If you think that players wanting to act out in a game is a problem, it might actually be more indicative of how strong that desire is to see what price people will pay to engage in it than to ban it altogether. It’s one thing to see what people will do in the absence of realistic restrictions, like investigation, court-martial, and arrest. It’s another to see what they’ll do under constraint.Wouldn't it be kind of cool to see a game where there were realistic restrictions, though? You go along thinking you're playing just another war game, shoot the wrong person, and suddenly you're in a Law and Order type game where you have to gather evidence and argue with your lawyer in order to proceed to the next level... I hate violent video games. If the things I'm supposed to kill look anything like people I don't like to play. But I would totally play a lawyer.
September 2, 2011
Court Martial: The Video Game!
Alyssa at ThinkProgress wrote a brief blog post about how some video game is banning killing civilians in the game, and suggests alternatives to addressing random acts of in-game violence:
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Can we also have a PTSD meter that fills slowly fills up with every act of violence that you see? And a mini-game where you have to hold your CO's intestines in until the medics arrive?
Totally. ...God, now I'm imagining a mini-game where the organs are falling from the ceiling and you have to catch them. Ewww.
Post a Comment