Games

[NORDIC HEALER]

Have you seen the new army commerical where the kids are playing a video game and then it morphs into a soldier asking them if they want a 'real challenge'?

I have Not seen this commercial as I have not owned a TV in about 5 years now and only rarely watch the box at a friends house. But that's a scary extension from "Killing Game" to Killing Reality"!!

I have a roommate though who has the TV on (in his room) about 16 hours a day. YIKES! And yes I have tried to explain the Deleterious consequences of watching so much TV, but to no real avail. I must admit that even knowing it's on in another part of the house, that many hours, I find disturbing.

Even worse I have known people who actually use the TV to Sleep by. If you turn the TV off, they wake up and claim they were watching whatever program was playing. Never mind they were snoring just prior. LOL. For awhile my brother was in that crazy state of affairs.

And of course when you're asleep the Consciousness is no longer guarding the castle, so now All the programmed Garbage can pour into the subconscious totally unobstructed. How convenient.

 

[dant]

Interesting you bring to attention of the 'real challenge' message from the Army
but did you know that there was a recruiting slump that was really going down
fast, had the PTB worried for lack of enough 'fodder for the cannons', started
talks about recalling the draft, went into "damage control/regrouping" and then
almost suddenly had doubled recruiting quotas because more money/incentives
is suddenly available (or is it really?), dangled about the $1000-$2000 in sign-on
bonuses and also available to recruiters meeting their quotas? Recall that some
recruiters have been caught using 'tricks' so they could to snare a recruit by
promising everything verbally but not authorized nor written in the contract(s) sort
of like a 'snake oil salesman's pitch? Some of these recruiters were exposed and
paraded in national news, remember that?

It was recently shown on TV news of an 'investigative reporter' looking into the
successful recruiting campaign, showed a scene that panned towards two people
who have signed on (a very young man and woman) and both were heard to say:
"I joined because it was easy money", and laughed and then the recruiter continued
to explain that there was more money available (from where?) to provide more
incentives such as potentially $20,000 in scholarships (but one must file a claim
and be authorized for it after they get out?). The reporter showed a graph (made
available by the proud recruiter) of the reversing trend showing a declining trend
almost hitting the bottom and suddenly reversing itself to a steep upward climb
and the recruiter was heard to say something like 30,000 more recruits have been
signed on. Don't forget that this money infusion was authorized by a newly replaced
democrat Congress! So what happened to the democrat's promises to bring the
troops home?

Statistically, what are the odds of getting out alive intact (physically/psychologically)
and realistically be able to collect these "benefits"? Most do not realize that the devil
is always in the details as in the contracts that they signed, and perhaps not all recruits
may be aware of what benefits they might actually receive until after the fact? Seems
this is evident from the "horror stories" we heard with flaps such as the Walter Reed
Hospital incident and many other scattered sad stories?

As we have already seen: If you die, no claim can be filed because well, you're dead.
If you are maimed/incapacitated you do not automatically get the best health care
benefit, you are required to file your claims (and the odds are against you in getting
this claim approved, if at all, or in a timely manner especially when you NEED IT NOW,
and as for long term care, you are still required to file new claims for each step as
needed and it is subject to authorization, and so on).

I think the odds are grossly in favor of the PTB like a deck of cards stacked in the
house's favor and as for the recruit, all this "sacrifice" and for what? Was it the promise
of Adventure? Money? Patriotism? Proudly getting stamped medals to put on one's chest
or on the left or right arm? Is it really worth your life to get these "benefits"?

But getting back to this thread, there are all sorts of commercials from the Army/National
Guard, etc. and from time to time you will see commercials that have a 'gaming flavor' in
their themes! Whoa! The US Government is taking their marketing skills to the highest levels
and it smacks of a level of corporate marketing skills flavor and they are VERY clever to add
'hooks' into the certain messages as if as a 'trigger' to draw in those to which might be not be
acutely aware to be bonded to this message and act upon it, almost automatically!? Doesn't
this seem like mass-media programming targeted towards recruits aged from 18 to 30(?) years
in age who might also be (addicted) gamers as well?

Sadly, I have seen the roll-call of those killed in action and statistically most are in this age group
and rarely do you see anyone older than that.

Very interesting indeed.

