This is once again another case of a group of parents thinking that the government should help them fight what they believe is 'a great evil'. I admit that if it was recreational drugs, liquor, or guns, I would be in favor it banning it's sale to kids, but the persecution of video games as the root of all evil is ludicrous and over simplified. Video games can show some bad things, but that does not mean that they are the cause of it's real world counterpart. So drop your post hoc ergo proptor hoc, and think once in a while.
- Status
TheKurrgan
Distinguished
- Sep 16, 2008
- 147
- 0
- 18,630
I dont follow what this would accomplish? It seems to be a waste of legislation given that there are existing laws in place for these the same as movies. That said, if they are going to treat it like porn, will retailers be required to posses the same type of license to be able to distribute video games as you would require to distribute porn? If so it sounds like this is just another way the state can add a tax without calling it one by requiring retailers to pay licensing fees to be able to sell the video games legally. Which if you figure for wal mart alone this would represent a huge chunk of revenue for the failing state of california. Not to mention all the others who sell video games. Looks to me they are trying to create themselves a cash cow.
However, I believe that almost everything comes down to money, so perhaps I'm misguided.
I'm old enough to buy anything, so I dont personally care, but I cant find logic in this.
However, I believe that almost everything comes down to money, so perhaps I'm misguided.
I'm old enough to buy anything, so I dont personally care, but I cant find logic in this.
simple_inhibition
Distinguished
- Jun 7, 2008
- 29
- 0
- 18,580
i just love the fact that a government for the people, by the people is now raising our children. now dont get me wrong, im all for protecting our children from things such as violence, porn, ect, however that is the responsibility of the parent, not the government.
neiroatopelcc
Distinguished
- Oct 3, 2006
- 639
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]Article[/nom]The state also accused the appeals court of wrongfully pushing its requirements of direct links between games and physical/psychological harm to minors.[/citation]
So the state is saying that demanding proof is wrong? What a sick twisted world.
So the state is saying that demanding proof is wrong? What a sick twisted world.
guanyu210379
Distinguished
- Mar 30, 2007
- 649
- 0
- 19,260
Hmmm... in the end... all games that involve violence, killing, dominating or sexually activity to human-liked objects will be completely banned or forbidden..
No :
1. First person shooting.
2. RPG with human-liked characters.
3. RTS with any human-liked units.
4. Run and jump with human-liked characters.
5. Hack and slash with human-liked characters.
6. Turn based strategy with human-based characters.
In the near future will developt to :all games that involve violence, killing, dominating or sexually activity to human-liked and animal-liked objects will be completely banned or forbidden..
The only game left will be 8 bit tetris and packman
No :
1. First person shooting.
2. RPG with human-liked characters.
3. RTS with any human-liked units.
4. Run and jump with human-liked characters.
5. Hack and slash with human-liked characters.
6. Turn based strategy with human-based characters.
In the near future will developt to :all games that involve violence, killing, dominating or sexually activity to human-liked and animal-liked objects will be completely banned or forbidden..
The only game left will be 8 bit tetris and packman
[citation][nom]Adidaz[/nom]Ok ....they should ban also news on tv because they show violence also. I always wondered how come there is no sexual acts in video games (show it all )but chopping heads and killing people GTA style is normal.[/citation]
Well that's because sexual content is more explicit than violence.
Mainly cuz sex is just a sensitive topic, amongst many cults and societies, whereas violence has become sort of a norm now. No srry we can't have the "modern" way of teenage pregnancies become the norm...
Well that's because sexual content is more explicit than violence.
Mainly cuz sex is just a sensitive topic, amongst many cults and societies, whereas violence has become sort of a norm now. No srry we can't have the "modern" way of teenage pregnancies become the norm...
[citation][nom]pharge[/nom]I fully agree with you (well... at least most of them). My only problem is... it appeasrs to me that there are more and more parents are not actually parenting their kids responsibly these days?... that does not really rationalize this case. However it does look worrisome to me.[/citation]
That's because half the parents work... which really means that they can't give their children proper care and training, which leads to the govt. stepping in.
That's because half the parents work... which really means that they can't give their children proper care and training, which leads to the govt. stepping in.
eccentric909
Distinguished
- Oct 4, 2006
- 228
- 0
- 18,830
[citation][nom]rooket[/nom]I don't have a problem with this law although it makes relatively no sense at all to have this law in place in the USA, let alone California of all states in the union. I don't have a problem with it primarily because there's better things to spend money on than stupid video games. And also the kids could be doing better things with their time than sitting in front of a tv set. These days, kids spend dramatically more time playing these things than I did when I was in school. Sure I had a nintendo and whatnot but I wasn't vegetating in front of it. I was studying up until I went to bed a lot of the time and I was just barely on the honor roll. But at least I learned more than these kids do these days.[/citation]
Is it any of your business what other people's kids are doing in their spare time, if it's not directly harming you?
