@nedrith That's the thing though. You buy a used book, you get it as is. Same with a car, chair, whatever. Yet people seem to expect developers to continue to maintain servers, offer patches and free dlc for these games and not make any more money off it. Do you work for free? If a used car breaks down or needs maintainence, the manufacturer doesn't fix it for free. Expecting developers to do so is asinine. You bought a game used. Saved some money. You get access to what's on that disc. My idea is, you want the post-release content, or access to the servers, you pay a little to re-register. Again with a used car, you pay to register it in your name regardless of whether it's due for renewal. It's a thought. It's certainly better than Sony's solution of banning used games altogether. I buy a lot of my games used and wouldn't like paying to register any more than you, but game makers are going to do something about this issue eventually, whether we like it or not. I'd much rather pay a little extra to access online play and extra content from a used sale than HAVE to buy the game brand new no matter what.

@heathmoor @Greyskin1 @CosmicJosh Texas is a perfect example of this. This is a state that strongly embraces the ability to carry firearms. There have been several stories of potential shootings in public places prevented there before any shots were fired by the would-be assailant.

There's got to ba a much happier medium here. Instead of blocking used games altogether, maybe have a registration fee to activate a used game. Sure you can play the game used, but if you want any post-release content or online content (i.e. patches, dlc, onling multiplayer) charge like $5 to re-register the used copy. While having the registration for a brand new copy included in the package. Developers have to work extra to make and maintain that content. This would ensure that at least something goes back to them for used sales. The only other fair solution will have to be cheaper digital-only distribution. Unfair pratices like this patent are only going to increase mod-ed hardware and lead to higher pirating. Which will hurt both Sony and developers much more than used sales.

@Greyskin1 @CosmicJosh I agree with you completely. The conceal part of that law is kind of counter productive. Guns should have to be holstered in plain sight. That would be a much bigger deterrant than having a gun hidden in your waistband.

There's yet another reason stopping used sales would hurt developers. A way they seem either too ignorant, or arrogant to admit. New games don't have a long shelf-life. You have anywhere from six months to a year to buy a game brand new. While it's true that the majority of game sales take place within the first month of release, stopping the sale of used games insures that a developer's games will not get new fans down the road. There's generally several games that release within the same month of each other. I, like most people, don't have an unlimited income to buy every good game the month it comes out. In order to be a responisble adult, I've had to curb my game purchases to either a couple used games, or one new game a month. If I can't buy a game used down the road, or rent or borrow it, I've got a pretty good chance of never playing it. Which means I will likely never get into the franchise. On the other hand, I've bought many used games that are the forst in a series, loved them and bought the sequels brand new. Block used game sales and you can kiss that profit goodbye!

@CosmicJosh @Greyskin1 That's an awesome article! That's exactly what I'm talking about! That dude would be dead if Fletcher wasn't armed. To deny people this right will only empower criminals. Who might otherwise think twice about pulling out a gun if they have to worry that someone else is armed. I personally don't own a gun and never plan to, but I feel a lot safer knowing others might be legally. Chances are if you went through the whole process to legally carry a gun, you're only going to use it when absolutely necessary. Otherwise the penalties and the revoked privilage will likely be too steep to waste it. If some nutjob pulls a gun though, I feel better knowing there might be others with the means to stop him.

@Greyskin1 We are indeed! Honestly as far as the studies are concerned, I've read several articles summarizing these studies so I don't know exactly how accurate the information is. Much like the knfo on the studies themselves, the articles were mostly written by people defending video games, so the info they used is likely somewhat taylored to suit their view. It seems likely what you're learning in med school is at least as accurate as what low level online journalists are reporting. I did read one report from one of the actual studies that seemed very objective and accurate. The doctor basically deduced that in the cases of increased aggression, further studies would be needed to determine whether or not there was a preexisting condition.

@Greyskin1 The problem with the way most of these studies were handled is that they were targeting a very specific effect from video games. They went into the studies to find out if video games increased the likelyhood of violent behavior in children. They weren't studying the overall effects of violent video games. They were looking for one type of behavior. If you go into a study expecting a result, you taint the study because you will read your expectations into the results. Most impartial studies in overall effects of violent games have come up inconclusive. There are simply too many other factors in behavioral issues to pinpoint whether or not one specific form of stimuli effects behavior. In young children I can absolutely see getting positive results in agressive behavior. Young children are extremely infuential. I'm willing to bet they would have got the same results having these children LARP in violent ways. Or train and fight for boxing and such.

That is why there is, and has been for years, a ratings system to help prevent young minds from being influenced by games they aren't mature enough to understand. Yeah a six year old might understand how to play Grand Theft Auto, but they certainly aren't old enough to understand why many of the activities in the game would be extremely wrong in real life.Ultimately, when it comes to young kids especially, but even teens, parents need to stop relying on others to raise their children for them and start being involved in what their kids are doing. If your kid's playing violent games, you need to either not let them, or sit down and talk to your kids and make sure they understand that these games aren't real and that they need to understand right and wrong.

As for people like the guy on your flight, that's just ignorance defined to think that moving a curser with a controller can make you an expert marksman. Of course gun owners, much like politicians, are trying to find anything to blame these atrocities on. Especially since guns are being wrongfully attacked for these tragedies too. I'm no gun nut, but I don't think preventing people from arming themselves is the answer. Psychos like this aren't particularly worried about obeying the law. However, if some nutjob walks into a crowded mall, pulls out a gun and starts shooting, he won't make it very far if there a several legally armed people in that crowd. If nobody is allowed to be armed though, this maniac can run rampant with no opposition. But I digress.

It's sad that games are attacked like this. Instead of looking at the true cause of these shootings, mental illness, these morons are passing blame onto a form of entertainment they don't understand. Facing the truth and admitting mental illness was the real culprit here would mean having to learn about and try to understand mental illness. You can't hold rallies to destroy the mentally ill. There is no quick-fix solution to that problem. Doesn't look good to the media to have to take time and gradually fix the problem once and for all. So, until something new comes along for politicians to rally against, video games will continue to be the silent villain in their eyes.

What evidence do they have that video games do any of the things they claim? the only evidence you will find that this is even possibly the case, will be the say so of people who don't play video games and who have likely never even watched the violent games they're destroying being played. There was a famous group of people who once burned books they didn't agree with too. Run by a short fella with a funny little mustache. Idiots. Keep blaming other things for these tragedies morons. When your efforts change nothing have fun finding other things to blame. Heaven forbid you focus on mental illness and how we can keep guns out of the hands of psychos. Not that gun control is the issue in my eyes. I'm just saying we need to find a way to keep psychos from getting guns.

Digital distribution is the best solution to the used game problem. It's much cheaper to produce a game digitally. Unfortunately developers are currently charging the same for digital and disc games. There's no real incentive to go digital. Besides, this format won't work currently until broadband is the standard world-wide. When the gaming world is ready for it, hopefully digital games at cheaper prices will make everyone happy. We're quite a few years from that point sadly.