your stance on "Light Guns" and Firearm VGs


PDA






JMPeters
July 4, 2005, 06:54 PM
Being a member of the "Nintendo Generation" I find games that utilize Light Guns very entertaining. There are a few that stand out that are exceptionally realistic. Police 24/7 for example and the feel of Time Crisis. What is your stance?

If you enjoyed reading about "your stance on "Light Guns" and Firearm VGs" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Black Majik
July 4, 2005, 07:04 PM
I loved firearm video games. Time Crisis was especially fun. Time Crisis was easy. :D

Dont forget Lethal Enforcers, House of The Dead, and Area 51 :D

I remember covering the muzzle for those games to reload quickly instead of shooting off screen. My screen looked like machine gun fire :D

JMPeters
July 4, 2005, 07:11 PM
:evil: covering the muzzle, devious :evil:
When playing TC2 I used my middle finger to fire and held the gun at a slight angle, it helped to fire wuicker then the standard hold using the index finger. TC3 is very nice

psyopspec
July 4, 2005, 09:22 PM
Think ATHF - I feel the same way about gun VG's as Frylock does about TV.

Meatwad: But Frylock, I thought you said TV was bad.

Frylock: Oh, it is. But we @#*&!% need it!

PaladinVC
July 4, 2005, 09:41 PM
With the high quality of home consoles and computers, the only real reason to visit a video arcade anymore is for the novelty control systems. Driving games, carnival games (Skee-Ball is forever!) and gun games are the absolute cream of the crop. Dancing games make me look stupid, which means they must be low-quality. ;)

I generally prefer newer, more sophisticated games, like Time Crisis 3, but I seldom miss a chance to put a buck into Area 51, Maximum Force or Police Trainer and see how my left hand does against my right. Right always gets more hits, but the accuracy rate is generally pretty close.

I hate the House of the Dead games, though. The guns are always broken, and there are places you absolutely must take damage. In Time Crisis, you know when you made a mistake.

I'd also like to observe that of all the home light gun systems, nothing has ever matched the style and entertainment value of the Zapper. K-Pang! I actually took the wires out of mine to use for a Halloween costume. I need to make a little holster, but it's tough to make it fit right without a trigger guard.

rhubarb
July 5, 2005, 01:01 AM
I reckon voting "complete waste of time" and being in the minority makes me an out-of-touch fuddy duddy.

I was watching some cop show on teevee tonight where some kid that was a video game tester killed someone. He was crying as he confessed. Cop says something like, "Real life ain't like video games, is it?"

Farnham
July 5, 2005, 01:08 AM
Dunno if "Silent Scope" counts as a "light gun" video game, but I show up at least a half hour early to the movies so I can play it. :D

(my wife and I play House of the Dead first)

S/F

Farnham

Smokey Joe
July 5, 2005, 01:41 AM
I'm not in favor of ANY "games" that involve pointing firearms (be they toy or simulated or whatever) at other human beings.

(rant) While I'm at it, I believe that the video games that have kids thinking that kicking and stomping on their adversaries in the name of entertainment coarsen their attitude toward violence to other human beings.

And the kids get the idea that in the real world all they have to do is press "reset" or some such button, and the broken bones and mangled flesh suddenly goes away and everything gets nice and clean again, and let's get on with the fighting.

As long as I'm hitting on this stuff, it seems to me that any form of entertainment in which the imagining is all done for you by the maker of the game, video, movie, or whatever, encourages the young to watch it and be entertained, rather than entertaining themselves. Thus their imaginagions are stifled and fail to grow.

Ask your grandparents about this. When they were young, if they were bored, there were only 2 alternatives: Stay bored, or dream up something to do on their own. Therefore they invented a lot of neat stuff, either really or in their heads. Their attention span was longer and their ability to concentrate better, and their imaginations had muscles like Charles Atlas. They also could read, write, and spell better than most young people today, not to mention being able to compose a coherent paragraph.

(/rant) Well, you asked.

