Jeff finally said something.

DaRockWilder

Well that really didn't clear up much of anything. I'll wait for CNET's response before I make a decision on my subscription. I'm hearing they should have something ... soon?

It's interesting that we can't find an actual quote of what he stated (just a paraphrasing) or the context in which it was stated.

That being said, everything that I've seen and read about this game would lead me to believe that it will be among the most expensive games ever made. I've questioned before whether it coudl ever get its desired sales on the PS3 exclusively when the user base is still relatively small and the declining sales of the series. Its not a mainstream series despite its rabid fanbase (which I am a part of; well sorta).

I wonder if statements like this are designed to rally the fanbase. Regardless, I'd be surprised if it sold this much worldwide on day one. In fact, I'll be surprised if it sells 2 million lifetime. That is if it stays PS3 exclusive.

Remember RE4 ........

[QUOTE="Darth_Tigris"]

You still don't see what I'm saying, and I know I can't force you. I gave a definition from the dictionary of what it means to be desensitized and then gave an example in the realm of gaming, but you still intepret it as "real versus fake" when that has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

Its like people are afraid that admitting this is tantamount to saying that Jack Thompson is right when its NOT. If you watch a rape in a movie once, it is typically shocking and disturbing. If you saw 50,000 movie rapes, then its unquestionable that number 50,000 will not bother you as much as number 1 did. THAT is what it means to desensitize. Its not about whether something is real or fake. Its about how you respond to it initially versus how you respond to it over repeated exposure. People walk barefoot enough and their feet become desensitized to the rough texture of rocky sand or gravel.

Is this really that hard to understand?

H3LLRaiseR

I know exactly what you are saying and I fully understand what it means to be desensitized. My point is that there is a huge difference in being desensitized to a headshot in a videogame vs a headshot in real life. In none of your statements have you made that distinction clear, which is why I responded.

If you become desensitized to shooting polygons, who cares? If you can watch 50000 movies about rape without blinking an eye, so what? If that bleeds over into your emotions regarding those things in real life, then there is a definate problem.

But people don't feel that way about everything. They're selective with the things they like and enjoy. Take for instance child pornography. If we found out that someone was watching it 6 hours a day 5 days a week, he would be unquestionably labeled as a pedofile. Why? He didn't actually DO anything to a child? Still, we would say that it was unhealthy for someone to watch that much (actually, any at all) because he's bound to ACT on it eventually. He's densensitized to the act by watching so much of it.

So why aren't we like that with games and movies when it comes to drug use and violence, even rape (and yes, I know child pornography involves actual real children and the acts are really happening, but the viewer isn't an activeparticipant)?

For the record I'm not taking a side on this issue. I'm just provoking thought. Society seems to often be selective about when to come to certain conclusions and when not to.

I'm gonna have to agree with the majority and say that video game violence has absolutely nothing to do with real life violence. People were violent against each other in all kinds of sadistic, screwed up ways LONG before video games were even thought of.

Yeah, of course you get desensitized to the violence in games if you play enough of them. When I first started playing RE4 and doing things like shooting people in the head and getting Leon's head chopped off with a chainsaw, I was somewhat shocked at the level of gore. By the time I finished the game, it didn't make me bat an eye. But hell, everyone in modern day society is desensitized to media violence to a greater or lesser extent. And of course it's not just video games, either--movies like Saw are 10x worse than anything I've seen in ANY game.

But being desensitized to it in the media =/= being dangerous. Unless you're one of the few mentally disturbed people that genuinely can't distinguish between fiction and reality, you still know it's just pixels on a TV screen. Even when you're watching people getting tortured in Saw, you know it's nothing more than special effects. If you were to see anything of the sort happening in real life, there's no WAY you'd be able to sit and watch without batting an eye like you do when it's in the media. No one could.

So...no, I don't think video game violence is a danger to society in any way. It's just something for people to blame when bad things happen so they don't have to take any kind of responsibility. After all, rock and roll is the devil's music and corrupts our children, right? ;)

Abby88

See, that was all that I was trying to say (BOLDED). Thanks for acknowledging it and recognizing that it is separate from the other issue.

What you stated about real vs. fake is funny, though. It reminded me of a friend of mine that is a firefighter. He actually said the gore in movies bothers him more than the HORRIFIC gore he's seen in real life. I always thought that was strange, but if anything it illustrates that the 'real vs. fake' discussion is far more complicated than both sides of the argument are willing to admit ...

[QUOTE="Darth_Tigris"]

See, here is what frustrates me whenever I try to have an intelligent conversation about this subject with most fellow gamers. Re-read what I typed and I NEVER ONCE blamed gaming for real life violence. I never even made a connection between the two. My only point is that gaming violence can desensitize us.

Desensitize defined:

2:to make emotionally insensitive or callous; specifically :to extinguish an emotional response (as of fear, anxiety, or guilt) to stimuli that formerly induced it

If anyone says that, as in my original example, that constantly pulling off headshots in games doesn't desensitize us to the idea of pulling of a headshot in general, then they are not being reasonable. Again, as I stated in my original statements, THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL EVER DO A HEADSHOT IN REAL LIFE! But that doesn't mean that it doesn't affect us, as in desensitizing our minds to the idea of doing such a thing.

To give you an example, when I first played RE4, I felt horrible for shooting village women in the face with a freakin' shotgun. Think about that for a moment and it makes sense. But the more I played the game, it didn't bother me near as much to do that over and over and over and over. I got desensitized to the action. It wasn't as shocking or horrible anymore.

