Uncharted NES: Critics: 'Left Behind' game glorifies violence- http://tinyurl.com/wu64s02/12/2012 - 4:34pm
|
Zen: I felt Brutal Legends was a funny & beautiful look at the world of rock from Double Fines point of view. The only parts I wasn't hot for were the RTS bits as it felt forced. Otherwise fantastic.02/12/2012 - 1:34pm
|
DorthLous: Passed 1.5M$. And I'd also say that Brutal Legend is far from being a bad game. I just think it was a few levels under what people expected from the people working on the project.02/11/2012 - 8:25am
|
Technogeek: Brutal Legend wasn't bad so much as "marketing had no idea how the game actually played", causing it to suffer accordingly.02/10/2012 - 10:38pm
|
RedMage: It looks the CIA's website has been DDOS'ed. Anon?02/10/2012 - 7:52pm
|
RedMage: Brutal Legend.02/10/2012 - 7:52pm
|
ddrfr33k: Has anything Tim Schafer ever made been of crap caliber? I'm struggling to think of one...02/10/2012 - 7:37pm
|
Guamish: I think it is in good hands. Tim did a game for the GDC award show and that was fun for how short it was.02/10/2012 - 12:22pm
|
Andrew Eisen: It'll be tragic if the game ultimately sucks.02/10/2012 - 12:17pm
|
james_fudge: $1.3 million02/10/2012 - 11:32am
|
Uncharted NES: Germany Says It Won't Sign ACTA [Update: ... Yet]- http://tinyurl.com/7r2twrg02/10/2012 - 11:21am
|
Andrew Eisen: Damn. Double Fine's Kickstarter fund has already passed a million dollars.02/09/2012 - 8:16pm
|
Andrew Eisen: Audrey didn't quote the sassy parts. Here's IGN's article: http://wii.ign.com/articles/121/1218359p1.html And here's my original post: http://tinyurl.com/7y68a3902/09/2012 - 7:50pm
|
james_fudge: I hope you some said something sassy! Where's the link?02/09/2012 - 7:46pm
|
Andrew Eisen: Hey, neat. IGN quoted a blog I had writen only two hours earlier. I certainly timed that one pretty well.02/09/2012 - 7:38pm
|
Andrew Eisen: Toki Tori has been added to the Humble Bundle for Android.02/09/2012 - 5:11pm
|
james_fudge: Thanks for the heads-up DorthLous02/09/2012 - 4:33pm
|
DorthLous: Will do, my apologies.02/09/2012 - 4:14pm
|
Andrew Eisen: I appreciate the heads up but please keep typo alerts to the specific article's comments or PMs.02/09/2012 - 3:33pm
|
DorthLous: The title says 30, but in the article, the developer says it's like a 20% net tax http://www.gamepolitics.com/2012/02/09/developers-call-facebook-currency-transaction-fee-thirty-percent-tax02/09/2012 - 2:43pm
|
Comments
Any prudent parent knows about the rating system. The basic problem is that alot of other forms of media are losing ground to the internet and games. So they want to villify all the gamers of the world and yet I can turn on TV on any given day and see more violence then I have seen in 99% of the games out there.
The game is not marketed towards chiuldren to start with. But the dumb, lazy parents will buy into it as they use TV and other media as a babysitter.
It wasn't made for kids, any parent that even considers buying something like that for their kids needs to be evaluated.
I don't even see the point of the 17 year old in the video, he was basically there to say, "Yeah when my parents say no, I go out and buy an M-rated game."
Great parenting right there, how do you not notice your kid is playing a game in the living room you said not to buy.
The quality of the video is messed up though, at least for me, so I mgiht have heard it wrong.
THEY didn't say the game was marketed to kids, The key word is "Critics"
The CRITICS are the ones who are referring Manhunt 2 as that.
They could have used better sources and looked at the ESRB and how they rate games.
In the end, just another example of shoddy reporting for shock value.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
Random Tower: Game News and Commentary
I'm actually a little pissed about them using some random 17 year old. There had to be a better person to use as a counter-point. Did they even try to ask the ESRB about the game? Oh, wait. That would require effort.
E. Zachary Knight hit the bulls-eye.
In the main this is because:
The Journalists/producers have no idea what they're talking about
The news companies want the biggest shock and money spinning headlines
The average viewer/reader knows little about the subject and is quite happy to be spoonfed idiocy and mis-apprehensions to make their lives easier.
