| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/19/2010 09:20:19 PM · #151 |
Okay, I'm dragging in religion some more! Too bad.
So, faithful... johnnyphoto's suggested that creativity isn't really creativity because gamers are constrained by the rules laid out for them by the programmers of their games.
Explain to me why ANY of you is creative, given you're supposedly operating in a universe constrained by rules set down for you by your God.
Bam!
|
|
|
|
10/19/2010 09:35:15 PM · #152 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
Explain to me why ANY of you is creative, given you're supposedly operating in a universe constrained by rules set down for you by your God.
Bam! |
I don't need to explain that to you, because I don't believe that constraints stifle creativity. On the contrary, I believe they enhance it, and arguably are the *root* of it. I'd say that without constraints "creativity" is a meaningless concept.
R. |
|
|
|
10/19/2010 09:39:21 PM · #153 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Mousie:
Explain to me why ANY of you is creative, given you're supposedly operating in a universe constrained by rules set down for you by your God.
Bam! |
I don't need to explain that to you, because I don't believe that constraints stifle creativity. On the contrary, I believe they enhance it, and arguably are the *root* of it. I'd say that without constraints "creativity" is a meaningless concept.
R. |
Yeah, that's what I said. :) |
|
|
|
10/19/2010 09:40:09 PM · #154 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Mousie:
Explain to me why ANY of you is creative, given you're supposedly operating in a universe constrained by rules set down for you by your God.
Bam! |
I don't need to explain that to you, because I don't believe that constraints stifle creativity. On the contrary, I believe they enhance it, and arguably are the *root* of it. I'd say that without constraints "creativity" is a meaningless concept.
R. |
Indeed. Like i said before, Mirrors and Hammers. And Sex & Death. And Zombies. |
|
|
|
10/19/2010 09:54:45 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
I'm still interested in your thoughts on this Doc. I don't think there ever has been such a Western society really. Or any society perhaps. What it boils down to i guess is Sex & Death and how different cultures explore those themes. Because, after all, there isn't any human population that can not be obsessed with them to a large degree. |
I would probably point to the 40s as a time when the concept of "duty" was much more important than now. Whether that was just a blip due to World War II, I'm not sure. While doing some searching I came across an audio program I haven't had a chance to listen to yet from the BBC. But the teaser itself asks some interesting questions and does seem to infer that duty is a concept we do not share with previous generations. (I realize this is a British show and so doesn't reflect, directly, US culture.)
Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the concept of duty. George Bernard Shaw wrote in his play Caesar and Cleopatra, âWhen a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his dutyâ. But for Horatio Nelson and so many others, duty has provided a purpose for life, and a reason to die â âThank God I have done my dutyâ were his final words.
The idea that others have a claim over our actions has been at the heart of the history of civilised society, but duty is an unfashionable or difficult notion now - perhaps because it seems to impose an outside authority over self interest.
The idea of duty has duped people into doing terrible things and inspired them to wonderful achievements, and it is an idea that has excited philosophers from the time people first came together to live in large groups. But has duty always meant doing whatâs best for others rather than oneself? And how did it become such a powerful idea that people readily gave their lives for it?
Sorry it's audio if you wanted to listen. Others can find the link here.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2010 10:12:58 PM · #156 |
| Thanks for the link Doc. I'll have a listen. Although i do think the fact it was war time, and post war, may play a large factor in it. Orwell's 1984 springs to mind there. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:26:36 AM · #157 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
While there is controversy about how big the negative impact of violent video games is, nobody is making the argument that violent video games also are beneficial to society. |
I suspect that the data comparing the performance of surgeons who played video games vs. those who didn't included those played "violent" games (the gamer docs were better at the modern techniques).
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Make sure we're either talking about "video games" or "violent video games". I got no problem with the former. So the question would be how would the latter be beneficial because of their violence? In other words, what do you gain that you couldn't also gain from a non-violent video game? |
I'd think the impact of these games on the ability of US drone pilots (and on the people their missles hit) would be obvious -- I believe one of the top instructors is a high-school dropout game-whiz ... now, whether you consider an increased military capacity "beneficial to society" is a matter of opinion, but one I am going to guess is pretty widely-held in this country ...