No_Brakes23
July 5, 2005, 04:02 AM
Silent Scope and Time Crisis were pretty good. The slide that moves on TC was the main fun thing about it.

Like Paladin said, the Console and PC games are just sooooo good now, that only the odd or interesting controls are worth playing.

As for people who think violent games make violent kids, well, that's the sort of blissninny nonsense that gungrabbers spout. Is it any coincidence that Nanny Nazis like Lieberman are against both interesting games and firearms rights? I don't think so. (And for the record, games like Grand Theft Auto are not for kids, so the arguements against kids playing them are retarded.) Lazy parents are the problem there. GTAIII, GTA:VC and GTA:SA are in my house, yet my kids are not allowed to play them. And anyway, I grew up playing cops 'n' robbers, cowboys 'n' indians, and spy games. Yet I somehow managed to avoid being a sociopathic killer.

bigun15
July 5, 2005, 04:16 AM
I beg to differ, Smokey Joe. I'm 15 (kid) and I'm sure I stand with many teenagers on this issue.

(rant) While I'm at it, I believe that the video games that have kids thinking that kicking and stomping on their adversaries in the name of entertainment coarsen their attitude toward violence to other human beings.

I kick and stomp on my friends, and they do me, and have been for years. Never wanted to seriously kill someone, EVER. Actually, I would say that sometimes the gun games can be a good, (comparatively) non-violent release for anger/depression/etc., rather than taking a real gun and shooting at someone.

And the kids get the idea that in the real world all they have to do is press "reset" or some such button, and the broken bones and mangled flesh suddenly goes away and everything gets nice and clean again, and let's get on with the fighting.

I don't know much more to say to that than it's just flat out not true. A virtual bullet at a virtual character is harmless, but a real bullet (or heck even a pellet from a pellet gun) can really mess somebody up. We know life from games, and I believe most of us do. There is no reset in real life, you don't put in another quarter or two and try again. Real life is real life and we know it.

What I'm trying to get at is, they don't always lead to killers. Sure, there are probably some bad apples out there who learn their accuracy from a video game, and treat a video game like an educational lesson, but the vast majority of us know the difference and aren't so stupid as to think that shooting real people is ok.

Khaotic
July 5, 2005, 05:43 AM
heh, you forgot Resident Evil: Dead Aim.

The game is very short, but extremely good - Time crisis is also a nice one.
My issue with the light guns is that they don't stand up really well to a lot of use, i've killed about four of them now.
(Guncon II is especially flimsy)

Side note on arcades/area-51 and ganger types.
I love walking up behind them and kindly whispering...
"You do know, if you did that for real - where the spent casings will go?"
That stunned look of realization is hilarious.

-K

psyopspec
July 5, 2005, 08:57 PM
(rant) While I'm at it, I believe that the video games that have kids thinking that kicking and stomping on their adversaries in the name of entertainment coarsen their attitude toward violence to other human beings.

So what do you reckon was in Hitler's Playstation or Saddam's Gameboy?

JMPeters
July 5, 2005, 09:05 PM
While I see your point Smokey, I am inclined to go with Bigun on this one. I grew up playing all sorts of games that today no one my age would have been allowed to play. I also played outside. My buddies would play Mortal Kombat then go and (safely) practice moves on eachother, building our CQC skills. I actually credit my playing Video Games to my interest in both Martial Arts and Firearms. And on the note that VG's stifle creativity I am also gonna have to disagree. The best games actually make you think creativly to coordinate strategy to beat them. I currently work for a radio station doing sales and production, I doubt I would be half as good at my job had I not had the supplemental creative outlet of video games (I also write and do Comp. Graph)

Just my 2

That being said I thank you all for posting and greatly appreciate the feedback :D

jlwatts3
July 5, 2005, 09:06 PM
My all time favorite is Wing shooting championship. They have it at my local bar. A pitcher of Anchor Steam and a pocket full of quarters and I am set for the night. At least if I can get my girlfriend to leave me alone. :D

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6178337506&category=13716#ebayphotohosting

thereisnospoon
July 5, 2005, 09:16 PM
I heard a gentleman recently on a morning talk radio show who is currently involved in litigation with Sony and Wal-Mart over the video game Grand Theft Auto III.

