Yesterday silence.

So yeah, I spent all of yesterday playing the original fallout game, in expectation of bethesda's rendering of the third installment hitting shop shelves in October.

I took a combat heavy character with the "good mannered" trait, my initial combat skills were crippled, but I could talk, barter and gamble like noone else. After some scientific exploits, a little persuasion and some hard work as a doctor, I leveled up and got acquainted with small arms.
I eventually turned into a compulsively gambling computer hacker that could blow a super mutants eyes out with a bolt of plasma at 50 feet.
But I ended up destroying both the military base and the cathedral with some hacking work, and lockpicking skills I picked when standing in front of the last locked door in the game.

Later in "real" life, I wanted to do a piece on that hammer-attack, but uncle beat me to that.

Assassins creed, part two

So, I did get it to work, runs perfectly now.
Other than the sometimes crappy console-camera, it handles sweet. Amazing game!

So ... yeah I pretty much wasted the entire day on that ... thank god for media center automatically recording anything worthwhile on TV so I don't even need to bother doing that.
There *is* also a feature that lets me schedule blog posts but I neglected to use that one. I am not sorry :p

I promise that the good and trusty current events in the UK post will be up tomorrow, maybe I'll snoop around the newspapers tonight and see if anything catches my eye.

Assassins creed

Trying to get it to work X(

It was great fun while it lasted ... stabbing crusaders in the back scaling buildings and all, but it just keeps crashing on me :(

I'll be blogging about something tomorrow.

Firebombing spree? blame it on video games.

So about a month ago, multiple verhicles ware set on fire by criminals with firebombs. Now, the confessed culprits are in custody and they blame ... grand theft auto IV, a video game.

what, "I didn't mean to, the video game made me do it!" ?

Seriously, at some point their parents should have told them that setting other peoples stuff on fire is a big no-no right? Should the store cashier not have been a little suspicious about some kid/kids checking out glass bottles, rags/fabric and lighter fluid? I'm not blaming the cashier, don't worry, he/she did her job and it is not a cashiers job to make sure kids are well brought-up.

This does show how easy it is to construct such a deadly weapon, all it takes is a trip to the local grocers according to the news report. In reality, a glass bottle of coleman fuel would make a rather crappy incendiary weapon, but they did their intended purpoe so I'll just keep that can of worms shut.

Now we can expect another run on GTA:IV, "it teaches our little ones to make molotovs, eeeek! Ban it! Ban it! Think of the children."

First off, minors shouldn't be playing that game, and parent should be taught the habit of checking esrb rating, (pegi.info for y'all brits), or even better: "what they play".
Secondly, where was all this stuff before? People have been doing some pretty (omitted) things since way before video games, and the games of ages past weren't quite the peacefull platform hopping, cuddely entertainment that people like Jack Thompson seem to think of it.

As a matter of fact, Cracked.com released an article about the worst games from before.
I guess release in 1995 meant that "phantasmagoria" didn't make the list (Video, not for the faint of hearth!)

A couple of kids who haven't been properly raised if you ask me ...

What they play.

Here's a little website I encountered just now: "what they play".

It is a site oriented at parents with information on contemporary video games. Warning them of extreme content, guiding them to a proper choice for a game for their children, as well as allowing the general public to write their own reviews aimed at informing parents.

I also spotted a nifty piece on how some children intend to circumvent the ratings of some games, and get a restricted game anyway. Answeres ran,ged from older friends or siblings (like alcohol), to a "dealing" doorman. Interesting stuff to say the least.

With the recent GTA:IV bonanza, I tought it might be interesting.
While I personally do not believe there is a link between violent video games and (increased) violent behavior, I will leave such judgement up to you when dealing with your children.

this is what I call video game violence.

A seven year old kid got beaten by his drunk dad with a video game controller. Not game-beaten, he was hit and poked (?), said father is currently being held for second-degree assault and resisting arrest.

I don't know if the video game can be held responsible for this outburst of violence, the drink, or the human element. Sure enough, you'll find people blaming any of them, or all of them.

video games normalize killing.

Violent video games have often been in the spotlight, often blamed for violent behavior of children. I've written a couple of posts on the subject as well.

