Question How to move from destructive games to educational games?

[T.Neo]

Yes. I think it was 5th grade or something, can't really remember now. (nor can I remember the reasons for it either, been too long, I only remember that because it's funny. lol )

Looking back on it, I now feel sorry that I didn't punch my elementary school principle in the face. He wasn't a strict authoratarian, he was just a boring person who totally lacked a personality. I'm not sure I any student ever saw him crack a smile.

Maybe he was an alien. Or a very nerdy terminator.

 

[Quick_Nick]

People like those who caused the Columbine massacre weren't inspired or affected by video games, they were just attracted to those genres possibly because they had a dark outlook, due to social rejection, etc.

Yeah, I think the correlation between video games and real violence is a lot like this graph.

Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

 

[Eagle]

Yeah, I think the correlation between video games and real violence is a lot like this graph.

Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

Ah Ha! All those pirates off Somolia are causing this cold spell!!

 

[Suzy]

I agree with so much of that!!

This is all about nature. Not just human nature, but nature itself, of which we are a part.

Urwumpe, it's one thing to want to improve yourself, but that means accomplishing more, not trying to overcome nature. What I mean by that is - changing your diet, improving your physical form, learning something new, being less lazy/working harder, getting a better routine going (could be anything, work related, exercise, morning/sleep, etc), caring more about those who are important to you/care about you, etc.

However, to sit there and claim that "violence is an abberation and must be eradicated", or that competition is bad, or that aggression is bad, etc, THAT is a problem.

The people we here in the states call liberals (not sure what you guys in Europe would call them, but I know you use "liberal" different than we do) are hippies, touchy-feely types who claim to love nature, but in fact only like trees but hate everything else about nature (because it's violent, cold, harsh and unforgiving, and decidedly "unfair"). They think they somehow know better than the very thing that gave them an existance in the first place.

That isn't to say that one should be out of control and hyper-violent. But it IS to say that violence and aggression are NOT the evil thing they are made out to be, and we as a society NEED to be more accepting of it. It's actually no wonder that crime is so bad today, we have no outlet, and video games just don't cut it. We need to bring back "the games" (just no animal sacrifices this time). We've taken away all outlets and ability to respond in appropriate manner, but left (even increased) the stress and pressures. It's a bad situation.

Gladiator games: I've had similar thoughts myself - resurrect proper fights - to the death! - the sports that are available now are lame substitutes. I could see such games becoming quite popular.

Couple that with an out of control population level (and growth), and you're going to have a larger absolute number of people too weak to take the pressures, and they snap. Columbine is the perfect example.

That was a case of weak individuals, horrible parenting, and a social system gone completely to hell. You can NOT defend your honor anymore. You have to sit and take anything anybody says or even does to you, in many cases, even RETURNING a strike will get you in trouble (meaning, taking the second swing, not the first). But nothing gets done about the pressures applied from peers, responsibilities, parents, the media, etc, etc, etc. And for kids, who haven't acquired all the tools they need yet, and are at the same time dealing with the CRUELEST peer group on the face of the planet (other kids), if they are trapped by society and have no guidance at home, the slightest weakness can make them snap.

I have some experience here. I was an outcast. I know exactly what it's like. But I didn't haul off and gun down my classmates either. Why? 2 reasons, I'm stronger (internally) than those kids, and perhaps most importantly, I had a release - I punched the elemntary school principle in the face, laid out one of the kids harassing me twice, sent another to the hospital to get lead removed from his skull.... lol Yeah, sounds bad, but all I wanted was to be left alone, and they just couldn't do it. Also these events were strung out over several years, so it wasn't like I just fliped out and went on a rampage. It takes me a while to build up a head of steam, but every pressure cooker needs a releif valve. Take that away, and don't be surprised if a few of the containers start exploding here and there.

I was ostracized at school - and girls can be just as vicious as boys, but usually verbally, not physically - I never had the satisfaction of getting revenge though! I did indulge in very violent fantasies of what I would like to have done to them; but being a passive sort of person I never acted upon these. I am determined now though that I will never let anyone intimidate me, physically at least!

And it all stems from the same source - all of it. Our love for violent entertainment (games/movies/tv shows/sports/etc), rough play/horsing around, competitive behavior, aggression, etc, it's ALL from an ingrained competitive/aggressive nature. It's part of being a social mammal. We compete against our predators and our prey, and against each other for status and rank. The alpha-male gets the most foot, the most women, and the most offspring, thus we all want to be there. Females are tuned to this too, as the alpha-male will likely be the stronges/smartest/most dynamic/etc so he will be able to provide the most, and most importantly, his genes will have the greatest chance of survival, and of being attractive to successive generations. We are nothing more than vessels for our genes really.