This law isn't going to make kids not be lazy, or prevent parents from supplying their kids the games they want.
Is it any of your business what other people's kids are doing in their spare time, if it's not directly harming you?
This law isn't going to make kids not be lazy, or prevent parents from supplying their kids the games they want.
eccentric909
Distinguished
- Oct 4, 2006
- 228
- 0
- 18,830
[citation][nom]cj_online[/nom]Well that's because sexual content is more explicit than violence.Mainly cuz sex is just a sensitive topic, amongst many cults and societies, whereas violence has become sort of a norm now. No srry we can't have the "modern" way of teenage pregnancies become the norm...[/citation]
You do know that teenage pregnancy rates have been on the decline since the 90's in the US?
You also know that Europe has lower teen pregnancy rates than the US, but most of their countries aren't nearly as puritan about sex as the US?
I don't believe your correlation between sexual content and teen pregnancy has any affect on one another, nor has it ever been proven.
You do know that teenage pregnancy rates have been on the decline since the 90's in the US?
You also know that Europe has lower teen pregnancy rates than the US, but most of their countries aren't nearly as puritan about sex as the US?
I don't believe your correlation between sexual content and teen pregnancy has any affect on one another, nor has it ever been proven.
bosqueteer
Distinguished
- Feb 15, 2010
- 2
- 0
- 18,510
it will be like the labeling of heavy metal disks 20 years ago. sales of violent games will surely rise just because they'll be labeled
[citation][nom]Eccentric909[/nom]You do know that teenage pregnancy rates have been on the decline since the 90's in the US?You also know that Europe has lower teen pregnancy rates than the US, but most of their countries aren't nearly as puritan about sex as the US?I don't believe your correlation between sexual content and teen pregnancy has any affect on one another, nor has it ever been proven.[/citation]
No need for proof, when it's so obvious. btw, talking about USA, not europe.
No need for proof, when it's so obvious. btw, talking about USA, not europe.
matt314
Distinguished
- Mar 5, 2010
- 56
- 0
- 18,580
Good! I wouldn't want my kids to play these games. I didn't think minors could buy Mature rated video games, but if they can i'm glad they are stepping up to restrict this. Sure parents have a responsibility, but if a kid can go buy GTA himself... it can appear suitable to a parent that isn't knowledgeable in video games.
Gaming websites and magazine can deny it all they want but there is a correlation between violent games and movies and aggressive behavior. And speaking of movies, no one complains that minors aren't allowed to go see R rated movies. What's the difference??
Gaming websites and magazine can deny it all they want but there is a correlation between violent games and movies and aggressive behavior. And speaking of movies, no one complains that minors aren't allowed to go see R rated movies. What's the difference??
matt314
Distinguished
- Mar 5, 2010
- 56
- 0
- 18,580
[citation][nom]Eccentric909[/nom]Is it any of your business what other people's kids are doing in their spare time, if it's not directly harming you?This law isn't going to make kids not be lazy, or prevent parents from supplying their kids the games they want.[/citation] No it won't stop parents supplying kids with violent video games. Just like parent can let their kids smoke, drink or whatever else. Heck, kids can still pirate whatever games they want! You are missing the point completely. This is to help parents who don't want their kids playing those games, but may not have the knowledge to properly assess what their kids are playing. If you 14 year old son can go to the mall alone, he can most definitely buy a game and if it happens to be M rated, unless parents manage to catch their kid playing the game while doing something unsuitable, they will never know. This is just like kids being able to go to the movies alone, but not being allowed to go see R rated movies without their parent present. The decision still lies in the parent's hands! It simply helps parents give their child space and freedom without having to worry they will be unnecessarily exposed to unsuitable content.
Guys, this isn't just about making selling mature games illegal to kids. If this law is pasted that means all games are no longer protected under the first amendment. Freedom of speech goes out the window allowing the government to ban whatever they want from gaming. The industry will suffer from the ban, games like Left 4 Dead and Mass Effect will be seen as too graphic to be sold. This law scares me as a gamer. If the highest court in the US passes this law it is absolute until repealed and that hardly happens. Other countries will fallow suit and games will be crippled. This isn't over dramatizing this, this is what WILL happen if this passes.
The video game industry is very responsible of ratings with their video games. This proposal is rediculous. If you as a parent are not responsible enough to safeguard your child from things you do not want them to be exposed to at an early age that is noone's fault but your own. Because a video game visually exposes you to violence is no reason to ban them. If thats the case let's ban action movies too. While we're at it, let's ban history classes too. It is not ethical to try and place a ban on such a thing that is occuring everywhere. Children don't get violent because of video games. They get violent because of the way they are treated and raised. This is a way to divert problems that are initially caused by the shortcomings of the parents themselves raising their children.
On another note, Granted that I am a gamer I am not biased to just this side. I do agree that children of a certain age should not play certain games because of their content. But this is my responsibility to my children not the government's responsibility. For all of you that want to argue the point that they can't regulate what goes on in other homes, that is a tedious issue and hardly matters. If they are exposed to it once so what. Its not going to be the last time they are exposed to violence and they're not going to turn into a demon seed because they saw it so give it a rest.
