta-9-THC. Does this mean that the naturally produced cannabis, the anandamide, is different from smoked cannabis? And if so, why? What, then, is the purpose of anandamide? Under what conditions is anandamide released? Scientists are now trying to figure out the actual function of this system. [13]Surely it does not exist in the body so that humans could smoke marijuana"

      I like the "surely" line in the last bit. I am not like the slant/bias of your article, seems they had a conclusion in mind before writing it. Not what I would expect from science.

      Most of the research specified in that article is from the 80's a little more from the mid 90's but only in that it is used related to the "bad old research".

      "The cognitive drawbacks of cannabis-caused impairment are not inconsequential. They affect driving a car, operating a plane, or employing a complicated piece of machinery. In such skilled activities, one's undivided attention, recall, quick visual-spatial mapping, and split-second timing, are required at every second. [19] Or to take a simpler example, what about the young adult who is attempting to learn how to play the trumpet. How can the student who has smoked too much marijuana simultaneously have command over the complex processes required to perform a piece of music - memory, coordination of hands and mouth, emotion, and interpretation?"

      I don't know where to start, someone is BSing here, through history there have been many stoners who play complex music. As for operating planes, cars and heavy machines, you shouldn't do that drunk or high on any other drugs (a big DUH there). Getting into less scientific areas, most people who are stoned can focus on a single thing quite well (this does fit in with what the article says about the cannabinoid receptors in the brain) and do said thing, but they tend to "tunnel" and ignore most other things (this is why

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  96. Marijuana was made... by cnelzie · · Score: 1

    ...illegal during prohibition. Failing to learn from history indeed.

    --
    If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
  97. Re:Bundle the game with a real gun - get NRA backi by east+coast · · Score: 1

    So if you're in the game industry and getting flak from "family" groups, give them a tour of the gun nut world and see what they have to say about that.

    Yeah, and the same group of people who gave you the right to play violent video games was also a group of "gun nuts" who'd obviously have it no other way.

    Bitch about it all you want but I don't see the NRA protesting your right to game.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  98. Two erroneous assumptions... by petrus4 · · Score: 1

    are made by the authors of this report, I'm guessing.

    First of all, that the gaming industry really gives two shits about their opinion...and secondly, that it even *should*.

    The thing that never ceases to amaze me about such hypocrites is that they themselves were most likely all loyal Bush voters in the last election. Have America (and by extension, other parts of the planet) run by a cabal of inhuman, genocidal fascist monsters, and that's fine. A hundred thousand dead civilians in Iraq is perfectly acceptable, (and necessary, according to the types I suspect this group are comprised of) and yet they take exception to some 14 year old disassembling pixels on a screen?

    Until they feel like doing something about the whale-sized camel in Iraq, they can leave straining FPS gnats for someone who cares. I'd prefer to listen to someone who is interested in dealing with the big, genuinely important issues first, before going after small stuff like this.

  99. Re:Insert "Oh Canada" comment here by Dac+Vin · · Score: 1

    Explain the typo, please :)

  100. The obvious one. by el-spectre · · Score: 1

    Man is the most recent in a chain of evolving species

    vs.

    Man was created by [insert god name here]

    --
    "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    1. Re:The obvious one. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Who is to say that God isn't they one who stated the whole process in motion?

      We do not know and, perhaps, we never will.

    2. Re:The obvious one. by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      No one is to say. One could equally say that gravity is 'god's will' and I can't refute it.

      I was speaking of the more traditional 'man from dust' creation stories, actually.

      There's no evidence for them, so why believe it? There is, however pretty good evidence for evolution, so it seems a more logical choice, no?

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    3. Re:The obvious one. by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      I thought man WAS made from dust, cosmic dust that is ....

      AND he isn't saying evolution isn't valid, just that god started it all...

    4. Re:The obvious one. by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      OK, but that wasn't the question... I was talking about any of the traditional creation myths.

      ANYTHING could be treated as an action of an all powerful being, it's not tenable position. For example, I could believe the Easter Bunny created man... no one can disprove it, so it's a valid belief, right?

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
  101. It's a vast right-wing conspiracy! by A.T.+Hun · · Score: 1

    Oh wait, the sentors beating this drum are Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) and one of my beloved *cough* senators, Herb Kohl (D-WI). Again.