Apparently, according to this man, the company that actually designed the game did so at the behest of the US Armed Forces and it is used to lessen the natural tendancy to NOT SHOOT! The case is involving a 12-14 year old boy who was arrested for stealing a car, while in police custody he stole a police officers weapon and used it to kill that officer and two others then fled the scene in a stolen police car...just like in the video game.

Now I have to admitt that I fall into the personal responsability crowd, but when you hear the scientific evidence this gentleman hsa ammased (including nuclear medicine brain scans of adults and children while playing the game, etc., it is pretty convincing, Especially when you factor in that the Federal Government payed for the development of this game in its initial form to teach soldiers not to hesitate to kill.

Here is a link to the man's website, you can decide for yourself, as for me, I've never let my kids play anything moreviolent than PacMan.

http://www.theregister.com/2003/09/25/100m_grand_theft_auto_lawsuit/

Farnham
July 5, 2005, 10:06 PM
^ Tighten up the tinfoil, spoon, you're starting to scare me.

C'mon...I could provide very convincing evidence that my Blue Heeler can teleport across the yard, but that don't make it so.

S/F

Farnham

Daniel T
July 5, 2005, 10:06 PM
Apparently, according to this man, the company that actually designed the game did so at the behest of the US Armed Forces and it is used to lessen the natural tendancy to NOT SHOOT!

You need hip-waders to get through that pile of BS. Jack Thompson's that is, not yours spoon.

Sorry, but that is so absurd that it doesn't require a sniff-test, as you can smell it from a mile away. Why on god's green earth would the US military give money to a Canadian company to design a game with gang-bangers and car-jacking in it? Besides, there is already a game in which your goal is to kill people that was most definitely developed by the US Army: America's Army (http://www.americasarmy.com/).

Correia
July 5, 2005, 10:35 PM
Sorry Smokey, your argument is full of holes.

The "studies" that show a direct correlation between violent video games and television and violent behavior usually come out of the same crowd that produces the "studies" about gun violence. I put about equal faith in both. Nanny staters worried about anybody showing any tendencies that make them uncomfortable. And pretty much everything from slow dancing to music with guitars in it makes those people uncomfortable.

There is a new study, (wish I could remember the name of the book, it is out in stores now) showing the opposite of your theory. History has shown that as a society becomes safer and more boring, the entertainment has become more violent. Violent imaginative entertainment has always been utilized by mankind. When a society is actually more violent and dangerous, then there is usually a natural outlet for violent people.

Jermiah "Liver Eater" Johnson would be considered a serial killer now, but in the 1800s he was a western hero. He only cannabalized and scalped the Red man, so he was an icon. Now he would be locked up. Our society now is relatively safe and boring (outside of places like Compton and innercity Birmingham). Mankind needs an outlet for our naturally violent nature. Since most of us can't go out and battle savages, or hunt our dinner every night with a pointy stick, we find something else that keeps our brains satisfied.

Sorry, when my Grandpa was a kid, anybody who could read had access to pulp novels that are just as violent and graphic as anything produced today. There were plays in Victorian Europe that would make Grand Theft Auto look like the smurfs. The dime novels of the wild west had violence and cruelty that makes most modern video games pale in comparison.

As far as dulling imagination, I don't see that at all. I'm 30, and grew up in the Nintendo generation. We seem to go on writing, creating, playing, and doing everything that our forefathers before us did.


But I always forget, everything was better in the olden days. :D

MechAg94
July 5, 2005, 11:00 PM
I remember people thinking that Bugs Bunny and Road Runner cartoons would make kids think they can jump off cliffs and stuff and be okay. Think of all the violence on the average Tom and Jerry cartoon. Just because there were no guns (mostly) doesn't make it non-violent. The important thing is that kids can differentiate between the two. :)

Violence is a part of us. Discipline and personal responsibility have to be taught so people can keep it under control. Sadly, many parents don't teach this adequately anymore.

