10-08-2013, 04:49 AM
Well Adam can just read this as it is in the official rules:
![[Image: form.jpg]](http://lafinjack.net/images/random/form.jpg)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73
10-08-2013, 04:51 AM
now if only adam was actually here to read the damn rules.....
10-08-2013, 05:22 AM
Once in a while it's okay.
Taking a UG'er seriously.
(10-08-2013, 04:37 AM)Grungie Wrote: [ -> ]stuffThere's your problem.
Taking a UG'er seriously.
12-02-2013, 01:01 AM
I've been thinking about this and I'm somewhat troubled by it. I didn't know whether to put this here or the venting thread.
I know that within the past twenty years, there has been less real-world violence, and there seems to be a correlation between that and the rise of popular violent video games such as Doom and Mortal Kombat in the early 90s. I remember seeing this correlation in a statistical graph showing releases of popular games in the nineties and a drop in real-world violence, and recent viewings of video game Youtube videos (specifically, PBG) have really started to bug me philosophically.
The fact of the matter is that many gamers pick on fictional characters in order to flesh out behaviors they couldn't, let alone wouldn't, in real life, and this is evidenced by the aforementioned correlation. A prime example would be GTA, in which organized crime, obviously auto theft, killing civilians, so on and so forth, is glorified and is your main objective. Hell, the company that makes the franchise actually pays reviewers to say bad things about the game because it actually boosts sales as people have a reptilian thirst for everything that is controversial.
I can't help but feel disturbed about this nonetheless. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those guys who thinks we should ban all violent, crass and disturbing media, especially considering the real-world implications that seem to go against the popular belief that violent media trains or incites people to be more violent. However, it's disturbing that people actually enjoy violence and "vent off" their thirst for it in a fictional world. The only thing that keeps such behavior legal is that it's fictionalized, but it's still violence at the hands of a person in some shape or form. In other words, the disturbing part to me is that violence is glorified and that people enjoy it one way or another.
Take Quentin Tarantino, for example. His movies are, as far as I'm concerned, watched primarily if not only for the violent content (I cannot know for sure because I've personally never watched a Tarantino movie). The stories are virtually nonexistent or even historically inaccurate, and there is virtually no moral content. There really isn't that much flesh to his movies, yet he is consistently cited as an amazing filmmaker, and I don't know why (again, I haven't watched any of his movies, but this is practically what I've heard of him).
In ancient Rome, people would go to the coliseum to watch not fictional violence, but very real, gruesome executions of prisoners at the hands of savage beasts. Most people will tell you that we as a society have evolved since then, but I feel like we haven't really; people do seem to have their heads a little more screwed on right morally, but that bloodthirst is still present. I'm not suggesting fictional character rights (that would be silly) as much as I'm just wondering why people are amused by killing fictional characters (in some cases killing said characters just for fun) but terrified by the prospect of killing real people nowadays.
In a final example, stormtroopers. In Star Wars, handfuls of these soldiers are killed, but since they all look the same and the viewer never really has time to sympathize with individuals or know them, the viewer doesn't attach himself to them and, even though they die one after the other, presumably leaving a wife and kids behind, their losses don't particularly affect the viewer, who forgets about them a scene later.
Man, I feel like a middle-aged mom just writing this down. Maybe I'm just thinking this through too much. Somebody please pull me back down to Earth.
I know that within the past twenty years, there has been less real-world violence, and there seems to be a correlation between that and the rise of popular violent video games such as Doom and Mortal Kombat in the early 90s. I remember seeing this correlation in a statistical graph showing releases of popular games in the nineties and a drop in real-world violence, and recent viewings of video game Youtube videos (specifically, PBG) have really started to bug me philosophically.
The fact of the matter is that many gamers pick on fictional characters in order to flesh out behaviors they couldn't, let alone wouldn't, in real life, and this is evidenced by the aforementioned correlation. A prime example would be GTA, in which organized crime, obviously auto theft, killing civilians, so on and so forth, is glorified and is your main objective. Hell, the company that makes the franchise actually pays reviewers to say bad things about the game because it actually boosts sales as people have a reptilian thirst for everything that is controversial.