  102. Bullshit bollocks by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    How does the game industry (who makes games) have anything to do with the retail industry (who isn't supposed to be selling these games to minors) or the parental industry (who are ultimately responsible for controlling their kids)? Its not their problem, they have no control over what happens to that CD after it leaves the factory, as long as they stick the right rating label on it they should be able to do what ever the hell they like, just like any other industry - guns, chemicals, drugs etc. Now im not happy that Monsanto gets to spill all their crap in the air but thats the law and until for example gun manufacturers are forced to make their guns 'less' powerful, why should games manufacturers be forced to make their games 'less' violent?

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  103. World History 101: by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    A few hundred years ago, everyone knew what a fairy was. It was the equivalent of a modern grey alien. They might, for example, cast a glamour on you, or abduct your children and replace them with a changeling.

    The new wave of children stories, such as those by Perrault, were considered to corrupt children's minds in much the same way as a fairy would. Hence, they were derisively referred to as "fairy tales".

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  104. I'm psycho for censorship! by Zareste · · Score: 1

    In related news: Minorities are changing the color of their skin in compliance with the KKK's 'Most Impure Ethnicities' list, Jews are shooting themselves after Nazis released their 'Reasons to Kill Everyone' list, and most of the US has atomic-bombed itself into oblivion after hearing Bin Laden's ''

    More 'Ban Video Games, Kill Traitors' lists were on the way - thanks to inspiration from IEMA's heroic cowardice - but other such conservative groups had gotten into arguments, shooting and killing each other before finishing, in debates over which video games the Furor and Bush would have preferred. Final Fantasy was a favored candidate. "We would like to focus practical violence on more constructive activities such as killing Iraqis and bombing abortion clinics." said a spokeswoman during an ESRB meeting.

    --
    I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!
  105. Video game and obesity? by alexandre · · Score: 1

    Uhm, people should play more Dance Dance Revolution :-)

  106. A bit of nonsense by brunes69 · · Score: 1
    I am quite liberal and support 100% the decriminalization and eventual full legalization of marijuana and other drugs. But when you say things like this...

    there is no impairment of coordination, most activites you can do sober you can do stoned.

    .. you do nothing but harm the cause and make us all look like idiot potheads.

    If and when marijuana is legalized, I hope that they have the sense to outlaw things like driving and operating heavy machinery while stoned. You *are not* the same stoned as sober, marijuana affects your brain, just like alcohol, and I sure as hell wouldn't want some tweaker cruising down the freeway being distracted by some trivial thing on the side of the road while my kids were out playing.

    It is just common sense.

    1. Re:A bit of nonsense by Hatta · · Score: 1

      If and when marijuana is legalized, I hope that they have the sense to outlaw things like driving and operating heavy machinery while stoned.

      That's why I said most things. Marijuana does not affect coordination, it does however affect attention.

      You *are not* the same stoned as sober

      Agreed.

      marijuana affects your brain, just like alcohol

      No, marijuana affects your brain in ways entirely different from alcohol.

      I sure as hell wouldn't want some tweaker cruising down the freeway being distracted by some trivial thing on the side of the road while my kids were out playing.

      See, it's attention. btw, tweakers are meth users.

      You may be interested in a 1993 DOT report on the effects of marijuana on driving. One key quote:

      "Notwithstanding methodological differences among studies, both direct and indirect evidence coverage on the conclusion that THC's effects after doses up to 300 ug/kg never exceed alcohol's at BACs of 0.08g%."

      .08 is the legal limit for alcohol in many places, in other places it's .10, 300ug/kg is a typical dose of THC. I won't repeat the data summarized in that report, but they conclude:

      "Of the many psychotropic drugs, licit and illicit, that are available and used by people who subsequently drive, marijuana may well be among the least harmful."

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:A bit of nonsense by brunes69 · · Score: 1
      > marijuana affects your brain, just like alcohol

      No, marijuana affects your brain in ways entirely different from alcohol.

      Er.. there is a comma in that sentence. It changes the meaning quite drastically from the same thing without the comma, which is what you seem to have somehow read.

      With the comma it means "both alcohol and marijuana affect your brain", which is obviously true.

      "Of the many psychotropic drugs, licit and illicit, that are available and used by people who subsequently drive, marijuana may well be among the least harmful."

      I don't care if it is the least harmful. If it is harmful at all it should not be allowed.

      When you drive you are not just taking your life and the lives of your family member into your hands, you are taking the lives of everyone on and near the road into your hands as well. There should be zero tolerance for people who drive under the influence, *any* influence. Anyone caught doing such a thing should all have manditory jail terms, 1-5 years minimum IMO. Will make them think twice about every trying that nonsense again.

    3. Re:A bit of nonsense by moonbender · · Score: 1

      There should be zero tolerance for people who drive under the influence, *any* influence.