Arc-Lite
July 5, 2005, 11:03 PM
I think most arguments here are full of holes... "shooting games" to kill people ?? where is the good in this ?? At one time, it was punishment to be kept indoors, now...you need a crow bar, to get a kid off the couch. "shooting games" kind of makes you wonder, what will be selling tomorrow, when these are the "good ole days" !!!!

thereisnospoon
July 6, 2005, 11:12 AM
Ummmm...If i get the tinfoil any tighter...

Apparently I didn't make myself clear. I believe each individual is held accountable for his actions, reardless of what video game he has played. However, listening to Jack Thompson's "evidence", if I were on the jury I would have to think twice.

IIRC-Yes, the Federal Gov't did in fact pay this company to make a video game to train soldiers. The only way the company would do it is if they could market a civilian version (GTAIII). So, while it is not the same version the Gov't used to train soldiers it has all the same graphics, etc.

Now, I agree his (Mr. Thompson's) same argument could be used to say that we the people (subjects) should not have the same weapons as the military, if in fact we shouldn't have the same video games as the military, but the evidence that is actually the most convincing has to do with how the brain of an adolescent processes the video vs. that of an adult.

(I actualy love Arcades, especially shooting games, just not the home x-Box type contraptions).

Now, again, I believe in everyone is accountable for their own actions, but that is why I do not let my kid have an X-Box, because I would be responsible for rotting his brain...ur, umm I mean keeping him on the couch when I really want him outside.

We actually own several video games, one is a TV plug in of Pacman/Galaga/Pole Position/ and two other 80's games. My kid loves it (And so do I, hummmmmmm. I did buy it for my 4 year old, right ;) but we limit his play time. The other is a paintball game you play on your TV) so don't misunderstand my comments about Mr.Thompson or his lawsuit. I just found his evidence to be very...interesting.

Daniel T
July 6, 2005, 12:03 PM
IIRC-Yes, the Federal Gov't did in fact pay this company to make a video game to train soldiers. The only way the company would do it is if they could market a civilian version (GTAIII). So, while it is not the same version the Gov't used to train soldiers it has all the same graphics, etc.

I'd really like to see a cite. Do you have a link that doesn't just quote Jack Thompson that verifies this? What part of the fed.gov footed the bill? Why did they pay a Canadian developer to do it?

Maybe you're confusing GTAIII with Doom, which was modified (after its commercial release) and used by the Marines as a training tool for a little while.

No_Brakes23
July 6, 2005, 12:13 PM
now...you need a crow bar, to get a kid off the couch I don't know what kids you know, but mine and most others I know will drop their VGs in a heartbeat to go bike-riding or swimming or have a water-gun fight.

I think this whole mindset of "Look at all these damn lazy kids" is just so much curmudgeonly horsepoop. :barf: People with that attitude are constantly whining about "the good ole days" were better and how society is going down the toilet. Whatever. Each generation has its pluses and minuses.

So to whom it may concern, you can take that pessimistic, "greatest-generation", chicken little, blissninny nonsense and dispose of it in a body cavity upon which no sunshine typically falls. :neener:

thereisnospoon
July 6, 2005, 12:18 PM
Here is Jack Thompson's websote

http://www.stopkill.com/


IIRC, Jack Thompson used this guys research to back his opinion


http://www.killology.net/bio.htm


Again, I was just interjecting what I remembered from the talk show that morning, and, no they were not referring to doom, because the case revolved around the game GTA III. I remember that the company was called Take Two Interactive, LLC or something like that.

Daniel T, just so we are clear, I am not against gaming or violent video games, I enjoy playing every shoot-um-up game that comes out. (Have you seen the new Sony game that tracks your movements as you duck for cover???? Really cool!). I just found this man's argument compelling enough to make me wonder if it should be sold to teens.