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
On another page, I'm not making this up, but literally today a writer at ESPN had this to say. Is it apropos to the conversation?
Originally posted by ESPN:
Most football fans are horrified when a player falls to the turf motionless. But some aren't -- consciously or subconsciously, they want to see harm. Presenting painful mayhem as "entertainment" goes at least as far back as the Roman Colosseum. |
|
NASCAR
Message edited by author 2010-10-20 00:32:25. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:31:25 AM · #158 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
While there is controversy about how big the negative impact of violent video games is, nobody is making the argument that violent video games also are beneficial to society. |
I suspect that the data comparing the performance of surgeons who played video games vs. those who didn't included those played "violent" games (the gamer docs were better at the modern techniques).
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Make sure we're either talking about "video games" or "violent video games". I got no problem with the former. So the question would be how would the latter be beneficial because of their violence? In other words, what do you gain that you couldn't also gain from a non-violent video game? |
I'd think the impact of these games on the ability of US drone pilots (and on the people their missles hit) would be obvious -- I believe one of the top instructors is a high-school dropout game-whiz ... now, whether you consider an increased military capacity "beneficial to society" is a matter of opinion, but one I am going to guess is pretty widely-held in this country ... |
But I don't think you are arguing that just because "violent video games" were included in the group that had better hand/eye coordination it was because of those "violent video games" rather than just playing video games in general that the surgeons were better. At least I hope you aren't making that argument. Now if you had a study that said surgeons were better who played violent video games versus those that were not violent, then you might have a point. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:41:34 AM · #159 |
Clive, tell me if you listen to the BBC program. It was interesting and walked through the historical idea of duty from ancient Greece to modern times. If I were to quote a portion that might support my notion, I would go to right around the end (about 41 minutes) when the host asks this question: (I may paraphrase a tiny bit due to having to type the transcript)
Is the notion of public duty today problematic because the philosophical notions of duty are not as emphatic as they used to be?
Yes. But also I think because of the culture of modern society. We don't think of people as having particular stations with particular duties attached. We are much more aspirational and mobile. People are, I think, in pursuit of their happiness and a good life whether they are shopping at Ikea or whatever they are doing they are trying to create a life for themselves where they feel happy and they see themselves as being equipped with rights to do so and therefore duty begins to be seen as a kind of external imposition, something that isn't part of ourselves...(a bit garbled here)...I mean we tend to think of "duty" as a bit of a pejorative.
An interesting answer and one I would agree with. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:47:41 AM · #160 |
I'm saying that the young hotshots who became surgeons probably did play violent video games, and it is likely the hand-eye-controller coordination involved in those which would seem to make them more adept at modern procedures involving remote instruments -- I think playing in SecondLife is probably going to have little effect on surgical skills.
But, I don't have the study details at hand, I could be wrong. I think I have expressed things here as educated guesses and reasonable projections, not as absolutes; I am not afraid to change my mind -- my dad always said it furnished excellent evidence that I had one ...
However, I think the evidence is clear and direct in the case of drone pilots, which I notice you did not address ... :-(
Message edited by author 2010-10-20 00:48:23. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:51:29 AM · #161 |
| I just remembered -- according to those sneaky Deists who set up this country, the "pursuit of happiness" (a.k.a. hedonism?) is an inalienable right granted us by our Creator ... :-) |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 01:04:04 AM · #162 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
"When you play video games you create nothing, at least nothing that exists outside of your gamer profile."
is not equal to:
"Show me something tangible."
Ergo, you have moved the goalposts.
There's a shit-ton of stuff created in games "outside the gamer's profile". Again:
- Any text-based computer game that allows users to create new content.
(Not in a profile, it's the game itself that's being extended)
- Any game that allows users to create their own 3-D environments.
(Not in a profile, it's the game itself that's being extended)
- Any game with creative tools where people design and populate worlds with creatures of their own making.