Yes, "metrosexuals" and "SNAGS" don't have much appeal for me Alpha-males who are aggressive bullies with no self-discipline, though, are not appealing either!

 

[Urwumpe]

I brawled also at school and did not even stop in the class room in my younger years... maybe that was the reason why I now attend university: The many many maaaany extra hours at school, as punishment for defending my territory.

Of course it was no good behavior. I brawled with some guy only because we both did not know any better way to communicate. But at least, I had the honor to only attack people, which had been regarded physically superior (for example older students, who thought they can bully me or a friend of me). I had almost been some sort of bipolar these days, was not easy. Often went from berserk rage to deep dark depressed and back in minutes then.

I am still learning about a stranger, when I read my travel log (I had to write on it that it is not, under no circumstances, a diary) from the student exchange to France - about 14 years ago. Strange enough, the worst qualities my friends wrote into our yearbook at school about 3 years later had been:

3. My driving skills
2. My cooking
1. My uncontrolled singing.

Looks like going berserk from time to time was tolerable for my friends.

 

[Andy44]

1. My uncontrolled singing.

Knowing you only as an internet poster, I find this strange and somewhat hilarious!

 

[Urwumpe]

Knowing you only as an internet poster, I find this strange and somewhat hilarious!

Well, be lucky. :rofl:

When I feel good, I have problems to not sing. I tried to suppress it with whistling, but when I have a good tune, I sing. Now, imagine hearing somebody doing a really really bad version of "I would do anything for love" on the school yard, in the moment you don't expect it.

This is even worse then being rickrolled by Rick Astley himself.

 

[tblaxland]

Now, imagine hearing somebody doing a really really bad version of "I would do anything for love" on the school yard, in the moment you don't expect it.

That's quite an image indeed. There has never been a better choice for bad singers (I'm one too) than Meatloaf

 

[Andy44]

Meatloaf makes me want to play violent videogames.

 

[Quick_Nick]

This is even worse then being rickrolled by Rick Astley himself.

You had to bring xkcd into this.
More graphs! http://xkcd.com/523/ XD

 

[Urwumpe]

That's quite an image indeed. There has never been a better choice for bad singers (I'm one too) than Meatloaf

It is no shame to not own the vocal range of Freddy Mercury or Stumpen.

 

[toddhisattva]

History Games

I have been wondering why most of the commercial games you see around are about destruction, made in the most eye candy fashion.

As others have said, that's what sells. Eye candy is so much more important than anything else.

I showed some games to old friends who did not live the gaming era. They were horrified with games you just see as natural.

When taking control of U boat and I told him to fire a torpedo at a merchant, a friend who loves history and is father, asked me "why should I fire upon them, they have not done anything to me" and I told him "because high command instructed to do so".

How can anybody who "loves history" not understand the situation portrayed in the game?

I showed him the old Advanced Tactical Fighters (ATF Gold) and he saw the videos, where destruction is seen as mean to "achieve victory" he felt sick. He had the idea that planes could make good racing machines.

Tell this history loving naif that if he doesn't stop the tank column, thousands of civilians will die. Or if he doesn't stop the Mongols, he will be enslaved. The reason people resort to violent means *is because the alternative is worse*. He could use the games to learn the history that he loves, understand the motiviations of those who made that history.

This is why he plans to keep his kids as offline as possible.
Before 2003 war was a game to me, plain entertainment, Star Wars.
In 2003 during the first attacks I had the news on TV and I decided to play USAF Gulf War missions... and I felt sick

Before 2003 war was a game to you?

I understood that AA devices were firing at me because they were defending themselves from me, and as I attacked those buildings I could imagine many people living what people lived in WTC as I pulled the trigger.

They are firing at you because high command told them to. And who put the military assets on the civilian buildings? Somebody who was literally asking you to hit the civilian building.

Use the violent simulators like you use Orbiter. Play a Civil War (the War Between the States, that Civil War game and read "The Killer Angels" at the same time.

In a Wings documentary, a pilot said it was just a job. James Dunningan, war simulation expert says fighting war is just a job. What a job...!!

The military pilots I've interviewed do say it's just a job, and if the camera work and sound did not convey the deep sadness they say it with, that is a shame. They said it with all the enthusiasm of a surgeon who just performed an amputation. But like the surgeon, they are *professionals* doing a necessary job.

Those games are uninstalled, giving some room to Simcity and Orbiter.

