Pillars of Eternity
5 days 12 hours
Path of Exile
1 day 16 hours
Holy Potatoes! We're in Space?!
Holy Potatoes! We’re in Space?! Demo
25 days 9 hours
Sid Meier's Civilization V
14 days 9 hours
XCOM: Enemy Unknown
7 days 19 hours
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II
7 days 10 hours
stuff like this is always the same with "older" people. you only need to look at what most adults in their 50's and 60's think is unreasonable behaviour and a problem with society, but go back to when they were that age and they will of generally done worse, but back in their time you just got a smack round the ear from a copper and told to sod off.
this is the biggest problem with society they look on the past with blinkers and ignore the fact that what happened back in the even the 80's wouldn't be allowed today. or an even closer example Friends a much loved comedy goes up on Netflix and people are slating it for fat shaming and other stuff, honestly when did people get so sensitive? this is why I would actually go the other way, with how sensitive people are getting now, you actually have a greater chance of offending people and a company getting slated or protested again, so if anything I would say the louder group is actually way more prudish than the old generations.
most only act as if they understand because it has became cool to stick up for minority groups and that is why nearly every day on news sites there is some random person pointing out something is offensive that pretty much no one else in the world would notice. like the complaint lego is sexist because sets in blue boxes are superheroes and city building, while sets in pink boxes are stuff like salons and such, we ignore the fact that no where does it say boy or girl on either box, now isn't the person complaining being the one causing the problem as they are using blue means boy and pink means girl.
so yeah that's my rant over, but I would honestly say sex in games now would offend more than it would of 15-20 years ago.
SJW's will hang you out to dry for it (Or worse), but you're not wrong. Was he publicly reprimanded for it then? Did it impede his career or what he achieved for the industry? It's ridiculous. Make no mistake, that type of behavior is disgusting and does not belong in the workplace under any circumstances, but to deny someone an award based on something from a different era, especially when he didn't get in trouble for it then is completely asinine.
yes! If you
re going to allow us to skin it...then let us SKIN-IT!
How do you know he was trigger happy?
From the sound of article and other online reports it's an unfortunate situation of a homeowner surprising the swat team while they were setting up then not cooperating while the police are only able to operate on what they've been told (an apparent hostage situation).
That doesn't make it right. It just underscores how dramatic of an impact the internet has had on social attitudes and behaviours in a very short time.
I do not think he was trigger happy at all. In his mind he was going into a hostage situation. He took the opportunity presented to save people. Have you ever been in a situation, where you have to save hostages. Most likely he identified the target positively, and didn't want to take chances to see if he was armed, especially with the possibility of other victims in the house. The cop isn't trigger happy or at fault, he was doing his job and the one who called the swat on false pretenses should be given the cops sentence on top of his own.
But the former is not entirely free of responsibility either.
I agree with most of what you said.
But in my experience the 'other side' of the addiction coin that few people want to address is the fact that most addicts are compensating for something they feel they're lacking internally by latching onto something externally. Especially when what they latch onto isn't even a physical thing, it's not like getting hooked on a drug that causes physical withdrawals when you try to stop. This is literally collecting the most sophisticated flashing lights.
Is that really about saving time? Or more about having a flashier light than the next gamer and the anxiety some might feel if they appear inferior in an environment where a few extra dollars can make them superior?
In games like LoL, DotA, CS:GO or Overwatch you're entirely right, there is no benefit to paying/gambling for the virtual bling they offer, be it looked at inside or outside the game. Also as you say, there's no negative symptoms for stopping video-game investments (unlike drugs). I'm definitely not trying to argue a gaming addiction is anywhere near as bad as drugs, only that it won't stop a gaming addict from also falling down that trap too.
Sense of value is definitely a problem with influences for younger generations right now. Games ask for large constant investments of time to be able to earn/maintain rankings desired by the players. Leaderboards and rankings ask for players to invest as much as possible to do as well as possible and show off their achievements to other players. It's a very easy trap for people to fall into, deciding they'd rather invest their time into games than work.
The micro-transaction-riddled mobile games, MMOs and EA-titles do try to offer you cuts in the menial tasks lengths. 'Pay for this and you'll be able to get to the content you want sooner!' is the argument they keep ringing, and it inevitably works for many who don't have the time or control.
I suppose procrastination isn't a problem to dwell on nowadays though; people who want to delay work will find a way whether or not the games tempt them into investing time on them instead. Be it in games or books, on Facebook or YouTube, distractions are in abundance either way.