(Not in a profile, it's the game itself that's being extended)
- Any process that takes in-game resources and makes them into real world objects using fab-at-home object printing techniques or commercial rapid prototyping gear.
(Not in a profile, REAL WORLD TANGIBLE OBJECTS)
- Machinima.
(Not in a profile, MOVIES, TV SHOWS, ANIMATIONS)
- Any game that provides a sandbox mode for free experimentation.
(Not in a profile, and created purely with your imagination and the tools at hand)
- Any game that has level building tools.
(Not in a profile, it's the game itself that's being extended)
- Any game where you build teams and rely on social skills, practice, and teamwork to accomplish goals.
(Not in a profile, and REAL WORLD EFFECTS ON SKILL AND RELATIONSHIPS)
There. I just repeated a ton of stuff, including tangible objects, that are created outside a gamer's profile, and created IN GAMES. Creativity. In games. |
Whether the data is being saved to the gamer profile, to the console hard drive, or to some cloud is irrelevant. The point is that what is being created is nothing more than some data that the game was designed to create in the first place. And to clarify, I'm not arguing that games themselves are not creative, or that creativity is not required to play games, I'm arguing that a person playing a video game is not actually creating anything new.
Originally posted by Mousie:
Never seen any? I've already listed some. Using your ignorance of the others as an argument is not particularly useful at this point.
I've also pointed out sandboxes. From Wiki: "some games offer a sandbox mode that allows players to explore an open world game environment independently from the game's main objectives." The designers do not set up everything you can do. They set up a world with physical rules and populate it with objects, and let you have at it. You know, just like the real world. No control. No goal. No predictability.
You operate within the parameters of real world physics every day. Does that makes you less creative? |
During my normal every day life, I am a creative person, but I am not always creating. This is my point. You can be a creative person and play a creative video game, but you are not actually creating anything yourself.
Originally posted by Mousie:
Let's take a closer look at Second Life, just to prove a point. You suggest that game developers tightly control their user's experience. Here are the tools they give you in SL: Polygon modeling tools, texturing tools, scripting tools. That's some tight control right there... free reign to build whatever you want from the ground up, defining shape, color, behavior, physics... you can even build crap as big as a city if you dedicate the time. People make money in-game by creating tools, toys, and works of art to sell to other people in the game. |
All of these things are in game "virtual" creations. If anything, this would qualify as some form of graphic design. That's nice... but in my mind it's not really worthwhile until the design turns into something tangible.
Originally posted by Mousie:
And just to kick it over the edge: People have been printing their SL creations on rapid prototyping tools for years, making them real! Just export a mesh! They have converters for all sorts of game's 3D models these days.
//www.secondlifeinsider.com/tag/Rapid+Prototyping/
Is seeing believing? |
That's exactly what I was arguing against. I've been enlightened. But that's just one example out of thousands upon thousands of video games. Not very convincing.
Originally posted by Mousie:
Is making a TV show not a creative endeavor because you can only watch it on a TV? Your 'you can only see it in a game' argument, while untrue on it's face (see: Machinima, they're all over YouTube!), is completely irrelevant. What is the tangible of a TV show? The recording on tape? Games are recorded in memory and on disk... every change I make in game a makes a small, corresponding physical change in some electrical or magnetic media at some point. Not artistic, for sure, but certainly tangible. |
The actors, directors, producers, and scriptwriters are creating. The people watching the show are not creating.
Video game developers and computer programmers are creating. The people who play the games are not creating.
Originally posted by Mousie:
I just can't believe how wrong you are.
|
I just can't believe how much effort you are putting into proving me wrong.
So, you proved me wrong. Fantastic. There are actually a few games out there that allow people to create something tangible. The fact is that few people play those games compared to the number of games that have no creativity. I don't know how many people play Second Life, but I'm sure it's not even close to the number of people that play games like WoW, Halo, Madden, Mario, Call of Duty, etc...
