Absolute Wuss

[Bridge]

This for the most part. Flight Simulator/Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. Just saying.

I'm not saying there are no realistic simulator games, just that the effects they have on you are limited to the mental in most cases. Yes you can use a joystick and it sort of feels like a real plane/helicopter but actually controlling vehicles like that in real life has some pretty heavy effects on your body. You've driven a car right? Compare your screen shaking when you hit a bump to you yourself shaking. Big difference. Shooting a gun, depending on what type it is and the shape you're in, can be very taxing on your body and FPSs in no way do or even can portray this. Therefore they are not good simulators at all.

This is just my opinion and i dont want to start war,but i think Battlefield 3 is more realistic war simulator than call of duties(I really hope this doesnt start a game war in here -.-).And i agree that there are no(atleast atm)any good simulators.

I still have my hopes up for VR, if the technology is ever perfected.

[Bridge]

Wasn't aiming that at you but at Cranky, Bridge. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.

Could have fooled me, but no worries. I just thought you said: "I agree with you but FS and CoD are realistic".

[Cranky Old Man]

1. So you are proving that sensationalist bullshit is not bullshit by citing sensationalist bullshit. Well done. No really, it is a good tactic. Videogames do affect people on a very deep level (enough to make them kill people) yes, but these people are either extremely weak-minded or legally insane. Normal, sensible people do not react this way to stimuli. If you take someone when they are an infant and train them to become murderers by playing violent video games all their life all the while telling them that it is the correct thing to do then videogames can affect people. But guess what? Videogames are not propaganda. Nobody is trying to teach anybody how to live their lives. Videogames are just another form of art that express various ideas and you are not forced to adopt those ideas to your own thinking. They simply allow you to experience that side, a side which you may not have known before, for a certain amount of time. For fuck's sake, if the child in question is playing on a console connected to a television, they are probably spending more time watching children's shows and movies learning their basic morals.

2. FPSs are nothing like real life. Even if it is realistically portrayed you leave out all of the other basic factors. Even if that person learned from a videogame that "killing people is fun" (that person is insane btw) then that person would also need to 1) purchase a weapon/weapons which takes a long time or steal a weapon which is not easy; gun control laws prohibit you from keeping the key or any ammo anywhere near the case/locker in which you keep your weapon and 2) Go to either a remote location away from all civilization (depending on where you live probably a very long drive) or a shooting range which require you to have a gun license which takes a long time to get and requires extensive screening from the police, after which you need to practice for a long time to become good at shooting and used to the effects firearms have on your body. The person in question has months or if he wants to steal a weapon running the risk of getting caught and go in totally unprepared a week at least to change his mind. Even if this crazy idea originated in a video game he must be genuinely insane to stay determined for that long. Video games do not make people insane and are not a good training regiment for mass murder.

3) Surely you must know he didn't mean people would become psychopaths because of Amnesia. He meant that it would affect them because it is terrifying.

4) See my first point. Art is not usually propaganda. It tells stories, it does not force you to agree with everything that is portrayed therein.

You're fanatically convinced if your opinion, to the point where you call science "sensational bullshit". There's no use arguing with you, because your emotions are rationalizing your arguments.

[Bridge]

1. So you are proving that sensationalist bullshit is not bullshit by citing sensationalist bullshit. Well done. No really, it is a good tactic. Videogames do affect people on a very deep level (enough to make them kill people) yes, but these people are either extremely weak-minded or legally insane. Normal, sensible people do not react this way to stimuli. If you take someone when they are an infant and train them to become murderers by playing violent video games all their life all the while telling them that it is the correct thing to do then videogames can affect people. But guess what? Videogames are not propaganda. Nobody is trying to teach anybody how to live their lives. Videogames are just another form of art that express various ideas and you are not forced to adopt those ideas to your own thinking. They simply allow you to experience that side, a side which you may not have known before, for a certain amount of time. For fuck's sake, if the child in question is playing on a console connected to a television, they are probably spending more time watching children's shows and movies learning their basic morals.

2. FPSs are nothing like real life. Even if it is realistically portrayed you leave out all of the other basic factors. Even if that person learned from a videogame that "killing people is fun" (that person is insane btw) then that person would also need to 1) purchase a weapon/weapons which takes a long time or steal a weapon which is not easy; gun control laws prohibit you from keeping the key or any ammo anywhere near the case/locker in which you keep your weapon and 2) Go to either a remote location away from all civilization (depending on where you live probably a very long drive) or a shooting range which require you to have a gun license which takes a long time to get and requires extensive screening from the police, after which you need to practice for a long time to become good at shooting and used to the effects firearms have on your body. The person in question has months or if he wants to steal a weapon running the risk of getting caught and go in totally unprepared a week at least to change his mind. Even if this crazy idea originated in a video game he must be genuinely insane to stay determined for that long. Video games do not make people insane and are not a good training regiment for mass murder.

