Video game restriction and controversy

It's a bit dumb to flip out over a game right when it comes out. It's different if you have a tangible case to call into question, but the game's been out like 2 days...no 'desensitizing (etc.)' could occur over 2 days.

As for Japan, we now have something worthy of investigation...unfortunately, a 'simple internet search' wouldn't do, so we probably won't know the answer to this. You'd have to experience it first hand, particularly as an immigrant. According to a Social Psych lecture I once attended, one of the only known cross-cultural taboos, is incest.

Is the crime rate low because people are (for lack of a better word) 'better' in Japan? Or is it because there are fewer laws? Which either means, people feel more free to express themselves, and there's no 'thrill' of doing those petty stupid things we all know about....or, it means people are no better over there, they're just not busted on half the things they do.

 

That raises an interesting question. Doesn't the Japanese Government have some kind of web page or something?

 

If you ask me, Japan is starting to hit the dumps when it comes to administration of the country. Its becomming corrupt. People are getting more violent, and a lack of certain laws means that they do just as much crap as us, but don't get busted.
SHOCKER

 

in japan breasts and thighs werent(and in many places still arent) considered sexual parts of a womans body, in japan it is the back of the neck, your ears, and your forearm that are sexual
the trends still tend to carry even with american influence...anyways to be more on subject
even japans teen games are a bit more bizarre, did you know there is a game for the nintendo wii where you aim for the urinal with the controller and pee...no comment...
how things are taken in psychologically vary in culture nearly as much as how plants and bacteria differ from place to place, while there are similars all around, some can only be found in certain areas
either way I still stress its culture

music is the only absolute in changing human thought/thinking patterns
I say this because its scientifically proven to be so effective it literally can change the wrinkles in your brain...but thats another story..

 

What do you mean by wrinkles in your brain? (Gyri?) What effect do you suspect this has on human thinking patterns (and other things? Motor control (cerebellum)?) Although I've experienced this effect (music alters mood quite easily), I've never heard any scientific basis for it. I'm interested, please elaborate.

 

I can't speak to the brain wrinkles, but I can address the reasoning behind music and it's effect over your mood. This occurs because all things opperate at a frequency. In this case, your organs all operate at a frequency as well. And it is a consistent frequency. With some research you cna find the operating frequency of various organs. Using sound, both audible and inaudible, you can affect the operation of these organs by playing frequencies that resonate with them. This is the concept of the infamous "brown note", which does exist despite what Mythbusters may lead you to believe. Their setup was simply wrong, for various reasons.

However, to continue on that trend, the brain operates at various frequencies. There are different brainwaves, each with a unique frequency, that correspond to different moods and states of mind. Creating frequencies within a musical piece that resonate with those brainwave frequencies can enhance them and trigger that mood or state of mind. Not all of these are audible tones, mind, so the musicians can't play those tones themselves. But multiple tones of different frequencies when played at the same times produce other tones, called beat frequencies. An obvious example of this would be when to out of tune instruments are played together. That unpleasant pulsating sound is a result of the beat frequency created. Musically, we often can't hear these, but they give the music a certain feel, and often result in the changing of moods by resonating with brainwaves.

Also, the distinctive sound of an instrument results from something called overtones or harmonics. A note is dependent upon the frequency of a sine wave. However, if it were just that frequency, any note played by any instrument, would sound identical. But as the sound vibrates through the instrument, aspects of the instrument's design (shape, materials, etc) create other overlapping frequencies that change t he sound into something more distinctive without altering the note. Some of these frequencies undoubtable resonate with brainwave frequencies in the same manner, so that different instruments on their own have certain influences over thinking. For example, flutes are often thought of as calming, and are used in playing calming relaxation types of music). French horns have very few overtones, and as such are very flexible instruments, and useful fro creating a variety of different moods and emotions,as the notes themselves, as well as the musicians style of play can have more effect on the music.