You may have proved me wrong based on what I was arguing, but I'm still not convinced that video games provide a good opportunity to create. Whatever can be created by a video game can be done much better and easier in other ways. So you can make your Second Life avatar into a statue? Why not take a sculpting class? So you can build some stuff with other people in Eve? Why not build a house for homeless people with a team of other creative people? There are superior ways of creating things that are more useful, educational, and fun.
If I take a sculpting class I learn more social skills, develop stronger friendships, learn more useful life skills, and probably have a lot more fun than I would sitting in front of a computer playing Second Life and making friends through a headset.
I understand that you've invested a lot of your life in video games Mousie, and I don't judge you for that. But I know that when you invest so heavily in something, you are willing to stretch pretty far to legitimize that which you've invested in. You won the argument, so kudos to you, but in my mind you're stretching pretty far. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 01:40:30 AM · #163 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I'm saying that the young hotshots who became surgeons probably did play violent video games, and it is likely the hand-eye-controller coordination involved in those which would seem to make them more adept at modern procedures involving remote instruments -- I think playing in SecondLife is probably going to have little effect on surgical skills.
But, I don't have the study details at hand, I could be wrong. I think I have expressed things here as educated guesses and reasonable projections, not as absolutes; I am not afraid to change my mind -- my dad always said it furnished excellent evidence that I had one ...
However, I think the evidence is clear and direct in the case of drone pilots, which I notice you did not address ... :-( |
I guess I didn't address it because I thought it was the same principle. Where would we see that it was the fact the games were violent that allows him to be a good drone pilot? That's all hand/eye coordination and I'm sure he could get that playing a regular old video game that doesn't glorify gore.
And while it may seem like I'm splitting hairs, I would draw a distinction between "happiness" and "pleasure". One does not necessarily lead to the other. I would bequeth a noble definition to Jefferson's "happiness" while the hedonistic "pleasure" of our modern age is not so noble. I think of my favorite quote by Camus: "Because I longed for eternal life, I went to bed with harlots and drank for nights on end. In the morning, my mouth was filled with the bitter taste of the mortal state." Pleasure does not necessarily lead to happiness.
âFreedom is not procured by a full enjoyment of what is desired, but by controlling the desire.â
Message edited by author 2010-10-20 01:41:27. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 02:15:52 AM · #164 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I just remembered -- according to those sneaky Deists who set up this country, the "pursuit of happiness" (a.k.a. hedonism?) is an inalienable right granted us by our Creator ... :-) |
God made man in his own image is starting to make sense now. How can you not expect man to be at least a little selfish in his desires when his father raped a virgin, tortures and kills at will? I hate to think of the games he's playing...
Message edited by author 2010-10-20 02:18:14.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2010 03:13:45 AM · #165 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I just remembered -- according to those sneaky Deists who set up this country, the "pursuit of happiness" (a.k.a. hedonism?) is an inalienable right granted us by our Creator ... :-) |
God made man in his own image is starting to make sense now. How can you not expect man to be at least a little selfish in his desires when his father raped a virgin, tortures and kills at will? I hate to think of the games he's playing... |
Seriously yanko?? Man, I don't know what events have transpired in your life recently to cause you to behave like this, but I find it contemptuous, offensive and disgusting. I've "known" you on DPC for over 4 years and either I never paid much attention to the things you post or something has really gone wrong in your life to cause you to act this way. I really hope you get it worked out before you alienate more people. I realize I can ignore this thread, so that's what I'll do. Enjoy your vitriol. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 04:04:23 AM · #166 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
Let's take a closer look at Second Life, just to prove a point. You suggest that game developers tightly control their user's experience. Here are the tools they give you in SL: Polygon modeling tools, texturing tools, scripting tools. That's some tight control right there... free reign to build whatever you want from the ground up, defining shape, color, behavior, physics... |
And what were amongst the first objects created in SL? - Penises.