And that is the crux of the case, this boy was 14 when he played the game, stole the car, killed the officers. The game is rated Mature and is not to be sold to anyone under 18. Of course I never had any alcohol or cigarettes before I was 18 eother, cause that was against the law.

And, the officers family have actually supported Mr. Thompson and his lawsuit, although one could argue that $$$$ is the motiviation on both the part of Mr. thompson and anyone else who would gain from Sony/Wal-Mart's deep pockets, including the family memvers of the slain officers.

I did not post to flame gamers or video games, just thought it was interesting.

lysander
July 6, 2005, 12:36 PM
Wow...this thread got derailed a bit. :eek: Let's try to get it back on track. I think one of the better LG arcade games is this one:

Sports Shooting USA (http://www.segaarcade.com/video/sportsshooting.asp)

I also really used to like Operation Wolf and Operation Thunderbolt.

Oh..and as far as the value of such games goes....it is entertainment and/or art (depending on your perspective) a mere reflection of society...no better or worse than a violent action movie, Mack Bolan book, or gangsta rap. These things don't inspire bad actions...they are inspired by them.

Catharsis is useful in today's day and age. Shooting up evil zombies on a screen helps relieve tension, it doesn't train kids to be killers. Kids and young people become become irresponsible and/or killers because they are failed by their parents. They aren't taught responsibility and concern/compassion for their neighbors. The causation/correlation between violent behavior and video games is weak IMO.

Justin
July 6, 2005, 12:44 PM
And the kids get the idea that in the real world all they have to do is press "reset" or some such button, and the broken bones and mangled flesh suddenly goes away and everything gets nice and clean again, and let's get on with the fighting. You're not saying anything that hasn't been said thousands of times before in any given time period about how people choose to entertain themselves.

Social hand-wringers were blathering on about the terrible effects of Penny Dreadfuls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_dreadful) in the late 19th and early 20th century.

In the 1940's and 50's it was Fredric Wertham and his book The Seduction of the Innocent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seduction_of_the_Innocent) that lead to congressional hearings about the supposedly "well documented" ill effects of comic books upon children.

In the 1980's and early 90's it was heavy metal, industrial music, and "goths" that caused children to go on murderous rampages.

I'm sorry, but blaming entertainment for as the root cause of violence or murder is patently asinine.

J Miller
July 6, 2005, 12:56 PM
rhubarb said: I reckon voting "complete waste of time" and being in the minority makes me an out-of-touch fuddy duddy.

Nope rhubarb, there's 10 others that agree with us. When I had my step kids I would not allow video games in the house. I don't like the violent nature of the games. Unfortunatly the kids had become addicted to them while in foster care. (Before their mother and I married.) They robbed the two of us blind of our silver coin collection and change bottle to go to the video arcades and burn their minds out.

Now both are in their 30's. Neither have a good job or a decent education, both are still heavily addicted to video games, and both are into building their own computers around the ability to run the high powered games.

Neither of them has any real grasp of reality.

Personally I believe that the electronic age will be the downfall of intellegent humanity.


Joe

Daniel T
July 6, 2005, 12:56 PM
Daniel T, just so we are clear, I am not against gaming or violent video games, I enjoy playing every shoot-um-up game that comes out. (Have you seen the new Sony game that tracks your movements as you duck for cover???? Really cool!). I just found this man's argument compelling enough to make me wonder if it should be sold to teens.

I understand, spoon. However, it looks to me that you're buying into a anti-style propaganda campaign. Just look at that leech's website and replace the word "game" with "gun", and you'll see an eerily familiar screed appear.

The Killology link you posted....well, let's just say that guy might be a bit biased. And arrogant....very, very arrogant. The guy claims that the scifi/fantasy book he co-authored "may be the first time any fiction book has ever talked about what combat is REALLY like!". He apparently thinks he's the only vet that ever wrote fiction. Regardless, he has an obvious agenda, and it fits hand-in-hand with the leech's goal of sucking as much money from the cash cow as he can.