Now, a new article by Omaha's KETV7 boasts that Indiana School of Medicine researchers put one (1!) brain scan of a kid who played a violent game next to one (1!) scan of a kid who played a non-violent game, and they noticed differences! (insert streak of hysteria here).

Yes, video games can trigger a physiological response, so can aromatherapy! And from the sound of it, these researchers didn't exactly go above and beyond themselves to find out exactly what happens to a population exposed to violent video games.

Be weary of false prophets, and scientists on a political mission!

non-violent video games harmless?

Okay, this is becoming little bit of a side-track to my main blogging, but this does fit into the line of posts concerning video games.

Many people have said that violent video games are a hazard to our children/society, many -including myself- have hailed the qualities of non-violent video games. But here's a little bit of a shocker: the dangers of non violent video games.

Playing a game of simulated tennis on your nintendo Wii, it's fun, nonviolent, and gets you a little excercise, that's great right?
Not so great it would appear.
People have reportedly suffered injuries after playing for extended periods of time, including neck and shoulder trauma. It should be obvious that the games themselves are not to blame. After all, would you start a fitness regimen by sprinting for five hours on a daily basis? That would also be harmful, but doesn't mean that sport is unhealthy.

Video games should be enjoyed in moderation, regardless of their (violent?) content; playing them for ten hours straight, that's just being plain silly!

Violent videogame saves life?

Following up on the last post:

It would appear that one Paxton Galvanek appied first aid to a car crash victim using techniques he learned from the game "America's Army"
Guess that'll stir up some controversy in the debate!

Article
Another article

Violent video games and music.

There's a problem with juvenile violence, both in the US and in the UK, as well as many other countries. As long as problems have existed, people have sought to blame someone (else) for such issues. Violent video games have often come under fire.

A myriad of violent media have been banned throughout history, from pen and paper RPG's such as dungeons and dragons, performances by Alice Cooper and Judas priest, as well as other musicians, video games, ... They were/are considered to be in bad taste, harmful to the people who were exposed to them. The FBI even raided a "shadowrun RPG" office once, because they were distributing material describing how to commit fraud ... in a world that existed only on a sheet of paper.

Authorities have often overreacted when it comes to "questionable" entertainment.

The current focus of this way of dealing with juvenile violence lies on violent rap music (extended: the entire genre of hiphop) and violent video games. Probably because that just happens to be what's "happening" with the youth of today. And I, being youthful and liking both violent music and violent games, am going to share my opinion on these media with you.

*Nerdy*
I've been playing violent games since I was six! The original prince of Persia, wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake ... I was there when sidescrollers were replaced by three dimensional environments in which to kill your opponent, I saw sprites get replaced by polygons, I witnessed the introduction of scripted AI, I was there!

Mind you: I didn't play just violent games. I loved theme park and simcity (2000), the latter I played recently (thank you dosbox), Used to play transport tycoon as well as many other business games. I found it amusing to build things in games, business empires, theme parks or military bases, I loved the logistics. Maybe that's why I never dug deep into real tine strategy games, always preferred the turn based variants that allowed for much more economy. I loved the civilization series, got alpha centauri lying around somewhere and I've got space empires 5 on my hard disk. Also loved the sims, but got bored after while.

I also loved Deus ex, greatest game ever in my opinion. Violence is strictly optional in that game. You can get through the entire game without pulling a trigger, and only one character has to die. (but this can be accomplished without physical force). Especially early on, you'll be commended for using a minimal force approach.
But this is one of the best examples of games that demand you make certain moral choices. You do get to choose who lives and who dies. Soldiers, civilians, world leaders ... and you have to deal with the consequences.

Some of my favorite games are devoid of violence.

I loved playing Gears of war while it lasted: It had great immersion and amazing action-packed scenes. Yes, it's bloody, and you can't join a multipleyer match without getting chainsawed in half a couple of times, during wich your screen is covered in bloodsplatter. It doesn't bother me, I'm in it for the fun.

Another game I loved was bioshock, homage to system shock, this is a real shooter, you cannot advance far without killing a lot of characters. This doesn't contain so much graphic violence in the main gameplay. Little blood, a couple of scary scenes. The little sisters are a little bit disturbing, but the harvesting process was "tuned down" in terms of "ickyness", so that's not all that bad.

