@nickyparmar92 @DLazarek I see. I could see some great stories from Batman's comic book legacy being quite well translated to the Arkham series of games. At least I am hopeful. :)

@nickyparmar92 It would be bi-annualized. We didn't get an Arkham game in 2012.

Wow. First the Pope quits and now Pelosi says something I can actually agree with. Maybe the Mayans were "pretty close"...

Hmm. Not sure that a '"full-scale online service" for its next game that will accommodate hundreds of thousands of users' is the best idea for profitability, but I sure wish them luck. I bought Journey based on all these accolades...haven't had a chance to really sit down and play it yet though.

So, what if these video game studies show that they actually curb real world violence by letting people release their frustrations in a violent video game? (actually some studies have concluded this) Will the government make playing violent video games mandatory? ;)

I remember buying the original Deus Ex at the local Meijer's when I was in my 30's. The computer flagged the M rated game, and the clerk actually carded me. First time I was carded for a video game.

@s2thugskater @DLazarek @blueknight1st In my opinion it is not constitutional. Also, SCOTUS did reference that there has been no clear danger proven by the government with violent video games when it struck down the California law. There has to be a clear and present danger posed by speech for it to lose its 1st amendment protection.

@Frimmel The good ones ARE for less government. The bad ones...well, not so much.

@blueknight1st Yes, in California. Essentially the SCOTUS ruled that you can't single out one type of medium for this type of censorship. Same rules have to be applied to books, magazines, DVDs, etc.

Accomplishes absolutely nothing except allowing a politician to say "I did something". There are millions of CoD players...but not millions of crazed gunmen. The argument that video games cause mass shootings is positively ludicrous.