Hey good to hear it.
If you want to discuss more lets pry. If not great response...
You said there are worse things such as drug addicted parents and being sujected to physical violence are worse things. True.
So if these are bad things. Is it responsible to include these kinds of things in video games ?
...yeah, ya know, that is a rather observant query.
At first glance one may not immediately notice the glaring relevance of what you've highlighted here...or at least I hadn't noticed it until reading your words.
I'm actually surprised too. Considering how obvious it is and already should've been, yet somehow it was not-obvious, tbh I'm unsure of the appropriate term for such a thing.
Maybe paradoxical perhaps(¿...?)
Regardless, with respect to the query itself, that is definitely a tricky one to answer aye.
While I do agree with
@shiv , that parents need to be responsible, or rather more parents ought to be moreso thereof subject matter which ultimately they either allow or deny exposure to the
ir children—*for whom the parents are fundamentally responsible unto.
Is it responsible allowing, insofar as is within an adult individuals capacities to independently determine, whether so intentionally or instead another consequence of parental dereliction, the exposure to a dependant developing individual by traumatic real world experiences...of course which I'm sure most people will generally agree that "no", it would indeed be blatantly irresponsible, yet obviously not so easy to answer when instead the same/or relatively similar objective context has become integrated within the widely available and now variably "normalized" artificial representations of such. Like, some people might argue from positions whereby asserting video games aren't real, thus resulting in no real world consequence for real world participants/witnesses from these artificial representations, so therefore no biggie.
Whereas alternatively others may argue from positions drawing attention upon video games requisite psycho-cognitive induction inter/re-activity aspects, &/or simply upon the fact video games are specifically designed to basically function as powerful psycho-cognitive immersion stimuli.
Admittedly I currently lean more towards the latter, although I still enjoy gaming, yet I, ahhh...
dunno really....I guess I just no longer consider video games as being like inconsequential toys, or just something we fuck around with for fun or to kill time aye.
Right now, if I were one responsible for dependant developing individuals....
by the gotts I would be like a hawk with respect to any potential exposure points with digital content. In hindsight, video games back in the day, eg: the late '90s-early '00s, probably weren't that bad since they usually existed on cartridges or disks, so the software & the content pretty much never changed, we got exactly what we got the day we bought a game, no less & no more. Whereas nowadays it's common for video game software to either require some degree of part/or full-time connection via the internet or even exist anywhere from partially to fully online as well.
I bought/& downloaded a few digital versions of games for my PS3 a good while ago which I still haven't bothered jammin' yet.
@shiv might actually recall this too, coz it was his excitement for one particular game (
can't remember the title) which influenced my decision to purchase it. Tbh the only game title I can recall buying, was Dying Light 2, though I haven't jammed it either.
No doubt during the time since each game was released, purchased and downloaded, numerous updates and whatnot would have occurred, so then I wonder, how different might those games that I bought well over a year/possibly closer to two years ago, be compared to their current states(...?). Generally I'd anticipate the more overtly presented stimuli, eg: the audio/video, top most psycho-cognitive layers like the primary narratives, characters, etc...would likely appear unchanged overall, butt underneath all that, for all I know there may have been all sorts of changes made through updates, bug fixes & patches, to add-ons, extensions or whatever else.
I wouldn't even know if, for example, let's say Dying Light 2 had some sort of disastrous core bug eventually discovered that required a major overhaul, resulting with it pretty much being a largely different non-physical product than what I'd originally purchased. I just wouldn't be aware. On the other hand, I'd probably be aware if a software developer climbed in through a window to switch the physical copy of a product I bought from their brand~with an altered version, or at least they'd first have to run it by me. Which, in a somewhat figurative sense by contrast, essentially amounts as being like a layer of defense from what we now have to deal with as "normal", which is (imo) simply remote intrusion.
Like, my PS3, if it weren't completely disconnected from net, it would not only be just an entertainment device or basically a toy that I can't be bothered playing with anymore. That PS3, when connected , would provide a means for any mother fucker with the necessary techno wizardry skills, to gain remote access via a digital portal into my real world property, which could potentially be exploited to my detriment without my ever even becoming aware of it occurring.
Although this hypothetical scenario is probably overly paranoid and unlikely in most cases, which would instead merely be automated system, software or perhaps spyware updates & that sort of shit, but still, I just ain't keen on the idea that some unknown cunts from some far away place are freely able to access my property, whether it's the operating system within the console, or a games software, both of which I legitimately own, and regardless if the software is either stored on a device I own on my real world property or stored somewhere else. To me, I consider there really being no fundamental difference beyond the physical vs the non-physical with respect to tangible property and intangible digital property.
I ain't lettin' no cunt fuck with my shit without my express approval.
Now, if I also had parental responsibilities, I'd quite likely be several orders of magnitude more paranoid than this too...
I'd potentially be seen as "the mean parent" or whateverthefuck because "it's not fair", "all the other kids have mobiles/computers/gaming consoles/etc"...they may perceive this as "punishment " or if they're retarded kids they might simply believe it to be "child abuse". Eventually—hopefully, they may possibly begin to comprehend the harsh realities of the real world that could easily at any moment be projected directly to anyone, which is what I would be doing everything in my capacity to shield the kids from until they are no longer fully dependant upon me, adequately equipped and able to face the unpredictable realities of our transient physicality experience....
hmmm, I may have strayed a little too far off topic.
