Kesh

@ matthew

'Its an issue of art and free speech. Whether you think itscrappy art is irrelevant.'

The point I was trying to make is that to paint this as purely an issue of artistic expression is to misrepresent what is actually going on. Lets be clearer with 2 scenarios. The first conforms to your version, the battle between censorship and expression:

1) Game maker makes controversial game about politically explosive topic. Motives are unclear, s/he may be doing so to share an opinion etc, or may be be doing so just to provoke. Legislators attack, censorship and curtailment of freedom of speech follows.

I think we can all agree that this version would be a free speech issue, and that free speech should be upheld.

Now the reason I would like people to stop laughing at us is not because of 'fear'. It is because they are laughing at what they see as a misreading of the problem. This is the scenario that most people see:

2) Game makers produce blockbuster game tailored to the young audience's desire for violence, sex, empowerment etc. Parents fear some vague link with mental health and behavioural disorders. Legislators attack. If they win, then we are all denied the pleasures of such games, and games of better content.

Now I put it to you that both cases are gross violations of liberty, and video games can be defended on both counts. But why are you trying to conflate the two scenarios in order to make a better case? By doing so, I believe you actually weaken the case for preventing a ban, because scenario (1) looks implausible when the subject is scenario (2). Yes there is a spillover, a ban on less artistic games may affect artistic games too. But by retreating that far, you are passively admitting that certain games ARE worthy of a ban.

We need to admit that some games have crap all to do with artistic expression, and we need to defend them none the less.

Wow finally something on joystiq worth my time.

BTW I don't think this is a freedom of speech issue. I think its plain and simple a liberty issue.

The difference?

When its a liberty issue, you won't have people laughing at you for calling games 'expression'. And do you really believe games are expression anyway?

Change the terms of debate.

because current affairs, philosophy etc is more interesting than gaming news. what am i doing here you ask?

no idea

actually steve what youre suggesting sounds more interesting than this post.

lets just remember what it said:

the gun will have minor cosmetic adjustments.

WOW that justifies a microtransaction right there.

OMG I think my head just exploded. Which other game in history has had this kind of coverage? Do we need to know the tiny imaginary details of a standard weapon in the game, details that won't affect gameplay at all?

We have now go to the Trekkie stage. Making up details for the sake of it. I do believe Halo just became geeky.

The argument has merit. But I disagree.
While it is possible for a well presented, finely tuned version of an old formula to be deserving of high praise, Game of the Year cannot claimed.

2006 didn't just see innovation. It saw arguably the most innovative developments in gaming since the movement to 3 dimensions back in the 16 to 32 bit era.

With that level of innovation, can we really say that the most significant game of the year was a game like GOW? A self-confessed derivative 'blockbuster'?

IMO, GOW marks the beginning of the high budget, low innovation titles of the next generation. But that's just me.

Shouldn't you be using the sum total of the decibals from all three bars? If so wouldn't the PS3 be noisier?

@3 Funniest comment today.

Maybe they'll release a ribbed version soon.

CALM DOWN PEOPLE They can't seriously consider releasing this ad. They have 3 months to come up with a new one. Preferably something not done by a an intern.

The icing on the cake was the slow mo that ruined the speed and skill of these 'master stackers' I know the intern wanted to find an obscure sport to show off so we would be amazed, but really.

Conclusion: Must be a fake.

@9
The point isn't that all Americans are criminals, but that the crime rate in the US is much higher, especially for violent crime. Hence the likelihood of a violent theft would be higher in an American city. We're not profiling you, we're profiling the country based on the statistics available.