I'm not saying that these games are appropriate for young children either, and the publisher, Take Two, rated the game as "M - Mature" for a reason. It was not marketed to children, unless you make the assumption that if it's a "game" it has to be for kids. The only people responsible for the kid's actions are he himself and his parents.

MICHAEL T
July 6, 2005, 12:57 PM
Their like TV a waste of time and good money. If I could still get around like I did. I wouldn't even have this thing in my house . Life to short to waste on a screen go do something that requires you using your brain and body not a toy gun and a screen

Arc-Lite
July 6, 2005, 12:59 PM
Justin....in all fairness, you read words NOT in Smokey's post...the words are "coarsens their attitudes toward violence".... not as you read "the root cause of violence and murder"

Daniel T
July 6, 2005, 01:01 PM
Now both are in their 30's. Neither have a good job or a decent education, both are still heavily addicted to video games, and both are into building their own computers around the ability to run the high powered games.

Neither of them has any real grasp of reality.

Yeah, it's because of the EVAL video games! It couldn't possibly be because they were from a broken family and spent time in foster care. Nope. No possible way could any early childhood family trauma cause problems later in life. Never.

Justin
July 6, 2005, 01:18 PM
Arc Lite- While Smokey may not have come right out and said that verbatim he did post the following:

And the kids get the idea that in the real world all they have to do is press "reset" or some such button, and the broken bones and mangled flesh suddenly goes away and everything gets nice and clean again, and let's get on with the fighting.

FWIW, broken bones and mangled flesh are a bit more severe than a coursened or desensitized attitude towards violence. One implies a heightened ability to tolerate simulated or real acts of violence, the other implies active participation. This strikes me as a fine but important distinction.

If "coursening" attitudes to violence don't actually cause more violence, then who cares?

No_Brakes23
July 6, 2005, 01:18 PM
I also really used to like Operation Wolf Man, I forgot about that one, I lost plenty of quarters to that game.

And +1 on Justin's comments; he stated it far more eloquently than I did. Social hand-wringers indeed.

thereisnospoon
July 6, 2005, 01:22 PM
Daniel T,

I here ya and you may be correct. However, if this guy has scientific proof (i.e. the brain scans, etc[p.s. this is what I do for a living by the way, so his research hit a chord with me, so I may be biased]) showing the effects of the games on children vs. adults it would be interesting. It is no secret to any of us that children are drawn to visual things, as are many adults (i.e. pornography, anyone? i.e. can you post pics og your new toy(s)?).

Therefor there has to be some connection between the visual spectrum and the brain. I may be venturing off into tinfoil hat realm for some of you, but I know my four year old's ears shut off when the TV turns on, especially if it is one of his favorite shows. It is the same reason, as a vigilant parent, I limit how much TV time my children have and exactly WHAT they watch.

So to say something does not have merit because it may endanger our 2A right (i.e. put "gun" inplace of "video game") or because the researcher happens to be an arrogant SOB (most researcher types I know are!) is specious.

AS to the "good ole days" argument, just because something is Old does not make it better, but neither does something being New make it better...Social Handwringing comments aside, it is now popular for girls to dress, well, like sluts. I think this is a sad commentary on our society and will not allow my 16 yo daughter to dress in such a manner (in fact she thinks it "gross" in her words). So I guess that makes me Handwringer...o.k. ut at least you can't see my daughters [edited for appropriateness] in public!

Arc-Lite
July 6, 2005, 01:30 PM
Justin...I will let Smokies exact words speak for themself. If there is need to clarify, I am sure he will gladly.

Justin
July 6, 2005, 02:16 PM
Arc-Lite- Perhaps he will.

thereisnospoon-

I've read Grossman's book, "On Killing" and came away thouroughly unimpressed. Anyone with even a mediocre amount of either video game or shooting knowledge can pretty much poke all sorts of holes in his assertions.

thereisnospoon
July 6, 2005, 02:30 PM
Okay.