Computer games AND porn. What more could mankind want? |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 06:09:10 AM · #167 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I just remembered -- according to those sneaky Deists who set up this country, the "pursuit of happiness" (a.k.a. hedonism?) is an inalienable right granted us by our Creator ... :-) |
God made man in his own image is starting to make sense now. How can you not expect man to be at least a little selfish in his desires when his father raped a virgin, tortures and kills at will? I hate to think of the games he's playing... |
Seriously yanko?? Man, I don't know what events have transpired in your life recently to cause you to behave like this, but I find it contemptuous, offensive and disgusting. I've "known" you on DPC for over 4 years and either I never paid much attention to the things you post or something has really gone wrong in your life to cause you to act this way. I really hope you get it worked out before you alienate more people. I realize I can ignore this thread, so that's what I'll do. Enjoy your vitriol. |
Yeah I woke up but that was more than 4 years ago so I guess you haven't been paying much attention. I'm sorry you find it offensive that I mentioned those acts stripped of their marketing. Personally, I find the actual acts more offensive, but I guess that's just me. Regardless, if the subject is the glorification of violence and the Bible is filled with it then it's probably best to start there since so many people use it as their personal manual for centuries. Video games not so much.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2010 09:03:41 AM · #168 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Personally, I find the actual acts more offensive, but I guess that's just me. Regardless, if the subject is the glorification of violence and the Bible is filled with it then it's probably best to start there since so many people use it as their personal manual for centuries. Video games not so much. |
So how does the Koran compare? |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 09:12:29 AM · #169 |
Originally posted by FireBird:
Originally posted by yanko:
Personally, I find the actual acts more offensive, but I guess that's just me. Regardless, if the subject is the glorification of violence and the Bible is filled with it then it's probably best to start there since so many people use it as their personal manual for centuries. Video games not so much. |
So how does the Koran compare? |
What's that got to do with anything? I fail to see where in this thread  Yanko was deriding Christianity and praising Islam. |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 10:49:23 AM · #170 |
Is there a lower ring of hell that Rant threads can devolve to? ;)
Hey Paul, I thought you agreed with most of my original premise. Have I drifted or did you change your mind or are you just conversing? |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:38:30 PM · #171 |
Is there a lower ring of hell that Rant threads can devolve to? ;)
Sorry DrAchoo... |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:42:51 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Is there a lower ring of hell that Rant threads can devolve to? ;)
Hey Paul, I thought you agreed with most of my original premise. Have I drifted or did you change your mind or are you just conversing? |
I'm not sure either ... I don't like violent games and believe that they can influence some people towards a more "aggressive" state of mind, which may ultimately lead to actual expressions of violence. I think the constant exposure probably inures us to the real thing.
But, I'm also opposed to censorship. I guess these companies have a right to make such games, but I wish they wouldn't.
I don't think I agree with your social analysis regarding hedonism and duty, or perhaps just not to the same degree.
I don't know, does that make things any clearer? |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:48:58 PM · #173 |
Originally posted by FireBird:
Originally posted by yanko:
Personally, I find the actual acts more offensive, but I guess that's just me. Regardless, if the subject is the glorification of violence and the Bible is filled with it then it's probably best to start there since so many people use it as their personal manual for centuries. Video games not so much. |
So how does the Koran compare? |
I probably should have said Abrahamic Religions and others like it rather than just focus on the one book. The reason though is it's far too easy to make the argument that the Koran incites undesirable attributes in man such as violence, discrimination, etc, yet when you apply the same reasoning to the Bible you are attacked and condemned as if you spit in the face of their mothers. Either the reasoning is wrong and we should stop practicing discrimination at home and end the murders and tortures overseas or the reasoning is correct, but we are just too blind hypocritical to see it. I suspect it's somewhere in between, but rather than explore that lets stay focus on just the trivial such as violent video games like what we did back in the 50's with rock 'n roll. After all we seem to prefer blindness over getting at any real truth.
Message edited by author 2010-10-20 12:53:10.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:54:46 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by yanko:
After all we seem to prefer blindness over getting at any real truth. |
As far as I'm concerned, you are free to post the real truth here anytime. :-) |
|
|
|
10/20/2010 12:57:07 PM · #175 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I don't know, does that make things any clearer? |
Maybe? :) |
|
