shooters..

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Tayze
    Rookie
    • Dec 2002
    • 174

    #106
    Re: shooters..

    But see, if you kill a soldier, that couldnt have been your grandfather. Like i said, these games are fiction, an imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented. Sure they are based on history but they are still fiction, historical fiction if you will. Just like historical fiction novels or movies, these games are not real. They are fictional games in a historical setting. Also like i said, many people just dont put it on the level as you do. But thats your choice and i'm cool with that. Like my dad was in the army and fought in desert storm back in 92 or whatever and had he died, i dont think i would have a problem playing the first person shooter set in that time period. I dont see it as my dad fighting in the war. Or also my best friend, who is living in Germany right now, has a dad in Iraq right now. I dont think he has a problem with first person shooters either. But like i said, I have no problem with your way of thinking. If you feel that way, so be it. But i just dont think that most people see it that way and the makers of the games dont intend for them to be seen that way.

    Comment

    • pk500
      All Star
      • Jul 2002
      • 8062

      #107
      Re: shooters..

      >>>listening to music, readin a novel, watchin a movies is PASSIV
      playin games and virtually killin the people - you guessed it! ACTIVE!!!!<<<

      Total bullsh*t, and you dumped yourself into the septic tank. Why? Because you used the word "virtually."

      We're VIRTUALLY killing the people -- we're not killing them. There's a huge difference, and you've done a superb job of pinpointing the difference.

      Let me guess: You must consider masturbation as conventional sex. Because after all, you're probably fantasizing about being with a woman while touching yourself with your hand, so that's virtually having sex, right? By your definition, touching yourself while thinking of a woman is the same as actually having the woman touch you.

      Well, it's not. Just like virtually killing someone is not the same as actually committing such a heinous act.

      Your solution is simple. Don't play shooters. But don't question the right or morality of those who do play them, because they're doing nothing wrong. Games are fantasy -- nothing more.

      Take care,
      PK
      Xbox Live: pk4425

      Comment

      • pk500
        All Star
        • Jul 2002
        • 8062

        #108
        Re: shooters..

        >>>listening to music, readin a novel, watchin a movies is PASSIV
        playin games and virtually killin the people - you guessed it! ACTIVE!!!!<<<

        Total bullsh*t, and you dumped yourself into the septic tank. Why? Because you used the word "virtually."

        We're VIRTUALLY killing the people -- we're not killing them. There's a huge difference, and you've done a superb job of pinpointing the difference.

        Let me guess: You must consider masturbation as conventional sex. Because after all, you're probably fantasizing about being with a woman while touching yourself with your hand, so that's virtually having sex, right? By your definition, touching yourself while thinking of a woman is the same as actually having the woman touch you.

        Well, it's not. Just like virtually killing someone is not the same as actually committing such a heinous act.

        Your solution is simple. Don't play shooters. But don't question the right or morality of those who do play them, because they're doing nothing wrong. Games are fantasy -- nothing more.

        Take care,
        PK
        Xbox Live: pk4425

        Comment

        • pk500
          All Star
          • Jul 2002
          • 8062

          #109
          Re: shooters..

          >>>listening to music, readin a novel, watchin a movies is PASSIV
          playin games and virtually killin the people - you guessed it! ACTIVE!!!!<<<

          Total bullsh*t, and you dumped yourself into the septic tank. Why? Because you used the word "virtually."

          We're VIRTUALLY killing the people -- we're not killing them. There's a huge difference, and you've done a superb job of pinpointing the difference.

          Let me guess: You must consider masturbation as conventional sex. Because after all, you're probably fantasizing about being with a woman while touching yourself with your hand, so that's virtually having sex, right? By your definition, touching yourself while thinking of a woman is the same as actually having the woman touch you.

          Well, it's not. Just like virtually killing someone is not the same as actually committing such a heinous act.

          Your solution is simple. Don't play shooters. But don't question the right or morality of those who do play them, because they're doing nothing wrong. Games are fantasy -- nothing more.

          Take care,
          PK
          Xbox Live: pk4425

          Comment

          • olec
            Rookie
            • Oct 2002
            • 181

            #110
            Re: shooters..

            </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
            pk500 said:
            &gt;&gt;&gt;listening to music, readin a novel, watchin a movies is PASSIV
            playin games and virtually killin the people - you guessed it! ACTIVE!!!!&lt;&lt;&lt;

            Total bullsh*t, and you dumped yourself into the septic tank. Why? Because you used the word "virtually."

            We're VIRTUALLY killing the people -- we're not killing them. There's a huge difference, and you've done a superb job of pinpointing the difference.

            Let me guess: You must consider masturbation as conventional sex. Because after all, you're probably fantasizing about being with a woman while touching yourself with your hand, so that's virtually having sex, right? By your definition, touching yourself while thinking of a woman is the same as actually having the woman touch you.

            Well, it's not. Just like virtually killing someone is not the same as actually committing such a heinous act.

            Your solution is simple. Don't play shooters. But don't question the right or morality of those who do play them, because they're doing nothing wrong. Games are fantasy -- nothing more.

            Take care,
            PK

            <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

            ok.. i must say i disagree, you didnt get the PASSIVE ACTIVE thing right..anyway..
            at least i found out in what way we have different opinions:

            to pick up your sex-example.. (now sex = killing)
            you are right thinkin about sex (killing) is not having sex (killing),
            but in my opinion even dreaming about having sex (killing) with pleasure
            is morally a problem - ha! see? thats it!
            i think its a little sick to enjoy dreamin about sex (killing)!

            ok, i think everything has been said..
            i now understand your point of view and i am cool with it, hope you feel the same way!

