Germany embarks on total and complete ban of killer games

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Piracy rates will go thru the roof in Germany, that's for sure.

Exactly. There goes the last of the moral qualms anybody will have against just BTing said "killer games" for free on the Internet - you can't even say some hard working game maker's livelihood is being threatened, because he can't sell the game in Germany anyway...

Originally Posted by Skybird

It means nothing, since there is zero statistical anaylsis given on forming a link between the two. In the nineties, I did shave off my beared. Maybe this made crime rates going so and so, up or down, and it contributed to the video games scene to make suczh and such kind of games?

We all know statistics aren't perfect (especially crime stats that depend on a wide, layered variety of assumptions), but at least he offered something on his side within this thread, which is better than what you did.

Now, outlining the general topic at hand:

In utilitarian terms, this measure involves a 100% probability of negatively affecting the interests of a significant percentage of the population for a vague possibility of positively affecting an insignificant percentage of the population (however many school shootings show up in the news, as a percentage of the student body the number is insignificant - we won't be living in the same world if it did).

On the Plus side, while it would be a real groaner for our Violent Game Players, the deaths caused by school shootings obviously have a much higher value than the displeasure of our game players. Still, even THOSE would be such an insignificant percentage that it is hard to believe the math would wind up favoring this measure.

Even generously assuming that this measure will eliminate further school shootings, it will be an upward climb to justify in the face of the sheer disparity in affected percentages.

To further add to that is the fact that thanks to BT, this measure would be nearly ineffective against Violent Game Players. It is just like an anti-gun law, except the proliferation of BT is much higher than illegal guns. In the end, only the most law-abiding segment (thus least likely to commit crime) guys will actually get hurt.

Sure, you can add anti-BT measures and all that to try and put a stop to it, now you are just pouring into the Loss side of the ledger. In short, any way you cut it, the actual balance will be nearly ZERO gain for definite loss.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

We all know statistics aren't perfect (especially crime stats that depend on a wide, layered variety of assumptions), but at least he offered something on his side within this thread, which is better than what you did.

You are wrong. Its better not to post any statistics that are porked, than to post statistics that are porked (and then say that would be better than nothing). Because the latter is actively misleading, while the first simply does not make any statement.

And I posted that old reply in reference to the obviously manipulative graph construction with the game covers in it by Mookie, since it is not clear to me wether that was meant as a joke, or for real.

Flawed data is better than no data? You must be kidding. It can even do greater damage than no data.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You are wrong. Its better not to post any statistics that are porked, than to post statistics that are porked (and then say that would be better than nothing). Because the latter is actively misleading, while the first simply does not make any statement.

And I posted that old reply in reference to the obviously manipulative graph construction with the game covers in it by Mookie, since it is not clear to me wether that was meant as a joke, or for real.

Flawed data is better than no data? You must be kidding. It can even do greater damage than no data.

That's true, but for that to be so, you'll have to SHOW it is flawed. The datasource clearly has an agenda, but that's far from showing it is flawed.

The chart obviously cannot prove that Violent Video Games reduce crime. But as far as I can see MM never said it was meant to do that. It IS enough to strike a blow (though not a knockout) at people who want to claim the other direction, by showing that if anything, the data seems to be in the inverse direction.

[Skybird]

You are about data quality. I am about a basic flaw in methodology. I would need to show the data is flawed if there is a causal link between the two variables in that graph. But in fact the graph is not even expressing a correlation, which in itsaelf also does not express a cuasal link. It simply is a suggestive picture claiming an opinion by trying to give a false impression of being solid data.

Let's stop this useless debate over nothing that would be worth the effort. I think it is absolutely clear what I point at.

[RickC Sniper]

Violent video games came about because there was a market for them. We are a violent society. We like to play these games. I do not believe violent games breed killers, but allow people to "vent" or blow off steam, which is healthy.

Our society has become more violent and it would have become so with or with out any video games.

The odd duck who goes postal and kills a bunch of people is just an abnormality of society and if there continues to be more and more of them they just represent a growing violent society as a whole.

Personal opinion here with no data to back this up. It is just what I believe.

[AVGWarhawk]

Game of the Year, Germany 2009!

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Game of the Year, Germany 2009!

LOL Im no expert but I'm pretty sure that cake is bad for your hamsters. Therefore this game sets a bad example and should be banned !