[Lorric]

This thread is spawned from the discussion from the "Well that escalated quickly..." thread about whether people will make real life judgements on people based on the way they play games.

This is an alien concept to me. Games are fantasy Worlds and what I do in a game has no bearing on what I do or want to do in the real World. And I also believe that for most people the same holds true.

So I decided to pick a game to study, and I've made this decision as it is a game I have and would heartily recommend, and rather than go after shock factor, I've gone for diversity. It should cover several bases with instances of real life behaviour that is very much not okay, and is in fact, criminal, while not making anyone lose their lunch. But advised, it is rated 18.

The game I have chosen is The Warriors. And the first few stages of this game are essentially an extended tutorial on how to be a criminal gang member. I've picked two videos to show you. Please watch them:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsuHJD4cVGQ#t=6m00s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES9BiIiTwXk#t=1m30s

Please vote in the poll and please share your thoughts with me. Using The Warriors should give us a good base for discussion, but I'm also interested in hearing if people, like me, won't judge you on your gameplay, or if you do judge people on their gameplay and why.

The Warriors is a pretty immersive game, and does a very good job of introducing you to the setting and the role you are to play within the game. I don't see anything wrong with accepting that role and playing it to the full and enjoying it. It's a well made game, with varied stages, objectives, some excellent combat mechanics and challenging gameplay. It's an all around rock solid game, but it shines in the combat. Just watching the gameplay has made me want to get it out and play it again.

[Scotty]

Your question is misaimed.  Or, rather, the intent behind it is.  The argument as presented in the other thread is not about looking down on someone for playing X or Y game.

The point of discussion centered around playing X or Y game, deliberately finding an activity that in real life would be utterly reprehensible (especially in comparison to 'normal' gameplay), and then taking enough pride in one's reprehensible (virtual) behavior to publicly announce that behavior and one's enjoyment of it.

[Lorric]

Your question is misaimed.  Or, rather, the intent behind it is.  The argument as presented in the other thread is not about looking down on someone for playing X or Y game.

The point of discussion centered around playing X or Y game, deliberately finding an activity that in real life would be utterly reprehensible (especially in comparison to 'normal' gameplay), and then taking enough pride in one's reprehensible (virtual) behavior to publicly announce that behavior and one's enjoyment of it.

It's still not making sense. So somehow if someone found a way to do what is depicted in these videos in a game where it's not normal gameplay that would make it worse? Doesn't make sense. You play the game, the game doesn't play you. You decide how you're going to play the game.

EDIT: Even in that game it was killing people instead of... killing people. But somehow it makes it worse because they're strippers...?

[NGTM-1R]

It's still not making sense. So somehow if someone found a way to do what is depicted in these videos in a game where it's not normal gameplay that would make it worse? Doesn't make sense. You play the game, the game doesn't play you. You decide how you're going to play the game.

You are being obtuse, and I strongly suspect it's deliberate. I can't go around murdering prostitutes in Wargame: Red Dragon. I can unleash devastation on a truly vast scale, to the point it would legitimately be possible to measure the number of people killed at times in hundreds per minute, but I cannot go around murdering prostitutes. This is because there are no prostitutes to murder.

Similarly, I can't kill women in a Carmen Sandiego game. This is because I have not been given a mechanism to engage in any sort of violence at all. I can't kill women because I can't even poke people in the ribs.

Player action in the game is defined by what is allowable by the rules of the game; this was a major point of discussion in the other thread that spawned this one, and I suspect your statement here is deliberately obtuse because you were a participant in that discussion. You should already know this.

[pecenipicek]

Lorric, because nobody apparently explained it to you in the past, not everything needs a "look from the other side". You dont have to play the devil's advocate on all discussions.

[Lorric]

Lorric, because nobody apparently explained it to you in the past, not everything needs a "look from the other side". You dont have to play the devil's advocate on all discussions.

Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

[Aardwolf]

Lorric, because nobody apparently explained it to you in the past, not everything needs a "look from the other side". You dont have to play the devil's advocate on all discussions.

No, because half the time I do that

[Lorric]

Hmmmm...

I wonder if I should have picked a game I haven't played. I thought The Warriors was a great choice and I put a lot of thought into that choice, but the problem with this is if you vote yes, that means you're not just looking down on those who play the game, you're looking down on me. And I don't suppose that's the easiest thing to talk about, for a yes voter or for me.

Trouble is though, I don't know enough about games I haven't played. It's a catch 22.

Still, the poll will be useful if enough people vote in it.

[NGTM-1R]

Still, the poll will be useful if enough people vote in it.

For what? It's far too broad. People could be voting for Yes or No or Snuffleupagus because they think it's a bad game, or from a bad developer, or they want to mess with the poll because don't like you, or dozens of other reasons. If you wanted to get a useful answer the initial questioning should have been better, and definitely not presented in the thread title so people don't have to read your post before they vote.

You want to produce statistically useful answers, you must phrase the questions very carefully for specificity. (And not include Snuffy options.) You're not getting anything useful out of this poll, and the only thing anyone else is getting out of it is a display of your ignorance; in general based on your bad reactions to people trying to help you/explain things to you that have been explained to you before and in specific of how to collect statistical data.

[karajorma]

I'm going to have to agree that this thread is a complete waste of everyone's time. Closed.