12-16-2006, 12:52 PM

I've never been able to bring myself to play games depicting WW@ or any other real-life war/conflict. I think it makes light of those who really fought and sacrificed in those wars and is a disgrace to them. Aming these horrific events a form of entertainment is not only disrespectful, they also make light of these horrific events in the minds of young people who need to understand and appreciate those events for what they were and what they meant.

I think for younger players, it distorts their view of WW2, and for older players it's disrescpectful. I won't as far as to say all war games are wrong, though one could make an argument in that way. I think fictional conflict games are ok as long as young players understand it is fiction and are taught the reality of these kinds of conflicts.

I brought this up because my 10 year old nephew plays these game a lot. He was a soldier for Halloween and has been making references to shooting people he doesn't like. It's very disturbing.

12-16-2006, 02:04 PM

What would be more disturbing is if we were no longer allowed to play said games because it upsets people.

Go go GOP.

12-16-2006, 02:21 PM

What disturbs me is that a 10 year old is allowed to play those games, that's very irresponsible on the parents part. He is clearly too young to distinguish from game and what's OK in real life, especially if he is making references to shooting people he doesn't like. If I were you I would definitely talk to his parents and him about this game, explain to the parents that they should not be allowing a child this young to be playing what is surly a T or M rated game the ratings are there for a reason! Explain to him that it's not OK to go around talking about shooting people simply because he doesn't like them, or at all for that matter.

12-16-2006, 03:47 PM

What would be more disturbing is if we were no longer allowed to play said games because it upsets people.

Go go GOP.

I never said anything about banning them, I'm questioning the moral and ethical ascepts of them. And what is "go, go GOP"? And it's not just about upsetting people, it's about respect and the impact on future generations. If I went to every WW@ vet alive and they said it was ok, there's still issues at hand that would make it morally wrong.

What disturbs me is that a 10 year old is allowed to play those games,

Me too, but some people just don't listen no matter what you do. My other point is, at the point when you're mature enough to play, you should also realize how it trivializes the real War by turning real death and sacrifice into entertainment.

12-16-2006, 03:52 PM

no offense, but it really annoys me when people say "video games are going to cause my kid to do this." well videogames are not to blame, it is probably just that a kid is tapped in the head, the games are meant for fun and not real, so just play them an enjoy them.

12-16-2006, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by fleurya

I've never been able to bring myself to play games depicting WW@ or any other real-life war/conflict. I think it makes light of those who really fought and sacrificed in those wars and is a disgrace to them. Aming these horrific events a form of entertainment is not only disrespectful, they also make light of these horrific events in the minds of young people who need to understand and appreciate those events for what they were and what they meant.

I think for younger players, it distorts their view of WW2, and for older players it's disrescpectful. I won't as far as to say all war games are wrong, though one could make an argument in that way. I think fictional conflict games are ok as long as young players understand it is fiction and are taught the reality of these kinds of conflicts.

I brought this up because my 10 year old nephew plays these game a lot. He was a soldier for Halloween and has been making references to shooting people he doesn't like. It's very disturbing.

Not really. I figure if my 88 year old uncle (A Pearl Harbor Survivor and Wounded WW2 vet) plays them, they can't be that bad. I think if kids end up getting the "wrong idea" from violent video games it mostly the parents fault for not keeping track of what their kids do, a video game alone is not going to turn a kid into a psycho.

12-16-2006, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by baggss

Not really. I figure if my 88 year old uncle (A Pearl Harbor Survivor and Wounded WW2 vet) plays them, they can't be that bad. I think if kids end up getting the "wrong idea" from violent video games it mostly the parents fault for not keeping track of what their kids do, a video game alone is not going to turn a kid into a psycho.

exactly... people just are trying to find a way to blame something other than themselves when something goes wrong with their children. its the truth

12-16-2006, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by spiccy

What would be more disturbing is if we were no longer allowed to play said games because it upsets people.

Go go GOP.

No doubt.