3) Surely you must know he didn't mean people would become psychopaths because of Amnesia. He meant that it would affect them because it is terrifying.

4) See my first point. Art is not usually propaganda. It tells stories, it does not force you to agree with everything that is portrayed therein.

You're fanatically convinced if your opinion, to the point where you call science "sensational bullshit". There's no use arguing with you, because your emotions are rationalizing your arguments.

It's not science because at the moment it's highly debatable. Just because someone writes a book about something doesn't mean that book is credible. How about actually quoting some evidence presented in those books? I'm certain there is nothing at all scientific about them. Like I said: Videogame violence can affect people only if they are insane or weak-minded to the point that if you order them to kill someone they will do it without question. At that point anything can make them violent, not just videogames. Videogames are a popular scapegoat in modern media because of the interactive nature of the violence that can take place, completely ignoring any other external influences wholly unrelated to art in general.

Why do I call your "science" sensationalist crap? Because it is not generally accepted by all psychologists or even half of them that violence affects those of sound mind. Give me proof that it is known that violence affects most people, even those with good mental health and a solid moral foundation and I will eat my words. It doesn't matter though because most people are not violent killers and today I would say at least 25% of the Western population plays violent videogames on a regular basis, even kids.

[CrazyShootin]

Well, I'm actually gonna post something that HAS to do with the post and not random arguments about moral and religion which is not really suitable for a forum discussion anyway. And not even relevant for that matter.

Play with a couple of friends. I did that the first half of the game. We were still scared and whimped like little girls. But it's not as bad as playing alone, obviously.

Don't light up the room tough! Kills the whole experience. :p

[Fomzo]

So, just wondering, is there a way to be less scared of this game?

[img]%20%20Uploaded%20with%20ImageShack.us[/img]

[Juby]

I've played M+ games with my dad, who also abused me (not technically, but almost) since I was about 6. I played every GTA, Duke Nukem, Doom, etc. He even cursed a few times! I did a play-through of Amnesia while I was 13. Games do not influence how your act, nor affect your mental sanity or health. If they do, it is a parenting issue. Nothing is wrong with me, I have no social problems; most of the kids in my school like me.

-Now I used to have a rant here, but declared I wouldn't use it.-

BUT, to Dusty926, if you want to be less scared, play the game without headphones and take it slow. When I played, I dreaded going to different rooms, so I took the time to devise plans on where to hid and such. That way, when you encounter a monster, your prepared; when your prepared, you won't panic as much. I feel that playing with a friend reduces the feel of the game way too much, but if you really need to, do it

[Bridge]

I've played M+ games with my dad, who also abused me (not technically, but almost) since I was about 6. I played every GTA, Duke Nukem, Doom, etc. He even cursed a few times! I did a play-through of Amnesia while I was 13. Games do not influence how your act, nor affect your mental sanity or health. If they do, it is a parenting issue. Nothing is wrong with me, I have no social problems; most of the kids in my school like me.

-Now I used to have a rant here, but declared I wouldn't use it.-

BUT, to Dusty926, if you want to be less scared, play the game without headphones and take it slow. When I played, I dreaded going to different rooms, so I took the time to devise plans on where to hid and such. That way, when you encounter a monster, your prepared; when your prepared, you won't panic as much. I feel that playing with a friend reduces the feel of the game way too much, but if you really need to, do it

This part mystifies me. What does "not technically, but almost" mean?

[nemesis567]

#2: Not sure, never watched any.

You're the first.

[Prelauncher]

I have not read the entire thread but I'd like to say something.
Like people mentioned earlier; the studies on wether on not violent games are to be held guilty for children commiting horrible things are often highly debatable. But no matter what, violent games are never good for anybody, even though most of us who have played violent games don't turn out to become psychopaths doesn't mean that we have not been affected by the violence.
But the thing is, people aren't more violent now then they were before. Yes we see more violence in younger ages now than before but this violence has always been blamed on something: violent tv, violent music and now violent games. There is always something to blame, but I think we overlook who the real reason for the violent young people: The parents.
One of the main reasons this violence is bad parenting. They leave their children to the digital babysitter and then they blame something else for all their childrens wrongdoings instead of asking themselves, What did I do wrong as a parent?