:!:E3 2006:!:

...It's Finally Over. I'm talking about this semester of course. All the drawings, photography, painting, teaching and...eating of ramen?...Anyway, it's all gravy now. Here's a photo I developed for a self-portrait assignment. No, I'm not playing Guitar Hero. That's just, pretty much, what I plan on doing for the rest of the summer, well, as much as possible anyway.

This is definitely an issue that has been on my mind. I have been thinking about games like God of War, which many of you know is one of my favorite games. However there is a part in that game where, in order to proceed, you must burn an innocent man alive. I, in all honesty, did not want to complete this task. I found it to be very disturbing and unnecessary. This sequence literally struck a moral chord within my conscience that told me I should not complete that task, but in order to continue I was forced to do so. In this sense the video game is now controlling the player and presenting him/her with a set of objectives that they must complete, in order to "win" no matter how illegal or immoral the act. Now you may be thinking, 'hey it's a video game'... and you are right, I realize that it's not real, it is on the ps2, I can still tell that these are pixels and texture maps and I can separate myself from the action as simply game-play and so I was able to soon forget about it and continue with the rest of the game. But what happens when the next generation of graphics is upon us? I mean, I personally cannot wait to blow away zombies in resident evil 5, but how about cops? Or just another human being in general?...No thanks. For now, it's fine but I don't think it's something I will want to look at when it is totally real looking and it is certainly not something I'm going to want to physically act out with movement or play in front of my family. Zombies/creatures are one thing but humans are another.

If you check out my tags you can read some of the information I have been looking at under 'politics' and 'video game violence'. What I am basically getting at here and what I am most interested in is the future of videogames and what kind of impact they will have on people. Any new technologies change our lives, whether we want them to or not because they are essentially forced upon us. Most of the time they offer benefits but they also simultaneously pose new problems as well. For instance, old as it may be writing is a technological advancement and while it serves to capture words and thoughts, does it not also replace memory? How about phones, now you can call your loved ones who are beyond practical reach, but if it were not for the combustion engine, would they ever have been far away to begin with? Cell phones too, now you can have a line of communication in a desperate moment, but are you not also a slave to anyone who wishes to get a hold of you? I could continue on and on. I can argue both for and against any of these examples, just as I can argue for or against video games. The point is, with every advancement, there is also a disadvantage and many times they are unforeseen. If any of you have read any philosophy on this subject you will know what I'm talking about. I recommend "Technopoly" by author Neil Postman. It is a very good read if you are interested in this subject. I read the book this semester and I can tell you, although extreme in it's negative view on technology, it does prompt one to take a worthy second thought about the digital world around them.

I really didn’t want to get into the violent video games debate because quite frankly I felt that the topic had been beaten to death. However, time and time again I read the defense (for games) that goes something like “Parents need to take control and pay attention to the ratings” or “People who commit crimes because of a game already have problems to begin with” I react to each of these statements in a different way but in both cases, I think, the people who make these comments are overlooking some things.

To say: “It’s the parents” is missing the point. Take a look at my last blog entry where I commented on the Devin Moore shooting. It's not parents, in that situation, who are suing the makers of GTA; it is the families of the dead police officers. To blame GTA is not entirely unjust. The “kid” was 18 years old and he specifically cited videogames as his motive. This is the beginning of a great threat to the industry because age is not really a factor anymore. We assume that only children are supple enough to be molded by the influence of videogames but what cases like this show is that, violent video game related crimes have only been a factor among children and teens simply because that has been the dominant age of gamers. However, as games reach a larger consumer base, their influence has greater opportunity to grip the minds of older individuals who are more capable and potentially more deadly. And in fact nearly every major developer is targeting the 18-24 demographic. It is one thing to prevent a child, in his formative years, from being exposed to violent videogames but what about older gamers? What sort of identification do you request at the retail counter to inspect the mental integrity of the consumer?

To say: “The people who commit those crimes were already criminals" is right on target but, so much so, in fact, that these people fail to realize the profound nature of what they have just said. Indeed, there is no system to prevent criminals and lunatics from buying videogames. Beyond this, I fear that it isn't only violence in games that poses a problem. It is also the suspension of reality in very realistic simulations. If you’ve ever played Tetris for an extended period of time and later found yourself visualizing the falling blocks as you piece them together in your mind, you'll know what I'm talking about. I have spoken to many a gamer that’ve had dreams about their favorite game or find themselves, after playing a very realistic simulation, actually feeling like they are "in" that game's world. I believe circumstances like these are a testament to the weakening of the mental ability to distinguish what is real and what is not as a result of playing video games. I do agree that only persons with mental instability would allow that separation to be broken but with that being said, let me also state that 57.7 million people in the United States have mental disorders and 20.9 million of them are adults with mood disorders, which is just the sort of thing that would lead to shooting a police officer. These people are perfectly capable and have the legal right to purchase and play any videogames they wish. So when I think about the industry trying to market videogames to a more massive audience I am faced with mixed feelings. On one hand, this will generate more revenue for developers to create games with higher production value. It may even get my girlfriend to take more of an interest in gaming. On the other hand, when games are marketed towards children, we can control their sales more easily. In turn parents can control their children and also provide a stasis of morals in the child’s life. When games begin to reach adults as well, any sort of control over the gamer is lost entirely.