 

[GRiM]

I really think this video captures the point of mindless killing in video-games!
Interesting and unusual perspective.

goomba's lifetime

One might even say its a bit funny :)

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

I really think this video captures the point of mindless killing in video-games!
Interesting and unusual perspective.

goomba's lifetime

One might even say its a bit funny :)

Well yeah I mean, Mario does sorta kill anything that gets in his way, regardless of who or why, to liberate the princess. He really has the same idea of liberation as US does. Well no, I guess not really, cuz Mario does liberate the princess after he is done killing thousands. US doesn't actually have anybody to liberate. Hmm unless this whole time "liberate" means "liberate from the entrapment of physicality". Aha now I get it...

 

[Johnno]

Occasionally people ask me (me being the Alpha Nerd in my family) what game they should buy for their young kid/nephew/cousin/etc.. Nowadays I say "get them some music making software, or Photoshop, Flash, video editing software or a programming language". Far more rewarding than any game.

I think it's just because games are so mainstream these days that more kids aren't into making stuff on the computer. (Well maybe there are lots who are? But among the younger people I know, not many). I begged for a C compiler for Christmas one year as a kid... sadly my parents ended up buying me a copy of Fortran. :)

[edit] Ok, I shouldn't say "it's JUST because..", but "it's partially because..". Obviously there'd be a lot of other factors too..

This is a really good idea.....I'll be using that one when I get asked.

 

[j0da]

Occasionally people ask me (me being the Alpha Nerd in my family) what game they should buy for their young kid/nephew/cousin/etc.. Nowadays I say "get them some music making software, or Photoshop, Flash, video editing software or a programming language". Far more rewarding than any game.

I think it's just because games are so mainstream these days that more kids aren't into making stuff on the computer. (Well maybe there are lots who are? But among the younger people I know, not many). I begged for a C compiler for Christmas one year as a kid... sadly my parents ended up buying me a copy of Fortran. :)

[edit] Ok, I shouldn't say "it's JUST because..", but "it's partially because..". Obviously there'd be a lot of other factors too..

This is a really good idea.....I'll be using that one when I get asked.

Those parents might want to buy graphic tablet along with photoshop or flash. Small and cheap would suffice. People just love to play with this stuff and I bet kids would have lots of fun with it too. Little ones might get bored with gfx software alone, but with this thingie..that's a whole another story ;)

 

[GRiM]

I also think its a kinda good idea. But:

Photoshop CS3 Price: $625.99
Reason 3.0 Price: $499.00

But im sure there at cheaper alternatives, or maybe a earlier version of said software.

 

[Johnno]

Occasionally people ask me (me being the Alpha Nerd in my family) what game they should buy for their young kid/nephew/cousin/etc.. Nowadays I say "get them some music making software, or Photoshop, Flash, video editing software or a programming language". Far more rewarding than any game.

I think it's just because games are so mainstream these days that more kids aren't into making stuff on the computer. (Well maybe there are lots who are? But among the younger people I know, not many). I begged for a C compiler for Christmas one year as a kid... sadly my parents ended up buying me a copy of Fortran. :)

[edit] Ok, I shouldn't say "it's JUST because..", but "it's partially because..". Obviously there'd be a lot of other factors too..

This is a really good idea.....I'll be using that one when I get asked.

Those parents might want to buy graphic tablet along with photoshop or flash. Small and cheap would suffice. People just love to play with this stuff and I bet kids would have lots of fun with it too. Little ones might get bored with gfx software alone, but with this thingie..that's a whole another story ;)

What about a box of crayons or a box of watercolour paints :)

 

[j0da]

There is Corel Graphics Suite - vector and bitmap gfx software included. Costs around 300$. Then there is open source (means Free) Gimp.

Small Wacom tablet - around 100$, but there are cheaper alternatives.

What about a box of crayons or a box of watercolour paints

Are you kidding? These ain't "cool" anymore! :D

 

[brandon]

Yep, the high price is the downside of such programs... But they may still be using them after years, or end up using them professionally.. where a computer game is more likely to give just a few weeks of "entertainment", if that.

jOda: Graphics tablet - great idea! (I wanna play with one too!). That'd be a much cheaper alternative - graphics tablet plus some free software like the Gimp. There's also Inkscape, an open source vector art program which i've heard is good.