I haven't read it and don't intend to, I was merely putting the information that Jack Thompson was relaying on the show about video games for Daniel T. I have not verified the information, nor do I intend to. I simply said if I was on the Jury, the information he presented, IF he could back it up scientifically would give me pause and make me think.

Again, I am not anti-video game for y'all, but as for me and my house...we treat it like a distant cousin that needs money. :eek:

middy
July 6, 2005, 03:02 PM
In the 1980's and early 90's it was heavy metal, industrial music, and "goths" that caused children to go on murderous rampages.
You forgot about Dungeons & Dragons. Apparently that game was supposed to turn us into a bunch of Satan-worshipping axe-murderers. LOL.

BBL, I've got to go rinse the goat blood off my slave-maidens.

bigun15
July 6, 2005, 05:28 PM
The more I read this thread, the more I want to go to the arcade.

Control Group
July 6, 2005, 05:54 PM
If video games affected kids, my generation would be eating pills, chasing cherries, and listening to repetitive electronic music.

JMPeters
July 6, 2005, 08:11 PM
yes that t-shirt was funny. what an awesome discussion. i was not expecting such an intelligent debate!

torpid
July 6, 2005, 08:24 PM
Video games shmideo games- The ultimate audio/visual "first person shooter" experience was...

...the 18 year old young men of WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc. who came home after killing men for real, and that's why the streets have run red with blood daily for over a century as these trained and experienced killers with 2nd Amendment guaranteed access to firearms have unleashed their pre-video game bloodlust on a trembling nation!!!

Pleeeease.

:rolleyes:

.

torpid
July 6, 2005, 08:29 PM
To add to psyopspec's "...what do you reckon was in Hitler's Playstation or Saddam's Gameboy?" sentiment-

Was Charles Whitman considered a "camper" without an appropriate FPS outlet?

:barf:

CleverName
July 6, 2005, 10:11 PM
My local pizza place had Sport Shooting USA. Too bad nobody bothered to properly zero the lightguns, so they hit about 2" low and 1" left of POA of the red dot on the screen. Makes hitting stuff hard when you constantly have to hold over something that should be point-blank. I just ended up point shooting.

Anyways, I've played video games since I was about... I have no idea, maybe 5 or 6? I'm at a good college, and typing this post on a hand-built computer designed to run the best games out at the time I built it well. I played GTA III, GTA VC and GTA SA, all but the last before I was the appropriate age. But like any semi-intelligent person, I could differentiate between the cartoonish over-the-top-violence in GTA and reality. In fact, one of the reasons I don't play Americas Army much is that the violence is a little too real and strikes a little too close for home.

PaladinVC
July 6, 2005, 11:43 PM
With a little effort, I'm sure you could argue that frequenting internet discussion forums where some members casually post about "mozambiquing goblins" and refer to real, live human beings as "bad guys" would coarsen one's view of violence against people. Calling a gunfight a "social situation" is a little spooky, out of context.

To be fair, though, hours of duck hunt instilled in me a deep, burning desire to shoot giggling hound dogs. Anyone else? Lousy dog. I'll teach you to laugh at me! P-Kang P-Kang P-Kang P-Kang P-Kang P-Kang!! And seriously, if I'm going duck hunting with a handgun, I'll bring more than a three-shooter.

bigun15
July 7, 2005, 01:22 AM
...the 18 year old young men of WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc. who came home after killing men for real

Only thing is that people UNDER 18 want to use the video games. Also the fact that when you shoot at other people in war, they shoot back with real bullets.

Arc-Lite
July 7, 2005, 01:26 AM
bigun 15...good point...the reality of war, kind of makes games "funny"

JMPeters
July 8, 2005, 09:02 PM
Yeah I find games like GTA, Mario Golf, Mortal Kombat, and Viewtiful Joe nice ways to unwind after a long arduous day. Screw beer give me a game any old day. I'll have fun and not get a hangover. SCORE!

If you enjoyed reading about "your stance on "Light Guns" and Firearm VGs" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!