SimCity *is* violent. For 5 simoleons the government can raze a building, destroying the hopes and dreams of its owners and tenants. Not fair market value no eminent domain proceeding, just an autocratic authoritarian decision and *poof* via a flat 5 simoleon fee.

Do we have proof the buildings are empty when they are razed?!

If you see the shelves you see many violent games in different flavors.
It seems like promotion of the apetite for destruction.

So I wondered what makes educational games to have less development than games about destruction.

I think you are misunderestimating the educational possibilities of games you think are "about destruction."

 

[doggie015]

To be able to harness massive amounts of energy. The majority of humans - including myself - seem to enjoy it. Why, though, I've no idea.

One way to be able to harness massive amounts of energy in a video game is to use it to generate high speeds. Quantum Redshift does just that and I personally find it more addictive than cigarettes appear to be (I HAVE NOT tried them personally; I'll make that clear now! Plus there is an option via code (cheat, if you will) to disable the weapons in the races so you can just enjoy the speed; or stick to time trials)

P.S. I have made a group for fans of this game on Friend Feed. You can find it here: http://friendfeed.com/rooms/quantum-redshift It also shows my YouTube favorites and videos for those who are interested.

 

[Usquanigo]

Yes, "metrosexuals" and "SNAGS" don't have much appeal for me Alpha-males who are aggressive bullies with no self-discipline, though, are not appealing either!

Well, "metrosexual" can mean a lot of things, hell, almost anything really. What are "snags"? And as for "alpha-males", like "metro", I don't think it's only one thing, in fact, the thing people associate with it tends to be inaccurate. You can only cower so many people for so long before your screw ups cause them to stop listening. A true "alpha-male" isn't an overgrown brain-dead thug. It's equal parts Bruce Lee, Benjamin Franklin, and General George S Patton. Someone who understands others, himself, philosphy, science, history, is wise, AND inspires people to follow him. Maybe not as tech-smart as an "alpha-geek", maybe not as science-smart as Dr. Stephen Hawking, maybe not as skilled at fighting as Randy Couture, but an appealing and hard to match well rounded combination that not many can match.

....but I digress.... lol

 

[Andy44]

What are "snags"?

JFGI: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snag

 

[Unkas]

Do destruction and education really exclude each other? Take a look at the geo-political simulation game Ars Regendi - in the worlds it is possible to wage wars against other states - like it is possible in the real world. But what do you gain when attacking other states? Almost nothing. You lose much money which you could invest in education or social welfare, your population becomes discontent and the global environment will get damaged. So I think a game can allow destruction even for educational purposes :thumbup:

 

[Ghostrider]

Should I mention that games come in many genres and that not all of them involve violence? Or that if you buy a WW2 sub sim you should, like, expect to be required to fire torpedoes at someone because that's exactly what happened in RL during WW2?

By the way, games now come with a nice PEGI classification that beside age requirements also includes what's in the game (violence, profanity and all that jazz) so if you don't like them, you don't buy them. Exactly like movies.

Some of us like our entertainment to be on the strong side, and entertainment doesn't mean "fun" as in barrels o' laugh. Playing Silent Hill 2 isn't a barrel o' laugh, it's disturbing but some people (like me) appreciate that kind of stuff.

"Educational" games are more often than not in the dull category. That's the case with "educational" TV as well. Doctor Who started out as "edutainment", then by episode 2 the Daleks came around and EXTERMINATED that concept for good, thankfully.

 

[Ark]

Educational content makes for very, very boring games. Blowing stuff up is fun, and that's why people play video games...for fun. We have ratings systems for a reason, look at the box and decide if it's something you consider to be fun. And more importantly, don't look down on other people because they enjoy things you dislike.

Besides, the fact that I've probably killed more pixilated, virtual Germans than WWII doesn't change the fact that I've never killed and never want to kill a single real human person.

 

[TMac3000]

I find war games entertaining because of the strategy. (Note that I'm not talking about FPS here, but map-based war games like Command and Conquer and Panzer General.) I don't think anyone in their right mind enjoys the death and destruction of war, but I think the study of warfare is fascinating. For me, games like that are about being able to show my strength by overcoming the will of the opposing side--outsmarting them and outgunning them. I'm a person who has been kicked around a lot in my life, so being able to defeat a skilled enemy against steep odds is something I find very rewarding.

I think that most people who play war games enjoy studying the tactics and maneuvering involved, much for the same reason that many people enjoy playing chess.

Now then, I'm off to play Crimson Fields (highly recommended war game for you Linux users out there).