I almost completely agree with you, I'm not a gamer today but I was a
moderate gamer during the late 80's and 90's.
As you, I don't think that playing violent games does not increase
violence, in fact, if you compare the units sold of games such as
Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty against the violent actions motivated
by them I'm sure that the conclusion will be that there is no relation
between both issues.
I preferred playing (and still like) simulators but I also enjoyed
(and enjoy) shooters, hence I played Castle of Wolfstein, Doom, Doom
II, Quake, Quake II, GTA, GTA 2, GTA 3 and now I steal my wife some
minutes a week to play COD 4. I'm totally opposed to weapons and I
don't think that I'm a violent person (or at least not more violent
that before playing :) ).
In fact I think that the games we can can enjoy now are very good to
avoid violence, they are very real and you can see all the damage,
destruction and pain that those acts carry with them, I think that
some years ago it was not the same and you could not appreciate the
hard life of a soldier (just take Operation Flashpoint or COD 4) and
the effects of a war.
What I think is that the media has to publish something, they earn
money making news where news do not make themselves, so, if one
individual takes a knife and kills one another and there's the fact
that this former guy played COD 4 a week ago the media will say that
COD 4 is the "factor".
The other arguments, where, as you say, I have a desk job and have
some extra pounds (not many) that I didn't had before I began to work,
and I played computer games much more than know, as you say, balance
and moderation is the key.
The complexity of software is an essential property, not an accidental one.
Our ignorance is God; what we know is science. (Robert Ingersoll).
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
false, and by the rulers as useful. (Edward Gibbon)
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"