Jump to content

Rip holes in this please


Recommended Posts

I have a script for a short video I'm making debunking the most common "Gaes are evil" arguments. Me and another super logical friend have gone over it to make sure there are no holes in the logic, but numbers are great for this, so get ripping. Also, these are notes, and as such spelling and grammer are not really concerns.


Game Defence Video

Computer Games. aka. Video Games. Evil detesable creations designed to turn innocent children into desesatized criminals and murders. Games are nothing but racist, sexist, violent nazi puss so vile they corrupt everything that comes near, or so some would have you believe. My goal is to use logic, reason and experience to shoot down some of the more common myths and provide the truth about games and the claims made about them.

Before I start with the video, let me explain what this video is not. This video will not cite studies or delve into indervidual cases. The reason is that new studies are released all the time with varying results and degrees of science. From scientific studies by soicial scientists, to TVs super nanny throwing pens on the floor and claiming it proves games are evil. As for the cases, well, most are touchy subjects and are beyond the scope of this video.

Sexism and Racism

(and other forms of discrimination)

While not as loud as the violence crowd, discrimination has come up alot. The core argument is that games are sexist, racist, ablist ect because most game characters are white males aged 18-30. Often they will bring up some convincing looking statistic to back up their claim. While I will admit white men are more common in games, the argument doesn't mention the fact that most games have create a character modes, none human characters, faceless protaganist or even no protaganists at all, and that's not to mention the countless movie and TV licence games.

Another trick they use alot is a straw man argument, usually to claim games are sexist. They will show a female character like Ivy dressed in string and compare her to someone like Captain Price from call of duty. People who know games can easily see what they've done here. They are basicly compairing Baywatch to The Godfather and claiming it proves games are sexist, but when you compair these characters to their peers, you see that men are also scantaly clad pretty boys with buff bods on display that appeal to teenage girls. For every woman in a combat bikini there's a guy in tights and leather pants.

However, even if we accept that games are discrinating against certain people, the only solution would be to include token character who exist soley to get the quota up, and we all know how well that turns out.

*image of rochelle from L4D2


Ah yes. Violence, Gore, Blood and Guts. The good stuff. It doesn't come around as often as discrimination, but when it does it's usually a news story. From GTA to Modern Warfare. Hypocrasy and stupidity abound. We'll jump right in with age ratings.

People, usually pairents, have this issue with the level of violence in these kids toys. One problem there. They are not for kids! They have age ratings on them to tell you if a game is suitable for kids. Games are not all for kids. I don't know how many times it has to be said. There's no excuse for it. Even if you are some kind of hermit who doesn't know what numbers are, you still have no excuse for buying little tiny tim a game called Manhunter that has a cover resembeling a snuff film. They are rated 18 for a reason. I know I hammer the point into the ground here, but this argument comes up every single time and anyone who brings it up is official a bloody moron.

It's at this point they bring up the argument that kids play the games anyway round a friends house. Again. What does that have to do with anything other then proving your an idiot. If you leave your kids in the care of someone who can't look after them, then that's your fault, not the games.

Two of the most common arguments is that people will confuse the game for reality, and thus go on a killing spree, and that games train people to do such things. Given most games have you play a good guy surely this would be a good thing if it did happen? After all, there are alot of games about soldiers and super heroes saving the world and the like. Not that it matters though because it doesn't happen. Even the most realistic games at best have you remote controling a person via a controller or keyboard. Even if they didn't, most people don't have the skill, dexterity or toughness to crawl through vents, dive through lazer beams or take a few dozen bullets to the face and just walk it off. A trip to the gym would do more for your violence potential. This idea that people confuse games with reality also doesn't mention the abstract nature of games. How many people fire rockets at their own feet to jump high, or why aren't the hospitals full of kids who have smashed bricks over their heads looking for money?

That also raises the issue of bodies. If games do cause people to go on killing sprees, where are all the bodies? More then 25 million people have played the game Modern Warfare 2. Thats Twenty, Five, Million. That game is more popular then the beatles ever were. It also has one of the most violent, hard hitting and controvertial scenes in any medium. So, you would assume that with all the players you wouldn't be able to so much as go down to the shops without wading through the corpses of Modern Warfare 2 players, but that is not the case.

I could rant all day about this stuff, but all these arguments have 1 thing common. They don't know gaming. They don't know the lingo, they don't know the culture, they don't know the conventions... As a result they see gamers as outsiders who speak in tounges and perform strange rituals, laughing at the unspeakable horrors on screen. Of course, those who know games know what they are talking about, and know that the anti games propogander is rediculous and absurd. This video won't change anyones mind though, as those who hate games are defined by that hate. Without thier camapaigns against games, Jack Thompson and Keith Vaz are nobodies, famenists would need to put more effort in finding things to blog about, and alot of people would lose alot of money.

I hoped you found this video informitive. Bye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really find anything immediately wrong with it, but I do have to say I love you for mentioning rocket jumping in the realism bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Julius Quasar

I don't see a single flaw in your logic. 

These stupid, self-righteous asshat video game ban advocates need to seriously f*** off.

I'm soooo sick of their bulls***.

I've know plenty of kids who watched slasher flicks, and played extremely violent video games, and they didn't grow up to be Charlie Manson or Ted Bundy, and creeps like that didn't become the way they are because of a violent video game.  You think Osama Bin Laden, the rest of Al Quida, the Taliban, Kim Jong Il, Saddam Hussein, Pol Pot, Josef Satlin, Nakita Kruschev, or the Nazis turned out the way they did because they played too many or any violent video games?  Hell No!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't find anything particular to put my finger on. And that's nothing less then impressive. :yes:

There's one advice I can give though. While the script itself seems to be well enough put together to inspire some confidence among the viewers to your credibility, trust is not something which one can have to much of. People have easier for seeing a point if it's brought up by someone not completely faceless, and giving a short introduction about who you are and why you decided to make this video, might not be a bad idea. That would be my 0.02$

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...