      Nice, except that it doesn't work. Anything can act as an influence: listening to the radio, talking to or arguing with other people in the car, being tired, having had too much sugar in the morning coffee, using cell phones, being depressed, being euphoric, wearing uncomfortable shoes, and so on.

      You have to draw the line somewhere, and zero is not where you will want to draw it. (It typically isn't, by the way, even if "zero tolerance" sounds very snazzy.)

      Note that I'm not arguing against outlawing "stoned driving", I'm really not qualified to pass judgement on that one. :)

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  107. ObSimpsons by sharkey · · Score: 1

    Will that be the sequel to "Billy Graham's Bible Blaster"?

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  108. Ummm.... by StormMoon · · Score: 1

    Common sense should tell parents to READ THE RATINGS before buying these types of games for their kids. That's what it was made for.. duh. Retailers should enforce the ratings a little bit more, like oh, asking for ID. Wal-Mart was supposed to be doing that but it appears they're not.

    --
    Vote Democrat: The ass you save may be your own.
  109. Re:Let's face it, there is some truth here.. by StormMoon · · Score: 1

    That's what the rating systems were created for, to keep kids away from them and to let the parents know that these games are unappropriate for them to play. If the parents did their jobs better and looked into these types of games, then people wouldn't piss and moan about them. What happened to common sense? Oh it died.

    --
    Vote Democrat: The ass you save may be your own.
  110. Wow thanks for telling me what to do..... by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

    These Ratings are GUIDELINES and should not be imposed by stores.

    Unless it is a law I don't want stores imposing limits on what can and can't be bought by my children, that is up to me, I am raising them, not some group who deems halo2 bad but jax3 good (which in both you destroy "teh evil").

    I know this might seem radical but it is truely up to the parents to guide their children in what is right and wrong, good and bad for them to experience while they are growing.

    It's not like banning them or labeling them with a "code" maks them any less accessible (esp with bitorrent).

    SO in conclusion thanks to all of the people who are behind this ratings crap (for movies, games, tv, etc...) for making sure that everything is watered down to the point where nobody could ever possibly be offended or *gasp* see reality as it pretty much already exists.

  111. Re:Don't forget more recent "Progressive Ideas" by kfg · · Score: 1

    The Bill of Rights is the traditional nature of progressives, but yes, it's authors considered themselves as reactionaires as well, and were proud of it.

    However, I note that you put "Progressives" in scares quotes, as well you should, while at the same time using the word is if it shouldn't be.

    Don't fall into the trap of using definitions in their politically motivated doublespeak terms. Ethnic Cleansing is the very antithesis of progressive. It is tyrany.

    Next thing you know you'll start thinking that Democrats and Greens are "liberals."

    KFG

  112. And the slide continues by AbsurdProverb · · Score: 1

    Prior to this election I would have laughed an article like this off. However things are starting to look pretty spooky. Why is responsibility for policing the household become responsibility of the federal government? I understand that a parent can't entirely control the enviroment which may or may not influence a child, but such reasoning is being used as leverage to go beyond what is reasonable. You can change the radio station. You can even control the television within your house to prevent a child from watching tv programming which you deem unsuitable. As legal guardian, you can control the video games YOU buy or at least allow into the house. As a parent, there is a great deal of control within your grasp. Parental control is there if you take the time and effort into using it. We are at a point now where we are beginning to halt our own foward progression. We are starting to see science and its already rampant in media and entertainment. This is yet another example.

  113. Don't kill.... by Gamefreak99 · · Score: 1

    ... steal! They say don't buy Doom 3 but they recommend Sly 2; a game that emphasizes stealing from others and then pawning the goods. And they use cartoon animals which kids can identify with as opposed to scary demons that kids wouldn't like. So in summary, kids are more likely to shoot hordes of demons than steal and thus must not play violent video games.

  114. RE: It all started with Pac-Man.... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Here you've got a whole game centered around eating things and popping pills. Eat as much as you can before getting eaten yourself, and if you eat these magic "power pellets", you even get a chance to eat the "ghosts" that normally try to eat you!

    Kids were brainwashed by Pac-Man and it started them on taking drugs and obesity. Don't you see!

  115. Re:'Family' in title = Christian Right by StormMoon · · Score: 1

    I fail to see how creationism will make better families. I thought moral values was: honesty, generosity, integrity, fair play, tolerance, etc. Somehow moral values is now fundamentalist Christianity. Yeah, the one group that abuses children more than drunks and pedophiles combined.

