While it wouldn't be pleasant for the gamers affected, I think eventually somebody is going get away with a stupid law like the one he proposes. In the end though, it'll be a sacrifice for the greater good. We could finally have definitive proof that taking violent video games out of the equation does absolutely nothing and it might become a precedent for dealing with this kind of stupidity in the future.
As with all things, it all comes down to a matter of opinion. While I can't say I believe FF VII to be the greatest RPG of all time (it comes in second for me), it is my favourite in the FF series. It also wasn't my first by far. I've played all of them, even II-V before they were ever officially translated, Mystic Quest and the renamed Seiken Densetsu and Saga games. Yes the game's graphics are dated and the combat system was exploitable, but that doesn't detract from the characters or dull its story, which I still find superior to FF VI's. For those of you who complain that you can abuse the magic system to make fighting ineffectual, I did the same thing in VI. Have you ever had every character in the game master every spell and carry an Economizer? Yeah, I know, I have no life:P I'll tell you one thing about FF VII, there has never before or since been a better villain. Kefka? He always felt more like the kind of character that should be a recurring joke enemy. Also, no game has ever tugged at my heart strings like FF VII. When Cait Sith was crushed in the temple I wept... and then I really started crying when he showed up again in the next scene;)
I'm just curious to see how all of the participating countries will react to this. Foremost in my mind is France with their recent hostile stance on OSS: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/02/20 40237&tid=123&tid=185&tid=219&tid=106/
If they're treating the publishing of free software as a criminal offense, how are they going to react to this? It's hard to see them boycotting, but if they don't protest in some way their policy makers will come off looking highly hypocritical.
"And c'mon, "modifications" like piercings and tatoos are prevelent enough that they're no longer individualistic; people are just following the crowd. I hire leaders, not sheep."
So does that mean that by not having a tattoo, I am inherently individualistic? I don't have a tattoo now, but I'm getting one next week. Does that mean that in one week's time I'll become less useful, a loose cannon or unreliable? Honestly, nothing will change. I'll still be about the youngest team lead on an AI speech agent you're likely to find and people will still be split in their perceptions of me. Some will think I'm eccentric based upon my attitude and views, and others will think I'm an erudite and a bit of a prude. I guess what I'm trying to say is that body modifications should not be a meter by which to judge a person's professional capacity any more than which genre of books they prefer to read.
That being said, I do realize that this isn't an ideal world and that many people are highly judgmental based solely on appearance, so I have to agree with the parent poster's 3rd point. I have three piercings in one of my ears, but when I used to go to work in an expensive suit and talk to clients all day, I made sure to take them out. I saw no reason to be temerarious when dealing with clients. On the other hand, in my current company where I only deal with other staff members, I see no reason to be reserved with respect to my hairstyle or superficial appearance. I'm in charge of what I do because I do it better than anyone else, and if anyone at the company has issues with me because of my appearance and not my work, then we're really in trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
While it wouldn't be pleasant for the gamers affected, I think eventually somebody is going get away with a stupid law like the one he proposes. In the end though, it'll be a sacrifice for the greater good. We could finally have definitive proof that taking violent video games out of the equation does absolutely nothing and it might become a precedent for dealing with this kind of stupidity in the future.
As with all things, it all comes down to a matter of opinion. While I can't say I believe FF VII to be the greatest RPG of all time (it comes in second for me), it is my favourite in the FF series. It also wasn't my first by far. I've played all of them, even II-V before they were ever officially translated, Mystic Quest and the renamed Seiken Densetsu and Saga games. Yes the game's graphics are dated and the combat system was exploitable, but that doesn't detract from the characters or dull its story, which I still find superior to FF VI's. For those of you who complain that you can abuse the magic system to make fighting ineffectual, I did the same thing in VI. Have you ever had every character in the game master every spell and carry an Economizer? Yeah, I know, I have no life :P ;)
I'll tell you one thing about FF VII, there has never before or since been a better villain. Kefka? He always felt more like the kind of character that should be a recurring joke enemy.
Also, no game has ever tugged at my heart strings like FF VII. When Cait Sith was crushed in the temple I wept... and then I really started crying when he showed up again in the next scene
I'm just curious to see how all of the participating countries will react to this. Foremost in my mind is France with their recent hostile stance on OSS:0 40237&tid=123&tid=185&tid=219&tid=106/
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/02/2
If they're treating the publishing of free software as a criminal offense, how are they going to react to this? It's hard to see them boycotting, but if they don't protest in some way their policy makers will come off looking highly hypocritical.
"And c'mon, "modifications" like piercings and tatoos are prevelent enough that they're no longer individualistic; people are just following the crowd. I hire leaders, not sheep."
So does that mean that by not having a tattoo, I am inherently individualistic? I don't have a tattoo now, but I'm getting one next week. Does that mean that in one week's time I'll become less useful, a loose cannon or unreliable? Honestly, nothing will change. I'll still be about the youngest team lead on an AI speech agent you're likely to find and people will still be split in their perceptions of me. Some will think I'm eccentric based upon my attitude and views, and others will think I'm an erudite and a bit of a prude. I guess what I'm trying to say is that body modifications should not be a meter by which to judge a person's professional capacity any more than which genre of books they prefer to read.
That being said, I do realize that this isn't an ideal world and that many people are highly judgmental based solely on appearance, so I have to agree with the parent poster's 3rd point. I have three piercings in one of my ears, but when I used to go to work in an expensive suit and talk to clients all day, I made sure to take them out. I saw no reason to be temerarious when dealing with clients. On the other hand, in my current company where I only deal with other staff members, I see no reason to be reserved with respect to my hairstyle or superficial appearance. I'm in charge of what I do because I do it better than anyone else, and if anyone at the company has issues with me because of my appearance and not my work, then we're really in trouble.