Unfortunately there aren’t any studies available that offer strict conclusions about the questions I have raised here. Seems like conclusions, in general, are hard to come by when you're talking about violence. Now that’s not to say that there isn’t an argument to be made for games as an outlet to release anger or perhaps engage in violence  in a virtual environment as an alternative to real-life violence. I guess it's too bad T.I. didn't know all about that.

'Rubber Band Man' Rapper T.I. Gets Three Years In Prison

Quite recently, Alabama teenager, Devin Moore is quoted saying: “Life is like a video game; everybody has to die sometime.”  This was right after shooting and killing two police officers. The victim’s relatives are now suing the makers of Grand Theft Auto. His comparison, of life to video games, is a very Interesting analogy. I say, if life is indeed like a video game, then right now I am fighting a boss, my hp is low and I could totally go for a power-up of some kind. If you're not following me; school sucks!

This whole college thing has pretty much worn out it's welcome at this point. I'm ready for the flat-screen TV now, hell, I was ready a year ago.

I guess I'm pulling, what has come to be known as, a "Greg" but hey, why not? If this is how a gamers have to earn their street cred; so be it. You may notice however, that I am also pulling a "Gerstmann" other-wise known as an incredibly stylish hair-do. 

Sick of the 13 yr. olds, who just can't seem to cease the endless stream of newbie/fanboy/what have you, insults, simply because you don't think that Kingdom Hearts is the next best thing? I know I am. Fret no more fellow gamespotter. Direct them here, to my profile. Here they will find this lovely portrait of me, age 8, proudly displaying my favorite game to the camera, over 15 years ago, while they were still nestled snugly in their mothers ovaries. If you observe carefully you may admire my dads unique choice of T.V. stand. Hmm...well, I think I'll go buy some "M" rated games now.

Well it's real birthday was of course in October '85 but most of us celebrate it's february '86 release which makes this a very special month for all of us who grew up with the console. As we move forward into an exciting new generation of gaming, with forgiving gameplay and fancy graphics, let us not forget the system that taught us how to run, jump and eat magic mushrooms in order to gain the ability to smash bricks with your bare hands. From Super Mario Bros. and Zelda to Contra and Mike Tyson's Punch Out, the NES has given us boredom-free, 8-bit, childhood memories that we will continue to relish with sentiment for the rest of our days.

Q3 2006 Atari Inc. Earnings Conference Call

With only 10 mil. in it's pocket and a net loss of 4.8 mil. Last quarter Atari will spend 54 mil. on games for next quarter alone. It is a dark hour for Atari. Let us all now take a moment of silence and pray that they stop making Deer Hunter.

...*silence*...

Thank you. Now, if you want to help keep one of gaming's forefathers out of the dirt,  give them a hand "Getting Up". unless you know what budokai means.

In reference to the Microsoft executive's recent apology in which he stated:

"I want to apologize for the dereliction of duty to our company's number-one platform, the PC, in terms of gaming."  

Here is a translation of Moore's statement:

"You should buy my product even though it is second class to something that i am already neglecting, so much so, in fact, that i feel it nessecary to release a public apology"

Why should I buy a console who's executive considers it sub-par to PCs or anything for that matter? If you can't even take care of number one, how can console gamers trust you to take care of them?

     "But MAZ, Moore has been so dedicated to the XBOX and that  is why he has forgotten PCs on the back burner" To this I say, bull shi' ite muslim! MS controls more capital and more resources than practically any entity on the planet right now; handle more than one franchise at a time! I truly believe he is slowly ruining this industry by stripping the industry of it's passion for games and painting over a passion for money.

     On a side note, people are trying to sue developers for "ripping off Halo" (what?!). All games have appropriated something from another game. This progressive process is the crux of gaming evolution. So, to all you money hungry business men who don't sincerely give a hoot about gaming; do me a favor, stop apologizing, stop making games, you bother me.