Halo 2 is clearly a fantasy, and the "world of tomorrow" seems, in a large way, to be apocalyptic. Xenophobic aliens who wish to destroy humanity, or to activate rings which will erase all sentient life in 25 000 lightyears? This hardly seems an accurate view of the future. Halo 2 cannot possibly be justified by suggesting that it gives an accurate view of the "world of tomorrow".
On the other hand, gore is extremely limited. Everything is in bright colours, which lends to the disconnection from reality. It is, as I said, clearly fantasy. It has a cooperative mode (which, in my mind, is the best improvement made on Halo). Any of these, I feel, would justify its use by children who demonstrated that they were mature enough to handle the concepts (as torture and genocide are implied or demonstrated on-screen during the game.)
Re: All I can say is WTF!!!!!nightwng2000March 31 2006, 15:56:51 UTC
Actually, I don't recall anyone here taking the idea of cartoon violence into consideration. TV and movies, yes, with the counterargument of "not interactive". But cartoon violence in video games... not that I recall.
I don't know about you, but that did escape me. But then, I'm not overly familiar with the Loony Toons games or others like them.
Though I am familiar with Pokemon, Yu-gi-oh, and Duel Masters (among a few others).
Re: All I can say is WTF!!!!!lordlundarMarch 31 2006, 18:16:56 UTC
To say nothing of the Ratchet and clank series. The premise of that one is "big guns for big boom". That sort of game would be most at risk, despite it's comical nature, and is one of the closest things to Looney Toon violence in modern gameplay.
I believe that I may have said something to that effect.
It's an old story, and it's not going to go away any time soon. The difference between cartoon violence and graphic violence is not a matter of degree. It's a matter of personal preference. I truly believe that that is the entire impetus for the anti-game movement. They're trying to legislate taste.
Awwwwwww, that is the cutest little kitty . . . ZOMG it bites! The venom is going into my brain! AUUUGH!
I would think that the cartoon violence in the Elmer Fudd type cartoons is worse that games, being far more fake and not showing any negative recourse. In today's Uber-Violent games, you can argue that all of them show the violence as having consequences.
that's why I never understood all the bs around GTA, you'd think politicians would like the fact that, no matter how depraved and skilled you are, the "man" will eventually slap you down, even if they have to bring in tanks to do it.
Ahhh yes. One does wonder why no one was able to bring "vauge wording" as a list of reasons to oppose video game legislation until now. And done so elegantly, too.
Who ever drew that connection is a genius. Wish we thought of that... ;)
Comments 74
It makes me cry if people are so stubborn to say things like that.
Reply
On the other hand, gore is extremely limited. Everything is in bright colours, which lends to the disconnection from reality. It is, as I said, clearly fantasy. It has a cooperative mode (which, in my mind, is the best improvement made on Halo). Any of these, I feel, would justify its use by children who demonstrated that they were mature enough to handle the concepts (as torture and genocide are implied or demonstrated on-screen during the game.)
Reply
DAMN IT! Are they really THAT FUCKING STUPID!!!!.
ARRGHH! Nevermind.
I'm gonna go back to playing Elder SCrolls.
Thanks for the story dennis, great to hear that the bill is dead for the moment.
night all
Reply
I don't know about you, but that did escape me. But then, I'm not overly familiar with the Loony Toons games or others like them.
Though I am familiar with Pokemon, Yu-gi-oh, and Duel Masters (among a few others).
nightwng2000
Reply
We used to, a long time ago, but it sounded silly.
We did examine how the Sims would qualify for most of these bills, because you can kill your sims in cruel, depraved, and heinous ways...
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
It's an old story, and it's not going to go away any time soon. The difference between cartoon violence and graphic violence is not a matter of degree. It's a matter of personal preference. I truly believe that that is the entire impetus for the anti-game movement. They're trying to legislate taste.
meep, meep, indeed...
Reply
I would think that the cartoon violence in the Elmer Fudd type cartoons is worse that games, being far more fake and not showing any negative recourse. In today's Uber-Violent games, you can argue that all of them show the violence as having consequences.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Who ever drew that connection is a genius. Wish we thought of that... ;)
Reply
Leave a comment