call of duty 6 modern war fare 2

timberflake

robredz wrote: »

How to confuse a PCW salesman, tell him you could show him the definition of futility, install Norton on a Linux box using WINE.

huh??.........

b33r

timberflake wrote: »

Seriously? That's your argument?? There is a massive difference between "killing" pixelated icons that don't even resemble a living creature and shooting a person in the head and watching their blood spray all over the place!

Your argument simply doesn't stand up and I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're under 18 and that's why your fighting a losing argument!

It's a game, if you don't understand that you shouldn't be playing. Simples.

I've played "violent" video games since I was 11 and Duke Nukem 3d came out. Never did me any harm because I was intelligent enough to understand the difference between real life and a computer game.

If you have kids I presume you're ok with them playing a game that involves smashing your head on bricks, jumping on small creatures and tripping out on magic mushrooms?

[Deleted User]

timberflake wrote: »

I see your point to a degree and I remember my parents buying a the original Resident Evil when I was 14, but the graphics in computer games now are so realistic even down to the physics of how the blood splatters.

Yeah, I played Wolfenstein, Doom, Quake, Carmageddon, GTA and pretty much everything else that had a rating.

This kind of game is just too graphic to allow a minor to play, its right up there with GTA ans Manhunt in my books. Kids shouldn't be seeing this kind of imagry when their minds are still developing, they get de-sensitised to it and all of a sudden a generation or two down the line, this kind of behaviour is deemed "normal".

Better stop them watching the news then, that's pretty graphic.

When you a child, that's the time for your parents to instil some value's into you, when you grow up into a young adult you should then be mature and well adjusted enough to handle this kind of thing. Young kids are far too impressionable for this stuff.

That's your opinion, which I disagree with. The real world is much more vivid and influencing than a game. Years before I would be able to buy 18 rated games I was firing automatic weapons in the Cadets and riding in helicopters and generally doing Army things. That's significantly more real than playing a game.

Oneday77

So if games are rated at 18 why are other ratings/laws so out of touch.
You can get married at 16, have sex, get pregnant and claim to be an adult. But you can't drive for another year, drink for 2 and leagally aren't out of your parents care for 9. You can have full responsibilty of bringing up a new life but can't shoot pixels :rolleyes:
Tell me how many fathers play video games but couldn't bear the beauty\brutailty of child birth?

superscaper

Oneday77 wrote: »

So if games are rated at 18 why are other ratings/laws so out of touch.
You can get married at 16, have sex, get pregnant and claim to be an adult. But you can't drive for another year, drink for 2 and leagally aren't out of your parents care for 9. You can have full responsibilty of bringing up a new life but can't shoot pixels :rolleyes:
Tell me how many fathers play video games but couldn't bear the beauty\brutailty of child birth?

At present BBFC classifications aren't legally enforceable. I.e. a shop could sell an 18 film or game to a child and there isn't anything that could be done. Shops have basically agreed to stick to the age classifications voluntarily in restricting who they sell to.

Oneday77

superscaper wrote: »

At present BBFC classifications aren't legally enforceable. I.e. a shop could sell an 18 film or game to a child and there isn't anything that could be done. Shops have basically agreed to stick to the age classifications voluntarily in restricting who they sell to.

If the age rating is the usual DVD style Red 18 in a circle it is enforcable, which most 15s and 18s are. If it is 15+ or 18+ on a white background then they are advisory. Retailers and can be fine and jailed if they break the rules of the former style of rating.

superscaper

Oneday77 wrote: »

If the age rating is the usual DVD style Red 18 in a circle it is enforcable, which most 15s and 18s are. If it is 15+ or 18+ on a white background then they are advisory. Retailers and can be fine and jailed if they break the rules of the former style of rating.

Not at the moment it isn't. The Video Recordings Act 1984 was found to be unenforceable a couple of months ago because of government screw up. I've not seen anything to say that the Government has rectified this and it would be a relatively slow process to do so anyway. I'll reiterate BBFC classifications are currently not legally enforceable (all prosecutions in progress were instantly dropped).

Mercenary

There are worse things seen on television programmes, in the news and in films these days, which many people under 18 can access at any time.
In order to see or play this game it has to be purchased and then installed so it's not like it just appears out of the blue one day on the PC/Xbox/PS3 ready to shock little Susie or Jack when they switch it on. Furthermore, little Susie or Jack shouldn't be in possession of that amount of pocket money in the first place, so the only way they would see any of it is if they wander into the room while it's being played by someone else.

It's also not just men and boys who play this type of game.....I do too and I'm a woman of a certain age .
Installed it yesterday and had no problem with the controversial airport scene at all as IT'S A GAME :cool:.

donnajunkie

timberflake wrote: »

Seriously? That's your argument?? There is a massive difference between "killing" pixelated icons that don't even resemble a living creature and shooting a person in the head and watching their blood spray all over the place!

Your argument simply doesn't stand up and I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're under 18 and that's why your fighting a losing argument!

the point i was making is just because a game involves shooting it doesnt mean it is that bad. games arent as real as films and most films arent particularly realistic.
i wish i was under 18.

timberflake

b33r wrote: »

It's a game, if you don't understand that you shouldn't be playing. Simples.

I've played "violent" video games since I was 11 and Duke Nukem 3d came out. Never did me any harm because I was intelligent enough to understand the difference between real life and a computer game.

If you have kids I presume you're ok with them playing a game that involves smashing your head on bricks, jumping on small creatures and tripping out on magic mushrooms?

Look, I'm not saying that kids can't tell the difference between a game and real life but children immitate what they see. When I was a kid, wrestling was all the rage, so what did we do? Spend all our free time wrestling eachother. There was a case in the news not too long ago about a lad who spend all his time on Manhunt and ended up executing another child.

I simply cannot get my head around how grown adults with children thinks its not only ok to watch this kind of violence but interact with it!