One highly disturbing scene I found is the part where you have to kill Andrew Ryan. This one kill is different than the ones leading up to the event. He's not a braindead splicer (zombie), he's a conscious human being who puts up no fight whatshowever, but you have to kill him -against your will- anyway (this happens in a cutscene, you don't control your character during these events). Still this scene had me on the edge of vomiting, you can watch the entire thing on youtube, just look up "Andrew Ryan".

And that's the big issue: Some of the best games simply are violent.
*/nerdy*

How do we handle that? Kids want to have fun, if these violent games get good reviews on account of them being really enjoyable, they will want to play them! I liked to play carmageddon when it was still controversial. Not because I liked running over pedestrians, but because it was a fun game.
Games are rated for a very good reason, the esrb provides parents with a relatively objective system that allows them to see the worst of a games content in a glance. If you have children and you don't play games yourself, read their warning labels! If you can't be there to educate your children on how to handle the content of a game, make sure they don't get their hands on games that would require such guidance.

I was taught not to resort to violence by my parents, and that worked! I am far from a violent person. A know-it-all megalomaniac, sure, but not a violent one. My friends have told me on several occasions that they couldn't possibly imagine me angry. I've never picked a fight with anybody, nor do I ever feel like settling disputes in a violent fashion. Clearly, having games as a passtime has not resulted in my being a violent person.

I've been playing violent games for 15 years, and I'm pascifist!

What about music?
I said I like violent music, that's true, but it's not rap. I love Power metal with a passion, as well as many other genres of metal and rock music. This hasn't kept me from loving classical music or soft rock either. My love for Queen predates me discovering Sabaton by about ten years!

Sabaton is a power metal band who like to glorify great battles of the past, the second wold wars D-Day, stalingrad, the first deployment of uclear weapons, the Fall of Berlin, as well as the Vietnam war, the Falkland war ...
Listening to their music on a semi-daily basis hasn't inspired me to joing the military ...

The music gets ever so more "graphic" if you listen to Manowar. Listen to "hail and kill" for a little while.
In the end, Joey sings:

"Rip their flesh
Burn their hearts
Stab them in the eyes
Rape their women as they cry
Kill their servants
Burn their homes
Till there's no blood left to spill
Hail and Kill
Power and dominion are taken by the will
By divine right hail and kill"

But my most profound love for this 20 year old music hasn't cultivated violence in me. As a matter of fact, it calms me down and helps me get my toughts back toghether when I'm irritated. Nor has the song "pleasure slave" from the same album turned me into a sexual deviant.
Despite the screams of conservatives during the "filthy 15" era were screaming, Heavy metal hasn't caused the downfall of civillised society.

Scaremongerers have been wrong in the past.

Now, I'm not a huge fan of violent rap, but frankly, I don't see why it would be so different. True, songs about dealing drugs and theft are much easier t act out in real life than a song that calls to ride a dragon into battle and fight with valor, but a well raised kid can see that neither one is a great goal to spend your life trying to accomplish.

Is there a connection between the prevalence of crime, and music that "talks" about it, or even glorifies it? Rap music has traditionally been about what's going on on the street, so the relation may very well be real, but in the other direction than proclaimed by scaremongerers.
Could music which glorifies crime push a kid into a life of crime?
Probably, but not just any kid. It may seem pretty glamorous, but any kids who's been half-properly raised knows better than that.

The kids who end up in a life of crime, are kids who weren't raised by their parents. Kids who grew up in front of a TV, with no parents, or parent's who set a bad example. Stuck in violent schools and living in high-crime areas, where criminal activity such as dealing drugs offers better prospects than a 9.2.5 occupation, chances of getting caught are considered negligable and jail isn't percieved as scary.

The most influencial people in a persons life, are it's educators. It's parents and teachers. I believe that giving children a loving enviroment to grow up in, and education and a future will go much further than banning or restricting certain violent media. It sure is a lot more work than simply blaming somthing entirely different, but I'll tell you it'll work a great deal better!

Please share your thoughts and oppinions on the matter, how do you feel about children being exposed to potentially harmful material?