    --
    Vote Democrat: The ass you save may be your own.
  116. Re:Derided? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

    I thought I'd scan through the submissions to see if anyone else had noticed that. One can cetainly deride Slashdot "editors" for yet again advancing illiteracy.

  117. What a load of crap by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    Have you ever used weed?

    As someone from the netherlands all you say is a complete and utter lie. You can get addicted to weed, it most certainly impairs your coordination and if you are caught driving under the influence you get the same fine as when drunk.

    You must have either never used yourselve OR are one of those people who claim they can drive with a couple of drinks under their belt.

    It is people like you that hurt the reputation of drugs as people on boths sides of the fence know your full of it. Idiot.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:What a load of crap by dajak · · Score: 1

      The redeeming quality of weed is that its users feel less capable of things like driving than they actually are. Drivers that are only mildly stoned are usually overly defensive in traffic and drive too slow.

      The effect of alcohol is the opposite, and the effect of alcohol and weed combined is apparently even worse. No sane person combines alcohol with any other drug or psychoactive medicin anyway. Alcohol very seriously impairs judgment, while weed impairs performance.

      High doses (> 300 ng/kg) of THC cause performance problems similar to those of 0.08 > BAC > 0.05 (common legal limits for blood alcohol of drivers). These doses are however higher than most regular recreational users prefer to use (in the Netherlands; not in combination with alcohol).

      As someone from the netherlands all you say is a complete and utter lie.

      Wtf is that supposed to mean?

      Did you know that Dutch traffic is among the safest of the world (3rd)?

      Have you ever used weed?

      Regularly. Have you tried finding out what the right dose is for you? Have you used it while being sober?

      Do you drive while tired or under the influence of painkillers? Do you use the phone while driving? Do you talk to passengers while driving?

    2. Re:What a load of crap by mink · · Score: 1

      "The effect of alcohol is the opposite, and the effect of alcohol and weed combined is apparently even worse. No sane person combines alcohol with any other drug or psychoactive medicin anyway. Alcohol very seriously impairs judgment, while weed impairs performance."

      Clearly the next big thing in the USA will be booze with THC additive.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  118. Re:The Legend of Zelda by flyingsquid · · Score: 1
    They'll come for your precious Zelda

    My favorite was the Monster Bait you could throw out to distract the monsters. So when he's baiting the monsters, you know, he's monsterbaiting (insert Beavis Laugh Here).

    Link had better watch it, or he's gonna go blind.

  119. At very least, do a honest top 10! by Leninix · · Score: 1

    Their top 10 seems based on graphism realism, where relatively non-violent games (Halo 2, HalfLife 2, GTA and especially America Army where you cannot kill anyone as when you kill someone they stay sitting down in indian) figure out. Here is one based on violent situations/atmosphere/crade look and not simply the graphism: 1.Doom III 2.Postal II 3.Soldier of Fortune I 4.Bad Mojo 5.Mortal Kombat II (not "Combat") 6.Lethal Enforcer 7.Quake I Teneabrea 8.Night Trap 9.Sanitarium 10.Planescape Torment

  120. You know damn well why: Responsibility by Polarism · · Score: 1

    NOBODY wants to be responsible for their actions anymore. Quite a sickeningly large percentage of parents just want to take the quick way out of any situation that involves their child.

    They do not want to understand or do any of the work to rid it from their lives, they just want a magic pill.

    Same with anything else really, nobody wants to be responsible for anything they do anymore, there's always something to blame, someone else's fault, something not of their own control or doing.

    Sad really.

    --
    All your base are belong to Google.
  121. Short answer. by realityfighter · · Score: 1

    Video games are art. When you can answer the question,

    "Does art imitate life, or life imitate art?"

    you'll have the answer, as well as you can.

    --
    A strain of paranoid prevention can be worse than the disease, whate'er the intention.
  122. Check this out by realityfighter · · Score: 1

    Replace all reference to video games with the word "parents."

    The U.S. Army now uses parents as recruiting tools because the parents capture the interest of teens, shape their attitudes and influence their behavior. Evidence grows that parents teach skills and affect behavior. The important thing to remember, therefore, is that parents are powerful-for good and for bad.

    Parents are natural teachers. Children find them highly motivating; by virtue of their interactive nature, children are actively engaged with them; they provide repeated practice; and they include rewards for skillful play. These facts make it likely that parents could have large effects, some of which are intended by the parents, and some of which may not be intended.

    Given the potential parents have to influence, we should pay attention to the fact that children are spending increasing amounts of time with them at younger and younger ages.

    I feel a new prohibition movement coming on!

    --
    A strain of paranoid prevention can be worse than the disease, whate'er the intention.