Oh man, can you imagine? It'll be Hot Coffee 2: Cold Tea!
I think you're being generous. That wasn't a _little_ in Yee's favor, it was disgustingly so, for various reasons (some already cited).
1. Deliberately framing Manhunt 2 as a game meant "for children".
2. Not bothering to point out that as a 17 year old, there is no reason for the store NOT to sell him an M-rated game.
3. Not bothering to point out that the responsibility of enforcing the ESRB's ratings falls upon the RETAILERS, not the publishers or developers.*
4. Failing to point out that Yee's attempted legislation and its ilk has already been shot down as unconstitutional, once in California and EIGHT TIMES before that.
5. Not bothering to have someone who actually represents the industry to offer a counter-point. I'm sorry, but what that kid said doesn't even qualify as counter-point. This piece basically said "Senator Yee is trying to keep Manhunt 2, an adult game that R*/T2 somehow managed to get re-rated to M, out of the hands of children. The end."**
*This seems minor when you consider that "we're all part of the industry, we're all in this together", but we're not. Not to that degree, anyway.
**That entire synopsis I used was both accurate and also constructed of at least 4 different complete fallacies, yet it is what the average viewer will take out of the news piece.
The fact of the matter is, most people are completely ignorant of this whole issue, the ESRB, and how it works. I'm fairly certain (based on empyrical evidence only) that most parents don't even realize there is a rating system for them to turn to at all, let alone reference on the box. If anything, we should be seeing legislature to expand the advertising of the ESA/ESRB so that more parents can become aware of the rating system.
That wasn't actually needed for it.
Just because Leland Yee has a Ph.D AND is a politician does not mean he is more insightful and informative than your average person. Yee has a liberal agenda and he'll push it every single time he can, and the audience he caters to believes in the liberal "nanny state" concept as well.
Maybe you already know that, but some Ph.D's are "book smart common sense stupid" types.
I'm sorry, I didn't follow that O.o What wasn't needed for what?
On the other hand I understand that the industry is making great strides on the retail front to make sure minors aren't able to purchase, without an adult anyway, age inappropriate material.
Were we watching the same video?
By the way, here's an email address for the station for anyone who wants to comment:
[b]webstaff@nbc11.com[/b]
I'm writing to them right now, to point out among other things, the shoddy journalism and total lack of research.
The thing with transparency is that it will inevitably lead to the system being pre-emptively second-guessed and criticized. Someone like Yee sees a movie or game he doesn't like, for his own reasons, and he'll come up with all sorts of illegitimate garbage to throw at it, while it's still _pending a rating_. It's just begging for loads of red tape.
Once the rating is done and the product is released, they can compare it all they want to the rating it received, and if it was really improperly rated, they'll know _then_. Before they get the opportunity to push the release back for who knows how long with petty BS.
It isn't like some vast conspiracy to rate games too leniently could be hidden...once the game is OUT then everyone can see what they rated. But letting them see the process as it happens is the perfect opportunity for people like Yee to dump a bucket of monkey wrenches into the gears.
You made a good point about how TV news is heavily biased against video games and gamers.The dirty tricks that old media is pulling are getting more outrageous as the days go by.New media (games,internet) are a major concern to old media corparations.Old media has lost a large amount of market share in the last few years.18 to 30 year olds are not watching as much television as they did 10,20 years ago.When it comes to it,it all about the money.Thus increasing the bias that a local news broadcast can give.Take a look at newspaper biz,local and national newspapers have lost a lot buisness over the last decade because the internet has gobbled up most of their marketshare.The lost of that marketshare eventualy resulted to smaller paychecks to local papers and local TV stations.This leads directly to the anti-new media bias that we been seeing lately.
Bingo.
Your long comment directed to commander toad wasn't needed.
O...kay...not sure why you had a problem with my post. I'm pretty sure everything I said was factually accurate.
That argument, unfortunately, is a double-edged sword. Some people are mature enough for M rated material when they're younger, and some honestly aren't ready for it by the time they're 30. But in order to enforce a regulation, they need to draw a line somewhere. That line was drawn at 17.
And it should be noted that it is NOT illegal for a
...NOT illegal for a
A child younger than 17 is allowed to PLAY an M/AO title, just not to BUY it. If the parent feels that the 16 year old child is mature enough for an M title, go ahead and buy it for him, AFTER doing some research so you know what you're actually buying.
