Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Cranky Editorials About Videogames

Posted by Zonk on Mon May 22, 2006 11:16 AM
from the get-off-my-lawn-ya-dang-kids dept.
Editorial Games
GamePolitics has a roundup of some game-related weekend editorials. Some of them are awful cranky and not terribly well thought-out. From the Peoria Journal-Star: "Many of my college students... seem to be less familiar with books than earlier generations. In part, you can blame the influence of video games in pre-teens' lives. If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or Playstation, I think we know which one a kid will pick... In other words, good writing means good salaries. Think about that the next time you choose between taking your kid to the video store or the library..." Another piece rails against the Columbine videogame, while papers in Louisiana are duking it out over the recently passed videogame legislation.

Related Stories

[+] Louisiana Passes Violent Games Bill 157 comments
GameDaily is reporting that the Louisiana House has passed a violent games bill, aping similar legislation from across the country. From the article: "The bill would allow a judge to determine if a video game is 'patently offensive to prevailing standards' and if it's appealing 'to the minor's morbid interest in violence.' If the title meets these "criteria" the game could be ordered to be pulled from store shelves. Furthermore, someone found guilty of selling one of these games would face fines of between $100 and $2,000, and a prison term of up to one year. According to the Associated Press, even though several members of the House questioned whether the bill would be in violation of the First Amendment, none felt they should vote against the measure."
[+] Too Soon For A Columbine Videogame? 319 comments
neutralino writes "Rocky Mountain News has a story about a computer game based on the Columbine massacre. From the article: 'Called Super Columbine Massacre RPG, the game mixes cartoonish scenes with photographs of Harris and Klebold, pictures taken from newspapers and television stations and excerpts from their writings... [The game's creator] said he wanted to create something profoundly unique and confrontational that would promote a real dialogue on the subject of school shootings.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Cranky Editorials About Videogames 50 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.

  • books vs. video games (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mistshadow2k4 (748958) on Monday May 22 2006, @11:24AM (#15381305) Homepage Journal

    "If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or Playstation, I think we know which one a kid will pick"

    When I was a kid in the 70s they said the same thing about television. (Jesus, don't people remember that? God, I'm not THAT old!) My grandmother told me once that they said the same thing about radio when she was a kid. So what did they blame before radio? I'd imagine it was wanting to play outside instead of reading. Hint: many kids don't like reading all that much, especially ponderous books like Moby Dick

    • You echoed' my first thoughts on the subject.

      BTW, before that they blamed comic books, dime store novels and other cheap, approachable writings for decreasing and abasing the literary level of the youth.

      Here's a clue for the professor: No kid has ever want
    • "So what did they blame before radio?"

      The novel, actually.
    • You used your grandmother's memory to dismiss the idea in general, but were the warnings of your grandmother's time correct? There is some evidence that people are, in general, less literate then they were a century ago before radio, television, and now vi

      • Re:books vs. video games (Score:3, Interesting)

        by kisrael (134664)
        "In New England, the literacy rate was over 50 percent during the first half of the 17th century, and it rose to 70 percent by 1710. By the time of the American Revolution, it was around 90 percent. This is seen by some as a side effect of the Puritan beli
      • "In New England, the literacy rate was over 50 percent during the first half of the 17th century, and it rose to 70 percent by 1710. By the time of the American Revolution, it was around 90 percent. This is seen by some as a side effect of the Puritan beli
      • You used your grandmother's memory to dismiss the idea in general, but were the warnings of your grandmother's time correct? There is some evidence that people are, in general, less literate then they were a century ago before radio, television, and now vi
        • Oh shit, you did not just say "Negroes."

          What century are we in again?
        • Wow! Finally someone puts it into perspective for me! I can't believe I couldn't see it before, but it's just so obvious: blacks and poor people are just stupid!

          JIM: Hey, did you know that literacy has declined every year in the US since racial quotas wer
      • Meh. Video games are too new to be the root of the problem. Look back to TV and radio, and the declining importance put on literacy by schools.

        Lot of people in this thread have said it already...Too much emphasis is put on "getting through" this period or
    • Hint: many kids don't like reading all that much, especially ponderous books like Moby Dick

      A lot of the old classics are completely overrated.