That is my point. Nothing more. So don't group me with Hilary Clinton or Jack Thompson, because I'm not saying what they are saying or trying to argue their point.

H3LLRaiseR

You'd save yourself some frustration if you did a little more re-reading. No where in my response did I accuse you of saying videogames cause violence. I have no idea how you even saw that in my statement.

If you honestly believe that Resident Evil has made it any easier for you to shoot a real woman in the face, see a real woman get shot in the face, or even hear about a real woman getting shot in the face.. then you are exactly the type of person that shouldn't be playing these games.

If you were sane and capable of drawing a line between real life and fantasy, then any desensitization you've experience ends at killing lifeless polygons in a videogame. It should have zero impact on your emotions toward living things.

You still don't see what I'm saying, and I know I can't force you. I gave a definition from the dictionary of what it means to be desensitized and then gave an example in the realm of gaming, but you still intepret it as "real versus fake" when that has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

Its like people are afraid that admitting this is tantamount to saying that Jack Thompson is right when its NOT. If you watch a rape in a movie once, it is typically shocking and disturbing. If you saw 50,000 movie rapes, then its unquestionable that number 50,000 will not bother you as much as number 1 did. THAT is what it means to desensitize. Its not about whether something is real or fake. Its about how you respond to it initially versus how you respond to it over repeated exposure. People walk barefoot enough and their feet become desensitized to the rough texture of rocky sand or gravel.

Is this really that hard to understand?

[QUOTE="Darth_Tigris"]

All things can be a danger, so that is a very broad phrase to use.

But I always considered it this way: if you never played an FPS similar style of game, would you ever be exposed to pulling off a headshot? Would the idea of a headshot ever cross your mind? If so, how would you feel about pulling off a headshot?

Now if we HAVE played an FPS or similar style of game, pulling off a headshot is second nature.

So what does that mean? That playing such games has desensitized us, to some degree, to the idea of pulling off a headshot. That's not to say that we would EVER do something like that in the real world. That's an oversimplification of this point. But we have been desensitized to the horror of doing such a thing in comparison to one that doesn't play such games.

What does that mean for society? It's not for me to say.

H3LLRaiseR

I doubt that is the case at all for any sane person. I'm pretty sure any level of desensitization stops entirely at videogames and killing polygons. No sane person can kill real people as casually as they do the Combine. I don't even think they can hear a story about someone being shot in the head and be that emotionally unattached.

Why? Because thats pretty much what defines insanity. If you have no ability to distinguish between real life and fantasy then you are insane.

See, here is what frustrates me whenever I try to have an intelligent conversation about this subject with most fellow gamers. Re-read what I typed and I NEVER ONCE blamed gaming for real life violence. I never even made a connection between the two. My only point is that gaming violence can desensitize us.

Desensitize defined:

2:to make emotionally insensitive or callous; specifically :to extinguish an emotional response (as of fear, anxiety, or guilt) to stimuli that formerly induced it

If anyone says that, as in my original example, that constantly pulling off headshots in games doesn't desensitize us to the idea of pulling of a headshot in general, then they are not being reasonable. Again, as I stated in my original statements, THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL EVER DO A HEADSHOT IN REAL LIFE! But that doesn't mean that it doesn't affect us, as in desensitizing our minds to the idea of doing such a thing.

To give you an example, when I first played RE4, I felt horrible for shooting village women in the face with a freakin' shotgun. Think about that for a moment and it makes sense. But the more I played the game, it didn't bother me near as much to do that over and over and over and over. I got desensitized to the action. It wasn't as shocking or horrible anymore.

That is my point. Nothing more. So don't group me with Hilary Clinton or Jack Thompson, because I'm not saying what they are saying or trying to argue their point.

All things can be a danger, so that is a very broad phrase to use.

But I always considered it this way: if you never played an FPS similar style of game, would you ever be exposed to pulling off a headshot? Would the idea of a headshot ever cross your mind? If so, how would you feel about pulling off a headshot?

Now if we HAVE played an FPS or similar style of game, pulling off a headshot is second nature.

So what does that mean? That playing such games has desensitized us, to some degree, to the idea of pulling off a headshot. That's not to say that we would EVER do something like that in the real world. That's an oversimplification of this point. But we have been desensitized to the horror of doing such a thing in comparison to one that doesn't play such games.

What does that mean for society? It's not for me to say.

Games really don't take advantage of 1080p, though. It's too taxing on the engines. HDMI is really only worth it if:

a) you have a 1080p TV that is over 50".

b) you have the 360 HD DVD player.

If you don't have either of those, then its really no big deal at all.

I've actually talked about this very subject NUMEROUS times, and I'm glad to see it come up again.

I agree with pretty much everything the TC stated, but the problem I've noticed is that the online gaming community is a big part of the problem. Let me explain:

Take Halo 3 for instance. You get on Halo 3 and if any game type comes up that is a little 'different', it gets vetoed. Every. Time. You see, the online gaming community is pretty much full of individuals that latch on to one thing and want to get VERYgood at it and anything that can damage their precious stats they don't want to try.

With that its hard to rip devs for not taking chances by taking other genres or ideas online because the community seems to categorically reject such attempts. And this is easy for a dev to track because they just view the online stats and there it is.

Personally, I have no idea how to solve this, because the only way online gaming works is by having a community. If its not there, then the idea won't work. And, sadly, the current mindset in the majority of the online community is not one of accepting new ideas.