I'd rather a parent have to go into the store with the 16 year old and make the purchase legitimately, than have a 16 year old be able to buy the game unattended, even if his parents determine he is mature enough for it. How is the retailer supposed to know if the parent isn't there?
The system we have DOES work, when it's actually enforced.
I'd love an Edit option.
Still, when was the last time anything was enforced in Britain? (Sodding country.. it's only just started to warm up! We'll be in a Neuclear Winter next..)
In some essence you're right, but i feel the line should be drawn alot lower then it is right now. Of course the vast majority of young children should probably not play violent M rated games, that's common sense, but i feel that the vast majority high school age teenagers can handle these games no problem. IMO i say we should give teenagers more rights as well as responsibilities rather then infantizing them as if they were 6.
In the end if we keep putting more restrictions on youth, taking away their First Amendment rights, raising the age limits for everything, make it so they're unresponsible for their own actions under the guise that they're not mature enough ect. it will harm then more then help them. Today's society is extremely ageist and anti-youth, and is always trying to protect them from things they neither want nor need protection from. I believe that overprotection and shielding youth from everything is amongst one of the most harmful thing that can be done to youth.
The problem with that is that there is no problem. As soon as anyone important sees that however, you'll be labeled a Liberal Slimeball.
I agree with you there. If we completely protect "children" from EVERYTHING, soon enough they will not be able to handle those things when they are deemed "ready".
Imagine keeping a child completely isolated from TV, movies, games, politics, people, and anything else you think may be harmful. Then, you suddenly throw them out into the vast ocean of media (being an ass and referencing Romney's ad) at 18 because they are mature enough, now. I ask: what do you think will happen?
My bet is that they will find the worst material that the media has to offer fast and will obsess over it. Imagine a Porn library that rivals your entire collection of games, music, books, and movies. A collection of the most violent and vile movies and games that you could ever find. Favorite Internet sites that range the gambit of hate sites. In short, a pervert. Or maybe a serial killer.
Then again, they could turn into JT 2.0. Wait, is there that much difference between a serial killer and JT? They both violate people for their own perverse sense of satisfaction.
Funny you mention that as Liberals, at least today, are the main offenders when it comes to nanny-state type legislation trying to place more restriction on youth under the guise of protecting them from supposed harm.
- They are called video games not videos. When you call them videos you give the impression that you have no idea what you’re talking about.
- Manhunt 2 is not a game for children. It’s recommended for players 17 and up. It says so right on the box. Can you not read?
- When asked about the re-rate, the ESRB did not say, “Trust us,” it said, “Publishers submit game content to the ESRB on a confidential basis. It is simply not our place to reveal specific details about the content we have reviewed, particularly when it involves a product yet to be released. What can be said is that the changes that were made to the game, including the depictions themselves and the context in which those depictions were presented, were sufficient to warrant the assignment of an M (Mature 17+) rating by our raters.”
- It’s not a big deal that the 17-year-old kid in this video was able to buy an M-rated game. That’s not against store policy and follows the rating’s recommendation. Maybe if the kid was 14 you’d have a point.
Andrew Eisen
Protecting children reminds me of the book Andromeda Strain by Michael Crichton. In this book a satelite crshes in New Mexico (or Arizona or Nevada can't actually remember but it was a desert). This satelite carried a highly contagous and deadly bacteria. Through the course of the book, they tried everything they could to contain it.
During the course of studying the desease they discussed an antibiotic (whether this was made up by Crichton or real I am not sure) that was tested. This drug killed almost all harmful bacteria. It had one really bad side effect. It killed all the good bacteria that our bodies need for daily life. When the patients stopped taking the drug, they died of all sorts of new deseases as the body lost its defense against the good bacteria and was killed by that bacteria when it was reintroduced.
In the end of the book the Andromeda bacteria and animal life ended up adapting to each other and neither harmed the other (the end was a bit accelerated but very true for a good number bacteria)
This is very like games and trying to protect children from 'harmful' media influences. The more you 'protect' children from harmful media influences, the more you kill their interest in 'wholesome' media influence if you are not careful.
PS Andromeda Strain is a great book. I highly recomend it.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
Random Tower: Game News and Commentary
Politics is a very strange world that never makes sense. It's Latteral thinking in Spades.