      My mother always complained that we read too many "Fantasy" novels. Heads in the clouds. Read some real literature
      • Terry Pratchett probably does more insight into humanity in 10 pages than the entire literary "canon" combined :(

        • Teachers introduce Austen too early (Score:4, Insightful)

          by tepples (727027) <slash2006@pineight.com> on Monday May 22 2006, @02:34PM (#15382998) Homepage Journal

          if you can't get past that point, I'm not surprised you hate the classics- they all take a refined reader to understand and appreciate.

          The trouble is that curriculum designers expect high school students, whose brains' emotion centers are not yet fully developed, to already be "refined" as you define it. Being forced by the school system to pretend to appreciate college or grad school level themes while in high school is enough to turn a student off from reading fiction.

          [ Parent ]
      • Uggh.. All I've read from Conrad was Heart of Darkness, and now your mention of his name makes me want to hide under my desk :(
        • I never understood how anyone could not like "Heart of Darkness". I can see not being able to wade through "Lord Jim", or some of the more cumbersome short fiction...but man, "Heart of Darkness" was one of the few things I ever got assigned in an english c
      • I can safely say that High School destroyed my love of reading. I don't even want to read ubiquitous Star Wars books anymore. In particular, I blame Maya Angelou.

        Christ, one of the most entertaining books I remember reading was about the Longitude Priz

        • I have to say that High School destroyed my will to read also. In middle school it was awesome, we could read any book from the library we wanted. I read a few C.S. Lewis books, Jurassic Park, and I instantly became hooked on sci-fi/fantasy. I started

  • I can believe this... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Otter (3800) on Monday May 22 2006, @11:27AM (#15381344) Journal
    I'm talking about young people who don't know how to use a period. Or never learned that you need to capitalize "United States." Or have no idea about extreme basics like nouns and verbs, and why one of each must be in every sentence.

    I can believe this is a problem. (A coworker was recently ranting about someone who regularly sends her lengthy emails where the only vowels are the 'o's in 'lol'.) But IM, chatrooms and blogs seem like more likely culprits than games.

    • Re:I can believe this... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by shotfeel (235240) on Monday May 22 2006, @11:47AM (#15381538)
      And sadly, the people who say things like what you quoted will insist the kid must read "Moby Dick" and other classics, while simultandously denigrating the reading of science fiction, fantasy and graphic novels.

      I'd like to know when in the Professor's childhood, millions of kids stayed up until midnight to get their hands on a new book, or waited anxiously by the door for the delivery person to bring their finally un-embargoed book. Then maybe he should visit a local, mainstream bookstore when the final Harry Potter book is released.

      Just because kids don't read what he did or thinks they should, doesn't mean they are any more lacking in literacy.
      [ Parent ]
      • I think Harry Potter is something of a special case, though. It's also very simply written and plotted - compare it to its rough 1960's equivalent, A Wizard of Earthsea, for example.
        • It's also very simply written and plotted

          And I think that's a big part of what makes it so approachable to many kids. Plus it's a fascinating story that hold their attention. What worries me is when I see teachers and parents pushing books they think kids

  • Call Me Ishmae*SZZZNNNNNKK* (Score:5, Insightful)

    by American AC in Paris (230456) * on Monday May 22 2006, @11:29AM (#15381362) Homepage
    If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or Playstation, I think we know which one a kid will pick.

    If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or pick-up a game of baseball, I think we know which one a kid will pick.

    If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or going out on the lake for a day on a friend's boat, I think we know which one a kid will pick.

    If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or hanging out at the local Denny's, I think we know which one a kid will pick.

    If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or mowing the lawn with the blunt edge of a butter knife, I think we know which one a kid will pick.

    Seriously. If we're going to bemoan the fact that kids generally tend to prefer leisure activities to poring over the great classics of Western literature, we could at least pick something that most kids might actually enjoy reading, like Shakespeare (Serial regi-patri-fratricide? Poison-tipped swords? Mass slaughter? Hot chicks? Rawk!)

    But Moby Dick--well, what teen wouldn't be utterly enthralled by a several-hundred-page long account of the finer points of the early American whaler's life and amateur deck-pacing?

    • GamePolitics took a very selective quote, and that is to their detriment.

