kirithem asked:
Episode Seven in my series of video “lectures,” made in association with James Portnow, game designer and founder of Divide By Zero Games. I can be reached at floydo_animation at yahoo dot com. You can reach James at jportnow at gmail dot com. You can watch the full-length Fox & Friends news segment here: www.foxnews.com We now have a blog! For updates on the progress of the next episode and more gaming discussion, go to: videogamesand.blogspot.com Like the intro music? Download the full …
#1 by vasilicod5 on April 9, 2010 - 10:51 am
Quote
I think I agree. In my honest opinion, honoring the dead has little to no positive effect on the living. We live with and consort with the living. Why should we honor and consolidate humans after they have died? Not that I am saying we should show disrespect for the dead, heck no. It’s just that those who are still alive should be held more relevant in society than those who have died because the living can share the experience with us in a way that the dead cannot.
#2 by vasilicod5 on April 11, 2010 - 12:44 am
Quote
Modern Warfare 2 took that kind of risk by including the airport mission where you take part in a terrorist attack on civilians. It was frightening, it was unsettling, and it was obviously controversial. But it also hit a chord in my mind that moved me both intellectually and emotionally. This is the progress that Mr. Floyd talked about. Sadly, the rest of the game was a basic retread of “WAR IS AWESOME SHOOT EVERYTHING THAT MOVES” mold. So, the industry is kinda headed in the right way. Kinda.
#3 by cormano64 on April 13, 2010 - 4:43 pm
Quote
Just imagine how that would be. You’re playing with characters based on actual people, some of them alive, some others who didn’t make it.
And it would be a survival horror game, (probably) the first war-themed one in videogame history.
Man… I understand the parents resenting this, but the rest of the moral guardians… screw them AND Faux News.
#4 by kirithem on April 16, 2010 - 4:23 pm
Quote
It’s not really a specific shot at Fox (not intentionally, anyway). They certainly aren’t the only group known for demonizing games. But that particular clip was the best example for the Six Days example.
#5 by TripleM87 on April 17, 2010 - 2:54 pm
Quote
Sad when shit like that happens. I haven’t heard of that game till now. Would’ve like to play it.
#6 by Pejamusmaximus on April 20, 2010 - 5:00 am
Quote
oh god… don’t ever use fox news as some sort of point proving thing…
#7 by HarakiriGTR on April 21, 2010 - 9:37 am
Quote
I think Videogames create controversy because they are interactive. People experience them to the fullest and decide their course.
It will take a decade or two for society understand their art value and respect them as so.
Either ways, it’s nice to know that our youth has a formed opinion about what these games constitute to their lifes.
Do they?
#8 by soapyshoes on April 23, 2010 - 2:48 pm
Quote
It seems like a lot of the scenes sensationalized on the news outlets are really taken out of context, too. You wouldn’t take a sex scene out of a movie and analyze it over and over again, would you Fox News?
It’ll just take time, I think. Especially as our generation gets older, the more the world will come to understand games.
Also, I just think it’s awesome that these videos get people talking. It just shows that not all game players are dragging their knuckles.
#9 by incognito84 on April 23, 2010 - 3:57 pm
Quote
I think As a history lesson, movies also, during the early years of the 1920s and 30s were considered much a novelty and not taken seriously. As film proved it was here to stay, it became respected and now it is one of the most beloved artforms within our cultures. Games are taking the same journey and while they have not reached maturity, they will. Some games of today will be seen as “classics” and games of the past will be looked back upon as the game equivalent to “steamboat willie.” Give it time
#10 by UKHoboso on April 26, 2010 - 11:06 pm
Quote
but games are shit?
#11 by simonbrackeva on April 29, 2010 - 9:57 am
Quote
What’s the difference between watching saving private Ryan or playing MOH allied assault, even tho my grand father died on d-day I would love to be able to simulate what happened that day by hitting the beach in Omaha. It is a form of honor to the soldiers who died in falujah by publish this game, simply becausse we will remember and simulate what they went thro
#12 by cormano64 on May 2, 2010 - 9:01 pm
Quote
This controversy is absurd if you just remember that it was the SOLDIERS who requested the game in the first place.
They survived that ordeal and begged for their stories to betold in a dignified manner, especially in he memory of the ones who did not come back.
A lot of research went into this, even with iraqi combatants. That would have been a incredibly relevant game and people are weak for having criticized one which they didn’t even see before there eyes.
#13 by kurtmcbeth on May 5, 2010 - 7:19 am
Quote
This reminds me of what happened to solders in England after WW1. Many felt that the memorials and days of remembrance honored those who died, a very important thing, but ignored those solders who lived. By showing the experiences of the solders who survive a conflict we understand them and show respect.
#14 by ShateredReality on May 8, 2010 - 11:39 am
Quote
I think well said. games are so much more then what they are credited for. Todays society likes to criticize everything, its getting kind of annoying actually.
#15 by ryanbrandes on May 11, 2010 - 9:52 am
Quote
Great job, brother!
#16 by nygge on May 11, 2010 - 2:22 pm
Quote
wel who ever said the game what ment for kids? parents have a responsibility as well, to ensure they’re kids don’t play something bad, just like you help a kid learn to use his first bike. Games like “Six days in Falujah” was meant for the older audience, and that has to be remembered
#17 by swathim123 on May 12, 2010 - 8:58 pm
Quote
Also, it’s real-time instead of watching something that already happened. Movies: oh, it happened a while ago and I don’t have to make decisions about it. playing video games: I am choosing to kill this person.
My understanding is probably flawed though ’cause I don’t play games often but I figure that’s how parents and opposition see it.
I enjoy your videos thoroughly, keep it up!
#18 by swathim123 on May 14, 2010 - 12:39 am
Quote
I think I haven’t read all the comments below but you ask why people don’t see games the same way they view movies and I think it’s just all about hands-on interaction. watching a soldier kill someone on tv is more bearable than seeing people willingly do it themselves, i think. I can understand how the parents can see us taking the position of the soldier as mockery. Like, ‘my son didn’t kill all those people but now this video game is having his role kill haphazardly oh my!’
#19 by patrick230 on May 14, 2010 - 5:55 pm
Quote
I agree with everything he said, great msg to the gaming industry and society
#20 by lepotica on May 18, 2010 - 1:49 am
Quote
you mean hear, hear?
#21 by 001115163 on May 18, 2010 - 5:29 pm
Quote
Here! Here!
#22 by Esuaci on May 20, 2010 - 4:54 pm
Quote
“Damn, James. Nice.”
Seconded.
#23 by OtakuBozu on May 22, 2010 - 6:58 pm
Quote
Once more, you have nailed the issue in a clear, understandable way, Dan & James.
#24 by AbundantRedundancy on May 24, 2010 - 5:59 pm
Quote
Also, I don’t think videogames need a rebranding. While they’re an art form, they’re not meant to be just an interactive medium; they’re meant to be fun, first and foremost. Hence why they’re “games”.
#25 by AbundantRedundancy on May 25, 2010 - 12:15 pm
Quote
I don’t understand the controversy around Six Days in Fallujah. Depiction of real-life wars in videogames is nothing new, to say the least, so what’s so different about this one?