extremus

This is case in point to why I've taken a hiatus from gaming for the past several months, and will continue for the foreseeable future (including the upcoming consoles). I still love videogames as a hobby and still follow what's going on around the industry, but quite frankly I find less and less of the genres I love the most each year (JRPGs and Strategy), so I now have other interests my time and money are going toward.

Anyone who believes that a console that "can do more than just play videogames" is a good thing most likely hasn't been a hobbyist since before game systems went online. We didn't know how good we had it back then in terms of 100% attention on GAMES and a wide variety of genres from developers. The hobby is dead folks; now there's just a fat cat industry telling you what you want. Either vote with your wallets or don't complain about being force-fed crap you could care less about.

There's no benefit to On line Passes except for the profit margins of game developers; seemingly every major "innovation" announced anymore is actually detrimental to gamers and the long-term health of the hobby itself.

@Funkmaster General and Heffer Wolfe

As I stated in my post, the "chicken and egg" issue we need to ponder is whether videogames make bad people go over the edge, or if innate human nature with its flaws came first and has simply found an extension in violent videogames and other media. While the answer is up for debate, I lean heavily toward the latter. By nature we are drawn to doing things that are detrimental to our overall health (mental and physical) and well-being, emotional and otherwise. I mean, just look at what a sense of anonymity tends to bring out in that seven year-old kid you encounter while playing Halo online; it's obviously not the game that does it, but a bunch of brats with apparently very poor parenting who genuinely take pleasure in being obnoxious. And frankly it's a big reason I have mostly stopped playing most games online; I far prefer local interactions with my friends and family in the same room. My comments about Columbine and Virginia Tech were merely footnote examples of violence committed by gamers (and hence the press/politicians harping on videogames as a possible culprit).

I know that you aren't likely ever going to read an article like this where anything is viewed in a truly objective manner; politicians love to beat the war drums against anything they feel will drum up facetime (free publicity toward re-election) for themselves, while on the other side of the coin the videogame industry, gamers and gaming journalists mostly seem overly defensive and willing to turn a blind eye to the fact that maybe something IS wrong somewhere. As a videogame enthusiast since the Atari 2600 days I can honestly say I feel there are valid arguments from both sides of the fence here.

From the time videogames were conceived, violence and killing has been a large part of the premise. From eating ghosts in Pac-Man, blowing up enemy space armadas in Galaga, and jumping on Goombas in Mario to Killing Sprees in Halo, bloody dismemberment in Ninja Gaiden, and slaughtering zombies in Resident Evil (zombie games have become so oversaturated because zombies make for politically safe adversaries. They have no loyalties, ethnicities, religious beliefs or any other cognitive identities; they're just "evil" and out to kill you. Make it about killing any particular group of people and see how long it flies). And we've all heard it discussed to death every time a tragedy has occurred which was somehow linked to videogames, from the Columbine killers to the gunman at Virginia Tech. True, most of us (hopefully) would never try to emulate what we see/do in a videogame...but there are always, unfortunately, a few who WILL.

I tend to look at this topic from a "chicken and egg" standpoint; are videogames the cause of violent behavior in our culture, or are our own predilections for "mature" content affecting the way that many developers approach game design? There's a reason there is such a glut of first-person shooters on the market this console generation: gamers in the West buy them up religiously regardless of how many annual sequels and rehashes get made. A visiting Japanese dev remarked at E3 2010 "You Americans sure seem to enjoy war" in regard to the oversaturation of shooters at the show, which is quite telling coming from an objective outside source.

The root of the problem isn't videogames; it's within our own human nature. Social media and smartphones, while making us connected more than ever at the push of a button, ironically have made us more socially isolated on a personal, face-to-face interaction level; that isolation, coupled with an increased focus on mature-rated games and entertainment which is so prevalent in the lives of people across every age, race, and belief system, devalues and dehumanizes other people to dangerous levels where a select few individuals are concerned and quite frankly isn't good for the rest of us in the long-term emotionally and psychologically. If honest and objective studies were done I'm certain that many folks would have all the classic signs of genuine addiction, be it to games, phones, the internet, or any number of other technological stuff.

Bottom line: be objective on this topic. Consider both sides of the issue, why one side wants and demands the ability to play these types of games and why the other tries to limit their exposure. And as a general rule, be always careful that you don't someday have to face the reality that you no longer own your games, but instead they own YOU. Keep your own priorities in order, and let folks make their own decisions; they're going to anyway, right or wrong.

Welcome to the 99 percent, Formerly Mismanaged.

Seriously, this is the end result of a LOT of corporations' upper management business plans over the past five to ten years, from all industries. When CEOs and stockholders expect and demand to continue the same income levels and profit margins regardless of a rapidly deflating economy (or company losses), a typical healthy "pyramid-like" business structure rapidly becomes an "obelisk" in the sole interest of maintaining that cash flow directly to the upper crust. Hence more job cuts, more unemployment and more "formerly mismanaged" workers. I know; I've been employed in these types of conditions myself.

I'd never advocate communism, but capitalism has its own dangers if the rich forget the middle and lower-level employees that help to build and maintain their comforts, for all concerned. The current typical corporate business model is simply unsustainable.

My room smells like ferrets because, well, I have three ferrets. But hey, it's not TOO bad.

Generally, in my bedroom whenever the rest of the family is watching stuff on the big TV in the living room.

"Good game" from gamers at my skill level (meaning not terrible but not the best at FPSes either); it's refreshing to enjoy a match against folks who are playing to enjoy the game like you are as opposed to deliberately team-killing, spewing profanity, and generally making the experience miserable for everyone. Matches like this do happen; unfortunately they're far less common than they should be, thanks to what anonymity seems to bring out in human nature.

By the way, I'm entering the contest because my XBox 360 RRODed earlier this year.

It's almost as if Sony's saying to themselves, "How many ways can we torpedo this thing's launch before it gets out of the gate?". I haven't heard ANY positive news (from gamers' perspectives) come out regarding the Vita in months...and that's covering A LOT of articles.

While I'm sure that the combination of survival horror and Naughty Dog's visual and set-piece pizazz will make a very high-quality game and for a ton of copies sold, when one gets past the hype and the brain-fungus backstory and looks at this objectively, it amounts to yet another zombie apocalypse title in a console generation market already oversaturated with them. The comparisons are already rampant between this game and Left 4 Dead, Resident Evil, and movies such as I Am Legend, and many observers have noted the similarities between the characters and certain real-life actors, but I'm not convinced that's a good thing. Between first-person shooters and zombies, games have arguably suffered from less theme and genre variety at the retail level than any console generation before.

Like I said, I'm sure The Last of Us will be a very good game quality-wise. I also think it would have benefitted by truly being an original idea and direction instead of something "safe" and already well-explored. When industry leaders like Sony and Naughty Dog reveal a major new IP that's so very derivative, it makes me concerned about this hobby's future.