      TFA actually says, right afterwards:

      "Then again, when I was a kid, I had plenty of non-educational alternatives, from junk TV to sandlot baseball. Yet my mother dragged me to the libr
      • Yet, reading fiction, even the greatest work of "Literature", is no more informative than making a sandcaste. I'm not saying it's wrong. If it floats your boat, whatever.

        But I'm tired of this stuff. The alternative is informative non-fiction. Period. Menti
        • From the perspective of a liturature teacher things may be diffrent...

          Reading Moby Dick or other "classic" works of fiction is "required" as a base point of comparison if you intend to spend the rest of your life picking apart fiction and sucking any enjoy
          • Having said that I am an avid reader, I have not read Moby Dick, I think Dickens is boring and I play the occasonal game, if this makes me uneducated in the eyes of someone with a doctorate in nit-picking so be it.

            Ummm, Herman Melville wrote Moby Dick. Als

  • Moby Dick? (Score:2)

    by Maul (83993)
    Not to be redundant, but I'd pick just about anything over Moby Dick.

  • Purpose and Perspective (Score:4, Interesting)

    by richdun (672214) on Monday May 22 2006, @11:36AM (#15381444)
    I think (and will not substantiate with evidence, as is customary on this Internet thing) that the biggest problem with arguments like those mentioned in TFA is purpose and perspective. It has long been the case that the previous generation doesn't understand the current or next generation simply because they somehow forget that just a few years back it was they who were misunderstand by their previous generation. Age tends to lock us into our own perspectives, and we forget to look for others. I for one have always hated reading the "classics" because they lack relevance and tend to contain language that was long lost - yet society seems to have continued without "thee" "thy" etc.

    I remember in senior English in high school reading passages from Beowulf, then trying to read the original text (in English, but in Old or Middle English). I wonder if the people in those times felt the youngsters were too radical and forgetting their heritage. Language is meant to allow for communication between people and cultures (and times, really). So long as we're able to communicate, and do so effectively, we're good.

    That said, I think the more important dilemna is not youth's rejection of classical education for video games, but the lack of communication that exists between many youth and their parents/grandparents/etc. In most cases, it's not the youth's fault.
  • Cranky editorials about the cranky editorials about video games!

  • Damn (Score:2)

    by bunions (970377)
    I was hoping for a return of Cranky Steve's Haunted Whorehouse map reviews. :mad:

  • Every generation has its culprit (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Opportunist (166417) on Monday May 22 2006, @11:58AM (#15381647)
    Today games, yesterday TV, before that radio, before that it was the "bad books". And I'm quite sure that what we call the "classics" today were the "bad books" of their generation.

    Yes, the language of our kids changes. For the better or worse, who're we to determine that? Looking back 200 years you'll see that the language was laboured, ponderous, loaded with terms and phrases that feel awkward to us today. Yet, if you spoke like we do today back then, you might have been called "simple" and "unrefined", because you use most likely fewer words to express what you want to say, and you do not try to create word constructs that make your listener doze away.

    Language is ever evolving. And while I'm not really fond of the "OMG d00dZ!!!1!!1111" we find in chatrooms more often than people able to create sensible English sentences (non-native speakers are exempted from the requirement), they don't represent the language spoken. They are a minority (even though one that we, as computer users and most likely also chatroom users, tend to meet fairly often).

    Don't worry. They won't write books, so our generation will not be judged by them by future generations.

  • Quick run through (Score:3, Insightful)

    by RogueyWon (735973) * on Monday May 22 2006, @12:01PM (#15381677) Journal
    Ok, random thoughts on each of the articles referenced by TFA:

    The Columbine game: this is one of those times when, even as a fairly straightforward, no compromises, advocate of free-speech, I wish I didn't find myself on the same side as some of these nutcases. Yes, yes, it's their right to say it and yes, I'll defend it. I seriously wish I didn't have to, though. I feel the same way about Rockstar sometimes. Their games rock in terms of the core gameplay (even if they have started recycling of late), they've reinvented several genres several times and if they want to make a game in which you dig up and rape the corpses of the grandmothers of assorted members of congress, then it is their right to do so. But for god's sake, guys, could you not grow up a little? Would make all of our lives so much easier and not make me feel... well... soiled, whenever I have to defend video-games against the latest loud-mouthed office bore.

