Gabe of Penny Arcade Slams the OSR

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, like are you not simply attacking new ideas when you reject them out of hand and claim you're being attacked without defining the nature of the attack?
No, not at all. I did not attack any new ideas. I don't object to any of the newer RPG ideas you discuss in your post, I simply rejected your idea that those of us who choose not to partake in them were somehow behind the curve, or harming the hobby, or being small furry rodents, or whatever your point was.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Interesting, because I worked with a couple of the people who did research on the psychological and cognitive effects of FPS games, and I've never seen data that could justifiably be interpreted that way.

Everyone who behaved outside of social norms after gaming.... also behaved outside of social norms before gaming, though very slightly less so. The most alarmist thing you can take from that is that certain types of games might exacerbate a previously existing condition. Anything bigger than that is a huge and unfounded leap from what the data actually shows.

In the meantime, the act of playing an FPS game is actually very good for various motor and cognitive skills, in some ways similar to playing a musical instrument, in that the training actually generalizes to other tasks.

This is from the UK's Byron Report a couple of years ago. There's more on both sides since but . . .

Conclusions on issues of content
6.41 Most researchers consulted during the Review would say that they believe there is some
kind of effect of inappropriate content on some children in some contexts and
circumstances. But the right studies are lacking due to the nature and complexity of the
problem and because a truly robust longitudinal research approach to this question would
simply be unethical (i.e. to let children play violent games over time and assess the effects
on their attitudes, beliefs and behaviour). However, there is also a strong view held by
some academics, many of whom are based in the United States, that there is clear evidence
of (short-term) harmful effects of video game violence on children and young people which
has been published in a number of prestigious academic journals. There is little middle
152
Byron Review – Children and New Technology
ground to be found in this debate. It is difficult to base policy responses on such polarised
research evidence.
6.42 It would not be accurate to say that there is no evidence of harm but equally it is not
appropriate to conclude that there is evidence of no harm. Relatively small and short-term
effects of playing violent video games on young children‘s behaviour and attitudes have
been demonstrated, but many questions remain about how to interpret this at an
individual level or it’s meaning for behaviour and attitudes in the real world. Research has
not taken a strong developmental perspective and I believe this is a key factor, as children
of different ages have different levels of skill and understanding about the world (e.g.
critical evaluation, ability to make judgments) which will impact.

Videogames can make doctors into better surgeons amongst other things but, sadly, a very high proportion of the child and adult populations spend some part of life in mentally vulnerable conditions. The media they're exposed to may have more effect on them than others. Put clearly - I wouldn't let a kid play MW2.
 

Seems a maybe selective answer but fair enough. There's an overlap but the scientific studies show a huge difference between the skill sets and 'entertainment' in say Mouseguard compared to MW2.

Wow, there are scientific studies about Mouseguard? And here I thought it was just a game about pretending to be small rodent soldiers :D

There are positive elements to games like MW2 but there are also significant scientific concerns about the desensitizing and emotional impact of frequent exposure to 'headshot' games. If you, an adult, play MW2 with mates a couple of times a week Post Traumatic Stress Disorders seems highly unlikely. If a teenager playing in their room in 10 hour slots with strangers and low self-esteem . . . takes the role of a terrorist in an airport . . . ?

Imagination and play-pretend are always very dangerous things, aren't they? I think I read something about that topic... It was called "Dark Dungeons".
 

The points I make are demonstrably provable facts
There's an overlap but the scientific studies show a huge difference between the skill sets and 'entertainment' in say Mouseguard compared to MW2.
My categorisations may seem emotive but they're based on current scientific thinking and publication.
Your points are argumentative, not demonstrative. There's a section in Chaim Perelman's Treatise on Argumentation on quasi-objectivity you should take a look at.

Note that the "evidence" you cite isn't actually evidence of anything. There's question-begging, acknowledgment that the necessary studies are lacking, and further acknowledgment that the existing studies skew either way.
 

"New school" seems to have a content level equivalent to terms such as "Mary Sue" and "munchkin" in common discourse. This means it has even less meaning than "old school." ;)
 

Folks, this thread stems from a faulty premise and has gotten off topic. Considering that I get annoyed every time I read the thread title, I'm just going to close the thing.

If you'd like to continue the current discussion in a separate thread, feel free to do so (assuming it stays polite, of course.)
 
Last edited:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top