As an interesting aside, when CDs first came out, a lot of people hated them, saying they sounded "cold" and they prefered the "warmer" sound of vinyl. The reasons for this is the overtones and beat frequencies mentioned could not be as accurately represented by the early digital technology as it could be by the infinitely vairable analog formats. It was cleaner (less noice from the recording and playback process) but it was unable to produce the inaudible tones because of the limitations of the format. The notes, as they were played back, would of course, create some of those frequencies again, but it wasn't quite as powerful, and thus didn't quite have the same effect on moods.

 

^^Have they since improved CD quality to capture this effect, or do you think that is just something that's impossible to preserve in the Analog -> Digital conversion?

You know it's funny, I've actually learned the other side of the coin. I never really considered resonating frequencies and their impact on the brain, but I've learned a bit about some other organs, in particular when studying ergonomics.

Just to handwave a bit, there are a few things which make any ergonomics job particularly bad. The mantra goes "Force, Posture Repetition" and that pretty much covers the bulk. You can't lift if your trunk (hips) is bent to a 90 degree angle, you can't lift a million pounds, and you can't lift even a light weight, a million times a day. But there are other red flags for ergonomists, a rather serious one being vibrations.* But of course when I say vibrations, I don't mean music as those are not very forceful waves and the body is lined with skin and fat which act as a shield in say, the torso. I'm suggesting a scenario like, driving a mining truck, where you're in contact with a vibrating seat all day.

(*Actually, there is currently no (universally accepted) tool for ergonomics that considers and quantifies sound levels when evaluating a work space...I think this is something that should definitely be considered, so I may devote some research time to this idea. The problem with a thing like ergonomics is that people vary so much, and it's hard to put things into 'numbers' that are acceptable for most people.)

Vibrations are bad for several reasons. One being that fact that your vertebral column has little fibrocartilaginous ('spongy') discs acting to support, and guide motion of the spine. There is a lot of water content in the spine, and over the course of the day it sort of 'trickles out' due to gravity...and when you lay down for a good night's rest, the water is essentially 'soaked up' again. (Interesting note: For this reason, you are actually an inch or two taller every morning when you wake up than when you go to sleep)

I'm sure you can sort of visualize and imagine that vibrations exacerbate this phenomenon...to the point of removing so much water that your spine isn't supported as it should be. I won't go into the specific conditions, but a lot of them are friction-based, or just compression-based.

There are several reasons the internal organs should not resonate however, and I'm not even sure I know them myself (I've just taken this fact for granted) when it comes for organs such as the heart or liver.

This however leads very nicely into a story. When my ergonomics professor was doing some of his research, he worked with a few guys on a vibration study. The paradigm was simply to use a variable-vibration table to simulate different environments, and see the effects on whatever it was they were studying. They knew the resonating frequency of certain organs prior to beginning the study.

One of the researchers was up on the table trying to make sure it was secure when another one (not sure if it was my professor or not) turned the table to the resonating frequency of the large intestine. The guy on the table looks up with a distressed look on his face and simply goes "UH OH!" before running to the washroom.

Well...perhaps a better story was when our prof was telling us about cognitive ergonomics, where, for example, when designing a pill bottle, you want to make it so kids can't open it but elderly people with arthritis can: you have to make it a cognitive, and not physical, challenge. To quote my professor:

"They did a study where they got kids to try to open pill bottles and only 1 kid out of 10 got it open. But then they filled it with Smarties and Reese's Penis..."

The class was in an uproar. Of course if he didn't have such a slip of the tongue, he would have said that in the second scenario, where kids had motivation to open the bottles, they all got it open. Every one of them.

 

You actually pointed out one of the flaws in the Mythbusters "busting" of the brown not. The sounds have to be played at extremely high volume (or since you can't really hear them, amplitude) to be able to work. If my instructor was correct (and I've never looked it up myself so I'm taking his word on this) the correct frequency is 4Hz played at 140 dB or louder. They hit the correct tone, but not the correct volume. He was also too close to the speakers. In order for it to work in this case, you have to be far enough away from the sound source for the wave to have fully developed, so a minimum distance of the waves full wavelength. The people watching this were actually far enough away. And while the volume was too low to cause the desired effect, they did, from what I understand, feel queasy.

But this rule doesn't apply to the mental and psycological effects of sound, as they aren't affecting anything physical.

 

ill do my best to find the articles I read and the research done
it basically spoke of how listening to the same stylings of music over a long period of time can physically change your brain
it also dealt with a lot of the things ebeneezer has said
but I feel so far off topic that ill prolly make a new thread for it once I find the information again

 

yeah they also have the highest suicide rate, just thought id point that out.

 

Well, video games aren't typically being blamed for causing people to kill themselves. I've certainly never seen a game where the goal is suicide. Though I suppose one could make the case for Viva Pinata. I'm actually quite surprised this game hasn't been mentioned more. Does anyone else find this a rather disturbing basis for a game? Not that I think people are going to begging people to bash them open for candy because they played it, but still, it's kinda twisted and a little creepy.

 

Well who wants to help me play 'Name that incredibly bad non-video game thing?' Ill start with:
Hostel
Wolf Creek
The Exorcist
Spongebob Squarepants XD

Hostel is the most violent thing ive ever seen. Well i havent actually watched it but you know what i mean. All the people are real, the blood looks real, everything is real.
Then look at Manhunt. Blood does NOT look real. The character is virtual. Nothing is real. Indeed id like to say that Hostel was used by Rockstar to forward the release of Manhunt 2 in a pitch to the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification). They succeeded.

Wolf Creek is based on a REAL STORY which is terrible. I find that insane that they should be able to do such a thing.

The Exorcist. OMFG cause this be more obvious? Real story, caused mass suicides, incredibly spooky, was banned for years.

SBSP: God save us all from ye yellow menace!

That said the only games i never really understood were GTA. I thought they were terrible. Extreme violence, sex, gun crime, freedom to do it all, characters always doing illegal things, stealings, drugs, prostitutes and the ability to go on a complete rampage.

Now with COD4 you are killing people because they are trying to kill thousands. If anything it inspires people to join the USMC or SAS. Indeed the story makes you feel for every person you lose. And sometimes you see the fear or pain on a terrorist face as you plug him. At the end your final magazine really counts for something. GTA you go "Oh look a flamethrower lets go a burning!" or decide which weapon will be best for holding against the FBI.

 

Has anybody played Turok? And I mean the origonal one on N64. That game is really bloody.

 

I mean, it is up to the player want he or she wants, you can't blame the gaming industry. If they want to kill themselves, I provide them with the materials to do so. I mean it is your life. You plan what are you going to do and if you let a game persuade you, then your life must suck, I am sorry for sounding harsh, but it is true.

It is true, when I play a game that it is so good, I wish I was in there, but then I realize that it is just a fantasy, and I really need to come down to reality. It is not the gaming industry fault that people think they are indestructible or all-powerful, they are just trying to make a buck.

I have things to do and goals to accomplish, I don't know, if this my maturity speaking, but for me, I just play a game and on to the next one.

 

*Grunt* Video games are awesome

 

GTA has made alot of trouble in Britain with gangs. It's on the news all the time. Ever since GTA3 was made, Britain's crime rate has increased and it's one of the top selling games in the UK which makes me sick. I hate GTA and all the violence. How would anybody get enjoyment out of that, I don't know.

 

GTA isnt more violent than many other games out there, its just that the violence is more graphic, and represents depravity that can HAPPEN in our society. Kingdom Hearts is probably MUCH more "violent" than GTA in that combat is one of the most basic functions of the game.

 

Blaming a video game for violence i think that is a load of shit. A video game is a game nothing more its not like when you go out and buy GTA you get a gun with it.its all about your mind set a and will power. if you cant stop yourself from doing somthing then you should not leave your house. I understand where they are coming from when people say it is not a good game for little kids to see or play but thats why they have ratings and if your kid is going to sneak and play it then there is not much you can really do but tell them it is just a game and there are very serius consinquences for doing things like you see in video games.