    On games resulting in poor literacy: this article's slightly better than the snippets in both the summary and TFA. I've worked (briefly) in a school and there's no denying that standards of literacy are hideous today. Is the growth of the games industry a factor? Possibly. There's certainly an extra level of distraction that has resulted from the easy availability of games. However, I think this is missing the point a bit. The primary responsibility for ensuring a child's literacy is split between parents and schools and there are too many cases where both of these fail. I strongly suspect that many of the teachers complaining about videog games are themselves part of the problem. If they would stop chasing after the latest politically correct, culturally sensitive educational paradigm and start actually teaching kids how to write - including incentivising failure and penalising failure - then they might find that school-leavers would suddenly be able to string two words together in print again.

    And the Louisiana thing: Oh for god's sake, have these people nothing better to do? They know the law is unconstitutional and will, after much time, effort and expense, be struck down. Is there not a case for prosecution here, on the grounds of misappropriation of public funds?

  • Compare and Contrast (Score:2, Interesting)

    by nsmike (920396)
    I have a BA in English. I can remember a few of my classmates who were a semester ahead of me in credits, and ended up in a Senior Seminar course with one of the most respected and well-liked professors of the English department (with good reason, he is a

  • What is wrong with Moby Dick? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by B5_geek (638928) on Monday May 22 2006, @12:06PM (#15381712)
    As a bored teenager many years ago I decided to read Moby Dick simply because it is considered a classic (and I wanted to know what the big deal was) {as a bonus, Picard kept making several references to it too}.

    While it was quite slow in places, I did enjoy the book. But I sence that my reaction to it might be unique.

    Am I the only person who thought it was (mostly) Very Funny?

    Disclaimer: yes there are some very somber parts, and humor was not the "all-encompassing" point to the book. Lest we forget the real moral to the story either.

    But, damn I was Laughing out Loud at several parts of the story. My mom would ask "What's so funny?" My reply of "Moby Dick", would only cause her to give me an odd look.

  • Really? (Score:2)

    by thebdj (768618)
    This is just people failing to understand. I read some, a long time ago, but it is not the main attributing factor to my college and professional success. I think that computers, video games and in many cases television can produce children who are intel

    • Re:I'd most certainly hope... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Distinguished Hero (618385) on Monday May 22 2006, @11:33AM (#15381408) Homepage
      As well, reading is much too passive an activity. It encourages mental passiveness, instead of being aware and engaged in our surroundings.

      Exactly. The fact that most of the great thinkers throughout history have been illiterates who never bothered with books further supports your assertion.

      P.S. This post employs a literary device. Figuring out the literary device is left as an exercise for the reader.
      [ Parent ]
    • Reading books like "The Golden Bough" or "Animal Farm" or any of those dusty old books by old, dead white men just encourages mental laziness - you're sitting there, reading words without any kind of interaction on your own. Also it reinforces eurocentric
    • "As well, reading is much too passive an activity. It encourages mental passiveness, instead of being aware and engaged in our surroundings."

      Good grief. I have yet to see any video game that as the depth of a a good book.
      I admit my writing sucks. I am dysl
    • Our society is too "traditionalist" as a whole, revering the "classics" while ignoring the quality that's both modern..and thus more relevent, that's under our noses.

      The problem is, there is no reliable measure of what's "quality" and what isn't in terms o
      • The problem is, there is no reliable measure of what's "quality" and what isn't in terms of what's modern. Are you saying with a straight face that, for example, kids should be exposed to Britney Spears rather than Beethoven? What determines quality? Simpl
      • To me, most books I read really end up lulling my brain down to a lower thought level. There are exceptions but these are not so much in the story, but in the style of writing. (And a wide variety of genres they are too. Pratchett and Rushdie. But if you
      • Actually the signal-to-noise ratio is a lot better than it used to be. I spend most of my time reading non-fiction materal online. Most of that material didn't exist 10 years ago.

        As a whole, non-fiction books really only became widely accessable over the 2
    • Yeah, we totally were. Remember when we all had Moby Dick lunchboxes, Ahab haircuts, fake peg-legs, insisted everyone on the playground call us "Ishmael," and made fun of the weird kid who preferred Hemingway? Good times, man. Good times.
Check for more

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2008 SourceForge, Inc.