Dvorak Defends Gta

[XxSATANxX]

While there is little doubt that simulators are valuable as training devices and may well be training people how to steal cars in GTA, the overlooked fact is that simulators do not motivate anyone to steal cars. In fact simulators do nothing more than simulate -- there is a difference between simulation and motivation.
Find out more here (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?siteid=mktw&dist=moreover&guid={2446B17B-7917-4F84-9AAC-34C6548DD108) :cool:

[Herald42]

See, I agree with the idea that GTA doesn't cause you to steal cars. But when he says that you might learn to steal cars from the game?

Walking up to any car and pushing a button with a triangle on it does not teach you how to steal a car, just like pushing an X button doesn't teach you how to ride a bike and using a joystick doesn't teach you how to shoot.

[Klade]

See, I agree with the idea that GTA doesn't cause you to steal cars. But when he says that you might learn to steal cars from the game?

Walking up to any car and pushing a button with a triangle on it does not teach you how to steal a car, just like pushing an X button doesn't teach you how to ride a bike and using a joystick doesn't teach you how to shoot.

Read the full article. He says pretty clearly that though its a simulation the only thing it will teach you is how to get yourself killed. And that its a simulation not based on reality etc etc.

I agree pretty much with everything he said except for the end where he insinuates that we will see more violent video games coming out in the next few years because of the war in Iraq. I don't think theres any evidence of a correlation.

[DriveALW]

I think someone should tell him it's "Martial Arts," not "Marshal Arts."

[Blue]

I agree pretty much with everything he said except for the end where he insinuates that we will see more violent video games coming out in the next few years because of the war in Iraq. I don't think theres any evidence of a correlation.

I think I could see an influx of military type games that may be a bit more violent (or possibly just more life-like where you're not a super one-man army killing machine) given the currently overseas situation. It could have been poor timing or simply my looking for it, but Hollywood seemed to come out with a good deal of military based films right when everything hit the fan in Afghanistan and then Iraq. People were initially in that kind of mindset due to the media (our being slammed with images) and I see that as having carried over onto Hollywood as a way to capitilize. The rise in more violent games seems a bit far-fetched as there will always be said genre out there whether we're at war or not, but I could easily see a rise in military/squad based games where they possibly attempt to make the violence more real. BIA gave me a distinctive fear-factor for the first time in a military enviornment. War games - to me - have always made war seem somewhat glorified and I'm wondering if we're going to begin to see a trend away from that given the current political field.

I'm not entirely sure if I hijacked the thread or not, heh. Wasn't intentional - just got to thinking as I was typing and just realized I kept going on. And on. Point is, I could maybe see a rise in violent games with a military skew (not necessarily including, say, Killzone or even Halo in this - a plausible military skew, rather), but not 80 new games coming out in July that all ask you to decapitate a family member who's trying to kill you with a shotgun-chainsaw combo. I have no idea where that game just came from. Long day.

[XxSATANxX]

Some amazing facts.

Only 10 to 15 % of troops involved in a firefight actually return fire.

The ARMY is trying to improve that number by using.......games.

Blue:

Isn't that game called POSTAL? :p

[Xaerin]

I think someone should tell him it's "Martial Arts," not "Marshal Arts."

Who is this Marshal Arts??

[MosBen]

He's sort of like a sherrif, but with the federal government and only dealing with paintings and such.

[GrinR]

Dvorak is an idiot regardless of whether or not I agree with him. All he writes is pseudo-tech blather du jour.

[gloogan]

I'm just wondering in a game where you can choose "good" or "evil" which ones most people choose. For me its always "evil" just because I'm not an arsehole in real life. Games are a chance for me to beat up some old lady cuz she didnt like my clothes(GTA series). I don't think games like GTA are simulations, they are more fantasy as Dvorak mentioned in the article. In real life how often do you get to blow up a car or mow someone down, never thats why games like this are so popular. As far as violence increasing I dont think that could happen. Like others have said graphicaly it might increase but it won't be more grusome. I don't think that the war in Iraq has anything to do about it. I think right now in society there isn't anything for people like Sen. Deanna Demuzio to complain about so she and others have turned to video games. The whole fight on games is dumb because untill they are banned from store shelfs nothing will be done.