Originally Posted by brianj08

no offense, but it really annoys me when people say "video games are going to cause my kid to do this." well videogames are not to blame, it is probably just that a kid is tapped in the head, the games are meant for fun and not real, so just play them an enjoy them.

It annoys me as well. Control what your kids watch/listen/play and stop trying to blame entertainment for your lack of parenting skills.

Originally Posted by baggss

Not really. I figure if my 88 year old uncle (A Pearl Harbor Survivor and Wounded WW2 vet) plays them, they can't be that bad. I think if kids end up getting the "wrong idea" from violent video games it mostly the parents fault for not keeping track of what their kids do, a video game alone is not going to turn a kid into a psycho.

:black:

12-16-2006, 04:59 PM

i grew up on bugs bunny and roadrunner cartoons and you don't see me dropping acme anvils on anyone.

well, not today anyway.

12-16-2006, 06:20 PM

I think you're all missing the point here. Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned my nephews violent behavior, because I'm not just talking about that.

How about this: if I made a game called "Tip the Towers" where the goal is to hijack a 747 and flying it into buildings in NYC and socre more points for the more people you kill, would you play it?

Society has a way of thinking things that happened long ago are less important than things that happened yesterday. What I'm talking about is people, not just kids, replacing what they should know and learn from WW2 with "boy WW2 was fun, lots of action and people got to shoot people!". That is very over the top, but that's what I'm getting at. Not completely replacing it, but taking away from the seriousness of the war.

I just don't think people fully appreciate major events in the past as much, and from that, not understand the consequences of present and future violent and war-like behavior. If you fully appreciate what happened in past wars, you're less likely to resort to those actions now. But maybe "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it" idea is going further than what I want to say.

The same logic goes for movies, but some movies can be good. I think that "Pearl Harbor" was a little too romantic about the whole ordeal, thereby romanticizing the event. In contrast, I think everyone should see "Saving Private Ryan" because it offers a much more grim and real view of D-day and can actually help a person appreciate the seriousness of the event, and war in gneeral. You can't get that from a game which is strictly entertainment.

12-16-2006, 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by fleurya

I think you're all missing the point here. Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned my nephews violent behavior, because I'm not just talking about that.

How about this: if I made a game called "Tip the Towers" where the goal is to hijack a 747 and flying it into buildings in NYC and socre more points for the more people you kill, would you play it?

Society has a way of thinking things that happened long ago are less important than things that happened yesterday. What I'm talking about is people, not just kids, replacing what they should know and learn from WW2 with "boy WW2 was fun, lots of action and people got to shoot people!". That is very over the top, but that's what I'm getting at. Not completely replacing it, but taking away from the seriousness of the war.

I just don't think people fully appreciate major events in the past as much, and from that, not understand the consequences of present and future violent and war-like behavior. If you fully appreciate what happened in past wars, you're less likely to resort to those actions now. But maybe "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it" idea is going further than what I want to say.

The same logic goes for movies, but some movies can be good. I think that "Pearl Harbor" was a little too romantic about the whole ordeal, thereby romanticizing the event. In contrast, I think everyone should see "Saving Private Ryan" because it offers a much more grim and real view of D-day and can actually help a person appreciate the seriousness of the event, and war in gneeral. You can't get that from a game which is strictly entertainment.

To be honest with you if "Tip the Towers" was a good game then yes, I would play it. That being said I still wouldn't want someone who is not mature enough for it to be playing it. You need to be able to distinguish between the seriousness of the real thing and the game world.

I don't think that war games or movies take away from the seriousness of their subject at all. If anything it gets people more interested in it. There times where I have played a game about something I knew nothing about and then wanted to know more about it so I researched, same with movies.

Just as a side note, are you or is your father a veteran of WWII? This seems to be a very personal subject for you.

12-16-2006, 09:06 PM

Most WW2 games are historicly accurate and help to teach the people who were not there about what happened, how it happened, and why. The games today are more about the good of world war 2 and are infact informational. IF you read what you are suppose to read about the captions it gives your information and does not disrespect the people who actually fought in the war but gives you more respect for them because you now know how hard it was for them to come home or how hard it was for them to look danger in the eye and die for their country (all members of all countries not just the united states which is portrayed the most in the games).