Video games give people more than anyone cares to admit. I'd like to share an article with you all that are willing to read it about a couple statistics of people that play video games. All rights go to www.economist.com
Science and technology
BabbageIn praise of video gamesWhy World of Warcraft is good for you
Sep 13th 2010, 15:40 by N.L. | LONDON
VIDEO games have been blamed for the ills of the world. Parents worry that violent games make their children antisocial, violent, shallow, and obese, and are breeding a generation that cannot sustain their concentration. Screen time is routinely limited, much to the chagrin of their keyboard-pounding offspring.
Help is at hand in the form of a new study from cognitive scientists at the University of Rochester. As we report in this week's issue of The Economist, this suggests that video gamers make faster and more accurate decisions. The work is published in Current Biology. What was particularly interesting was that the faster reaction times of the video gamers could be acquired by non-video gamers in 50 hours of training over a few weeks. But for the benefits to accrue, they had to play a particular sort of game.
Only those who played fast-moving action video games such as "Call of Duty 2" and "Unreal Tournament" saw an improvement in their decision-making skills. Rather ironically, players of "The Sims 2", a game where one has to decide how to organise an entire simulated world, did not benefit this way. Those trained with action video-games were 25% faster at coming to a conclusion, and answered just as many questions correctly.
The scientists conclude that video-game players develop an enhanced sensitivity to what is going on around them, and this may help with activities such as multitasking, driving, reading small print, navigation and keeping track of friends or children in a crowd. The precise neural mechanism for this effect is still unknown. What is known, however, is that people make decisions based on probabilities, which are constantly being calculated and refined in their heads—something called “probabilistic inference”. The brain collects small pieces of information, eventually gathering enough to make an accurate decision. When driving a car, for example, these many probabilities will be collated to make decisions such as whether or not to brake. The more efficient one is at collecting visual and auditory information, the faster a person can reach the threshold needed to make a decision.
Of course, parents can take heart from the fact that while the study does suggest some benefit in action video games, it does not imply that one must do nothing else. Nor, indeed, does the study compare the benefits of training on action video games with those of other activities that involve switching off the computer and getting a life.
On another note, Granted that I am a gamer I am not biased to just this side. I do agree that children of a certain age should not play certain games because of their content. But this is my responsibility to my children not the government's responsibility. For all of you that want to argue the point that they can't regulate what goes on in other homes, that is a tedious issue and hardly matters. If they are exposed to it once so what. Its not going to be the last time they are exposed to violence and they're not going to turn into a demon seed because they saw it so give it a rest.
Video games give people more than anyone cares to admit. I'd like to share an article with you all that are willing to read it about a couple statistics of people that play video games. All rights go to www.economist.com
Science and technology
BabbageIn praise of video gamesWhy World of Warcraft is good for you
Sep 13th 2010, 15:40 by N.L. | LONDON
VIDEO games have been blamed for the ills of the world. Parents worry that violent games make their children antisocial, violent, shallow, and obese, and are breeding a generation that cannot sustain their concentration. Screen time is routinely limited, much to the chagrin of their keyboard-pounding offspring.
Help is at hand in the form of a new study from cognitive scientists at the University of Rochester. As we report in this week's issue of The Economist, this suggests that video gamers make faster and more accurate decisions. The work is published in Current Biology. What was particularly interesting was that the faster reaction times of the video gamers could be acquired by non-video gamers in 50 hours of training over a few weeks. But for the benefits to accrue, they had to play a particular sort of game.
Only those who played fast-moving action video games such as "Call of Duty 2" and "Unreal Tournament" saw an improvement in their decision-making skills. Rather ironically, players of "The Sims 2", a game where one has to decide how to organise an entire simulated world, did not benefit this way. Those trained with action video-games were 25% faster at coming to a conclusion, and answered just as many questions correctly.
The scientists conclude that video-game players develop an enhanced sensitivity to what is going on around them, and this may help with activities such as multitasking, driving, reading small print, navigation and keeping track of friends or children in a crowd. The precise neural mechanism for this effect is still unknown. What is known, however, is that people make decisions based on probabilities, which are constantly being calculated and refined in their heads—something called “probabilistic inference”. The brain collects small pieces of information, eventually gathering enough to make an accurate decision. When driving a car, for example, these many probabilities will be collated to make decisions such as whether or not to brake. The more efficient one is at collecting visual and auditory information, the faster a person can reach the threshold needed to make a decision.
Of course, parents can take heart from the fact that while the study does suggest some benefit in action video games, it does not imply that one must do nothing else. Nor, indeed, does the study compare the benefits of training on action video games with those of other activities that involve switching off the computer and getting a life.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Lenovo Yoga book 9i vs. Asus Zenbook duo
- Started by szcad
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter