Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Did You Know That...

Subject Under Discussion.

I read this article in GameInformer around the beginning of this month. Needless to say, I was quite furious over the whole matter, sputtering to anyone at Gamestop who would listen, along with a few customers. It's rather ridiculous to have such a game made. But I think the quote that got me over the most was something to the effect of "maybe we're not ready in this time period or maybe we never will be."

All I could help but think is, "Who is the sick mofo who would even think of creating a game out of such an event?" (of course, I think this about war games, too, but that's because I very much so sick of how many come out)

I've never been one for people making money off of tragedy events. Such as painters creating a picture of an eagle flying with the Twin Towers in the background with smoke erupting from their stacks while spray painted hands are on either side of the event (it was hard not to barf). It's hard to respect someone willing to make millions because of it (I'm well aware of people who create things for non-profit).

Some people are saying that it's perfectly fine, that, by re-creating it, we'll have more knowledge of the event than what the media was ever giving us. That it's okay to have it because all we're doing is only playing the fantasy, pretending. Sure, that's what a videogame does. But I'm finding it hard to show that invisible line that the creators so obviously crossed.

A friend told me that when events like this happen, he can only say that he's happy to see our Freedom is being displayed. What reasons could I have that can go against the creators right to make this video game? I've never really been a fan of the Grand Theft Auto, as hilarious as it may be to get life by having sex with prostitutes (and then killing them to get your money back), but there are some pretty a-okay games that happen to be mature.

And, though I don't play many shooters myself, I know that I enjoy watching those kinds of movies; it gives a nice sense of tension, urgency and (oh god, yes) blood. For the Gods sake, I'm basically livid that I can't pick up God of War II because, during Spring Break, I'll be home and unable to pick up my prized possession. And I'll wholly admit that that game isn't exactly child friendly--ripping off a griffin's wing, or twisting an eyeball from the socket of a cyborg, definitly can be considered mature.

So, where do we place that line? How do we pick and choose what's allowed to come out and be sold in our Target/Walmart/Gamestop/gaming department? Does every single game have to be played by our government in order to be a "valid game"? This kind of goes against what I've ever wanted.

We're already at a point where mature material has to be purchased by a 17-year-old with an ID, adult games aren't sold in regular stores and many believe that playing video games is the devil (I can't wait to meet those on the petition... *cracks knuckles*). There could possibly be something in the very near future that says even Mature games can't be sold because too many kids are getting a hold of the mature games since nobody really check IDs anymore (Gamestop is very adament about us doing this now).

It could all really go against what video gaming is all about. For Gods sake, the reason why I even pick up that controller is because it allows me to go to another dimension, to be a character I've always wanted to play--it's like living in the novels I adore so much. But one cannot always have the same games over and over, which is why people started to make games more realistic, more like the real life events and closer to home.

I guess I can't help but wonder if the creator ever felt guilty while making this "scandal", the hardest game to play ever (and it's not because of the controls).

And really, in the end, it's the person who buys the game that makes the decision. If you're worried about your child playing a video game, make sure you know what they're playing, explain the rules of why you'd rather not have that material in the house, and make sure that you have legit reasons that also go toward the movies and television--why is it okay to watch the same violence that they'll play? There isn't really a good comeback for that. Not really.

Also, go crap yourself MAVAV. I'm not going to whip out a gun just because I happen to like a little plastic 3-D rectangle in my grasp. If you're going to start spouting that, may as well throw away multiple items of destruction (squirt guns, laser guns, water balloons, any Disney movie (holy hell, some of them have crazy enemies), and anything before the fifties). May as well cut anything out of the forties as well, given the whole WWII thing.

Learn More. NOW YOU KNOW!

Random Fact: March 13, 1981 was the day the Brookhaven Bulletin published a story on employee William Higinbotham, speculating that he may have invented the first video game, with his tennis game of 1958 (Tennis for Two). March 13th rocks face! It's my birthday ^_~

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I still don't like violent games, movies or anything that destroys demeans woman and children. :)~
Where did you learn all this? NOt from me! Love you all the same.