The concept of Tip the Towers is a completely different and truely un-moral. If a video game was to be created about september 11th 2001, then It would not focus on the flight of planes and the pure act of killing. This is not what the ww2 games portray and it is not what the 9/11 game would portray either. If there was to be a game about the attacks on the United States on that day the game would be something like "9/11 - FDNY" where you were a firefighter, and you got more points for the more lives you saved, not killed. 99% of video games is a good vs. evil with the player on the good side, there is also a plot, and a good length of game play. "Tip the Towers" would not be a fun game and certainly does not have a plot and is not a classic good vs evil set up. Its just evil standing alone.

however I would answer your question... and re-instate what ben said. If the game was good, I would play it, but I would not let my kids play.

12-16-2006, 09:19 PM

No, I don't have any immediate family Vets. My grandfather was a Korean War vet. It's just something I've been thinking more about as the games get more real and I wanted to know if anyone felt the same. I was thinking one way, and wanted to know if anyone had opposing views with good logic behind it.

I think Benjamin and PowerbookG4 made some good points. I suppose, like movies and other games, different people can play them and come away with differing experiences; good or bad. I suppose I'll have to try the game to see how I'll feel about it. Thanks.

12-16-2006, 10:54 PM

My grandfather fought in World War 2. He was a pilot, and out of the 20 or so men who went to war with him, he was one of the two returning. He went and fought for his country in its time of great need. My mother is a child phycologist who deals with violent children who play video games. There is a clear link between some of these children who play video games and there apparent violent behaviour. And you cannot say that the parents of these children are irresponsible, you could have the best parents in the world and that is not a garuntee that the children will be good and not be exposed to violent video games somewhere else. Now you must think of the actual video games, these are games in which you kill people of whom you hate, and recieve money and or respect or a certain level of achievement for it. What kind of message is this sending children? Now you must think about that these games are based on real life situations, where real men and women lost their lives. In WW2 games we are taught to kill japanese soldiers, along with other nationalities, and what type of message is this sending to young people who can not interpret the line between reality and game playing?

12-17-2006, 12:43 AM

Originally Posted by macAttack

My mother is a child phycologist who deals with violent children who play video games. There is a clear link between some of these children who play video games and there apparent violent behaviour. And you cannot say that the parents of these children are irresponsible, you could have the best parents in the world and that is not a garuntee that the children will be good and not be exposed to violent video games somewhere else. Now you must think of the actual video games, these are games in which you kill people of whom you hate, and recieve money and or respect or a certain level of achievement for it. What kind of message is this sending children? Now you must think about that these games are based on real life situations, where real men and women lost their lives. In WW2 games we are taught to kill japanese soldiers, along with other nationalities, and what type of message is this sending to young people who can not interpret the line between reality and game playing?

Wile I agree with you that some of these kids have issues, I don't believe for a second that anywhere near a preponderance do. Limiting what games can even be made because of what someone might do after playing it is ridiculous. Not creating a game that I, as an adult, may want to play because some 13 year old snot head might get the wrong idea and try to hijack an airplane or shoot up his school is silly. If Junior is considering those actions he's got bigger issues in life than what video game he plays.

It's a parents responsibility to teach their children the difference between a video game and the real world. Sadly, many parents flake on that responsibility, or just don't care. After-all it's easier to let your kid sit in front of a TV or PC all day and play "shoot em up games" (or surf the web, or meet perverts on MySpace or look at porn etc) than to actually take an active roll in their lives.

I'm all for the Video Game ratings system, but it only works if parents enforce it and keep track of what their "gift from god" is doing in his spare time with his bedroom door closed. I'd support a movement for a licensing requirement, complete with a written test and oral board, before anyone should be allowed to have kids rather than support a ban on video games.

And for the record, I would play the "Attack the Towers" game, I always like flying games.