 

[Tigersoap]

Those parents might want to buy graphic tablet along with photoshop or flash. Small and cheap would suffice. People just love to play with this stuff and I bet kids would have lots of fun with it too. Little ones might get bored with gfx software alone, but with this thingie..that's a whole another story ;)

Great idea for sure.
I just think that it won't compete with the quick satisfaction games or other entertainment can provide.
Once the novelty factor is over the learning curve will be a hindrance for most people, you gotta be really dedicated to make progress and achieve something that stands for itself.

Not everyone wants to be creative, at least in this particular field.
The rewards are equals to efforts you put in until a certain point.

Thus said, for some it will be probably the best thing you can offer them and I highly recommand a tablet as well.

 

[GRiM]

Well I meant to post this long before but it would have been a hassle to transcript the monolog at the end of the game, I didn't realize it was uploaded as a video on youtube.
I played this game with a friend of mine a year ago, I really didn't like it. The end made me angry and I told myself to never play a game again. Disgusting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg9edhb4OBs&mode=related&search=
(please note the non-existing sarcasm, he sayz it like he means it.)

(This is the end-video when you beat the game. The game revolve around you, a geneticengineered "super-agent" and a handful of "criminal-masterminds", your job is to kill them and all their minions, thats it. You move around in a nonlinear typical big city with loads of civilians.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg9edhb4OBs&mode=related&search=
(please note the non-existing sarcasm, he sayz it like he means it.)

I actually was shocked by that ending (I played that game as well). But honestly, I think it's one of the best video game endings ever. It brings up the idea to the player about how the real world could work, which of course is exactly how the real world works. The actual game was your typical naive/unrealistic good guys vs bad guys, and the game put you "on the inside" and into the action totally convinced that you know who the good guys are. So when the ending hit, I'm sure it surprised/shocked almost everyone who saw it, that despite being "on the inside" and "part of the team", you were a complete tool, completely and totally fooled about the real nature of the organization you work for. What you think is the good guys were actually funding, sponsoring, and creating the terrorists for reasons very well articulated.

I think it's a clever way to bring up this idea to the player, to hopefully make some of them think and wonder if something like that may be happening in real life. I don't think it was put there to make you excited about being part of the evil organization that creates/sponsors terrorism which results in totalitarian control over the population, with you as part of the "enforcement team". The player was convinced he was liberating people and part of the good guys, so I think it was in fact intended to shock the player and make him NOT want to be part of something that turns out to be the exact opposite of what the player was convinced it was. At least that's my impression, and so I thought that was clever.

The fact that this very concept could be presented to a large gaming audience without them knowing what's coming, surprised me. The fact that everything seemed "right/good" and "as it seems" and you thought you were "on the inside" and had all the answers to what was going on, and then to be shocked that you were nothing but a pawn for the very evil you thought you were fighting, I think it will have a positive result of making people at the very least aware of the possibility/idea that something like this could actually work, that all may not be as it seems in the real world as well. I dunno, I may be wrong about the effect of this, but these are the thoughts I had.

That whole time seeing that giant tower in the middle of the map, those "all seeing eye lasers" shining all around the world, all I could think about was how obviously this is a police state under guise of something else. So the ending was a pleasant surprise, that the illusion that the rest of the game was supporting was broken rather hastily.

 

[GRiM]

I really understand your point and I think it is correct in that aspect, but don't forget that 'the player' have just been given an almost Pavlovian conditioning when playing the game with 'bad guys' shooting that are trying to kill you. And the 'good police' helping you with more health and ammo. (I would say, this is a programming with negative and positive anchors)
I don't know if the players would be able to notice it, I would guess that only a few people with sufficient knowledge will be able to get the deep(er) levels of it.
Those who see it maybe gets it (hopefully) but I think that many of the rest would. I guess thats whats causing me to react so strongly towards it.

 

[Rich]

don't forget that 'the player' have just been given an almost Pavlovian conditioning when playing the game with 'bad guys' shooting that are trying to kill you.

I've been in kiddie world for a while and i notice whenever i take my son to playgrounds older boys often are mindlessly discussing their roles in video games. It is quite disturbing to hear a 6 year old say "i picked up the dagger and killed the monster like this...whoosh whoosh arrrggh." It is such common dialogue that in witnessing first hand these child interactions, my view is that it can only create negative associations and behavior patterns from an early age.