I can't help but feel disturbed about this nonetheless. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those guys who thinks we should ban all violent, crass and disturbing media, especially considering the real-world implications that seem to go against the popular belief that violent media trains or incites people to be more violent. However, it's disturbing that people actually enjoy violence and "vent off" their thirst for it in a fictional world. The only thing that keeps such behavior legal is that it's fictionalized, but it's still violence at the hands of a person in some shape or form. In other words, the disturbing part to me is that violence is glorified and that people enjoy it one way or another.
Take Quentin Tarantino, for example. His movies are, as far as I'm concerned, watched primarily if not only for the violent content (I cannot know for sure because I've personally never watched a Tarantino movie). The stories are virtually nonexistent or even historically inaccurate, and there is virtually no moral content. There really isn't that much flesh to his movies, yet he is consistently cited as an amazing filmmaker, and I don't know why (again, I haven't watched any of his movies, but this is practically what I've heard of him).
In ancient Rome, people would go to the coliseum to watch not fictional violence, but very real, gruesome executions of prisoners at the hands of savage beasts. Most people will tell you that we as a society have evolved since then, but I feel like we haven't really; people do seem to have their heads a little more screwed on right morally, but that bloodthirst is still present. I'm not suggesting fictional character rights (that would be silly) as much as I'm just wondering why people are amused by killing fictional characters (in some cases killing said characters just for fun) but terrified by the prospect of killing real people nowadays.
In a final example, stormtroopers. In Star Wars, handfuls of these soldiers are killed, but since they all look the same and the viewer never really has time to sympathize with individuals or know them, the viewer doesn't attach himself to them and, even though they die one after the other, presumably leaving a wife and kids behind, their losses don't particularly affect the viewer, who forgets about them a scene later.
Man, I feel like a middle-aged mom just writing this down. Maybe I'm just thinking this through too much. Somebody please pull me back down to Earth.
12-02-2013, 02:32 AM
Joel, go play some video games. /pulltoearthaccomplished
12-02-2013, 03:24 AM
I'm playing Ocarina of Time right now, lol.
I'm in Gerudo Fortress.
I'm in Gerudo Fortress.
12-02-2013, 06:09 AM
(12-02-2013, 03:24 AM)JoelCarli Wrote: [ -> ]I'm playing Ocarina of Time right now, lol.Nice. I've been alternating between CivIV and Dark Souls all night. Dark Souls is hard, lol.
I'm in Gerudo Fortress.
12-04-2013, 06:42 AM
My comment to you Joel is that destroying inanimate objects in video games can sometimes be just as good for venting as attacking living things, so I don't know if it necessarily has to be a bloodthirsty thing, unless you're talking about destructive behavior in general.
Also I wasn't under the impression that Tarentino's movies are really all about the violence, but then I haven't watched any of them either.
Also I wasn't under the impression that Tarentino's movies are really all about the violence, but then I haven't watched any of them either.
12-04-2013, 05:29 PM
(12-04-2013, 06:42 AM)Danjo Wrote: [ -> ]Also I wasn't under the impression that Tarentino's movies are really all about the violence, but then I haven't watched any of them either.They're not. But all of his films do tend to have violence. As an example, Gran Torino, which is about the bond that forms between a really grouchy old man and a Hmong teen, has the main character dying to several gunshot wounds. It also has the Hmong teen's sister being raped by her cousin and a few of his gang buddies (not shown, but the aftermath is shown, and her face is fairly bloody still).
12-04-2013, 06:46 PM
(12-02-2013, 06:09 AM)crazysam23 Wrote: [ -> ]Nice. I've been alternating between CivIV and Dark Souls all night. Dark Souls is hard, lol.
From my understanding, Dark Souls is more tedious than hard. Like you have to go around and grind a bit, then do the adventuring. Which is different from most of those action RPG's where you run around and kill shit like a boss.