            Comment

            • olec
              Rookie
              • Oct 2002
              • 181

              #111
              Re: shooters..

              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
              pk500 said:
              &gt;&gt;&gt;listening to music, readin a novel, watchin a movies is PASSIV
              playin games and virtually killin the people - you guessed it! ACTIVE!!!!&lt;&lt;&lt;

              Total bullsh*t, and you dumped yourself into the septic tank. Why? Because you used the word "virtually."

              We're VIRTUALLY killing the people -- we're not killing them. There's a huge difference, and you've done a superb job of pinpointing the difference.

              Let me guess: You must consider masturbation as conventional sex. Because after all, you're probably fantasizing about being with a woman while touching yourself with your hand, so that's virtually having sex, right? By your definition, touching yourself while thinking of a woman is the same as actually having the woman touch you.

              Well, it's not. Just like virtually killing someone is not the same as actually committing such a heinous act.

              Your solution is simple. Don't play shooters. But don't question the right or morality of those who do play them, because they're doing nothing wrong. Games are fantasy -- nothing more.

              Take care,
              PK

              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

              ok.. i must say i disagree, you didnt get the PASSIVE ACTIVE thing right..anyway..
              at least i found out in what way we have different opinions:

              to pick up your sex-example.. (now sex = killing)
              you are right thinkin about sex (killing) is not having sex (killing),
              but in my opinion even dreaming about having sex (killing) with pleasure
              is morally a problem - ha! see? thats it!
              i think its a little sick to enjoy dreamin about sex (killing)!

              ok, i think everything has been said..
              i now understand your point of view and i am cool with it, hope you feel the same way!

              Comment

              • olec
                Rookie
                • Oct 2002
                • 181

                #112
                Re: shooters..

                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                pk500 said:
                &gt;&gt;&gt;listening to music, readin a novel, watchin a movies is PASSIV
                playin games and virtually killin the people - you guessed it! ACTIVE!!!!&lt;&lt;&lt;

                Total bullsh*t, and you dumped yourself into the septic tank. Why? Because you used the word "virtually."

                We're VIRTUALLY killing the people -- we're not killing them. There's a huge difference, and you've done a superb job of pinpointing the difference.

                Let me guess: You must consider masturbation as conventional sex. Because after all, you're probably fantasizing about being with a woman while touching yourself with your hand, so that's virtually having sex, right? By your definition, touching yourself while thinking of a woman is the same as actually having the woman touch you.

                Well, it's not. Just like virtually killing someone is not the same as actually committing such a heinous act.

                Your solution is simple. Don't play shooters. But don't question the right or morality of those who do play them, because they're doing nothing wrong. Games are fantasy -- nothing more.

                Take care,
                PK

                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                ok.. i must say i disagree, you didnt get the PASSIVE ACTIVE thing right..anyway..
                at least i found out in what way we have different opinions:

                to pick up your sex-example.. (now sex = killing)
                you are right thinkin about sex (killing) is not having sex (killing),
                but in my opinion even dreaming about having sex (killing) with pleasure
                is morally a problem - ha! see? thats it!
                i think its a little sick to enjoy dreamin about sex (killing)!

                ok, i think everything has been said..
                i now understand your point of view and i am cool with it, hope you feel the same way!

                Comment

                • olec
                  Rookie
                  • Oct 2002
                  • 181

                  #113
                  Re: shooters..

                  </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                  Tayze said:
                  But see, if you kill a soldier, that couldnt have been your grandfather. Like i said, these games are fiction, an imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented. Sure they are based on history but they are still fiction, historical fiction if you will. Just like historical fiction novels or movies, these games are not real. They are fictional games in a historical setting. Also like i said, many people just dont put it on the level as you do. But thats your choice and i'm cool with that. Like my dad was in the army and fought in desert storm back in 92 or whatever and had he died, i dont think i would have a problem playing the first person shooter set in that time period. I dont see it as my dad fighting in the war. Or also my best friend, who is living in Germany right now, has a dad in Iraq right now. I dont think he has a problem with first person shooters either. But like i said, I have no problem with your way of thinking. If you feel that way, so be it. But i just dont think that most people see it that way and the makers of the games dont intend for them to be seen that way.

                  <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                  very nice last words!
                  thank you for not feeling insulted and havin arguments!


                  play on!



                  P.S.: EA put a bug in NBA live 2004 - oh.. id love to shoot these b*tches!

                  Comment

                  • olec
                    Rookie
                    • Oct 2002
                    • 181

                    #114
                    Re: shooters..

                    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                    Tayze said:
                    But see, if you kill a soldier, that couldnt have been your grandfather. Like i said, these games are fiction, an imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented. Sure they are based on history but they are still fiction, historical fiction if you will. Just like historical fiction novels or movies, these games are not real. They are fictional games in a historical setting. Also like i said, many people just dont put it on the level as you do. But thats your choice and i'm cool with that. Like my dad was in the army and fought in desert storm back in 92 or whatever and had he died, i dont think i would have a problem playing the first person shooter set in that time period. I dont see it as my dad fighting in the war. Or also my best friend, who is living in Germany right now, has a dad in Iraq right now. I dont think he has a problem with first person shooters either. But like i said, I have no problem with your way of thinking. If you feel that way, so be it. But i just dont think that most people see it that way and the makers of the games dont intend for them to be seen that way.

                    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                    very nice last words!
                    thank you for not feeling insulted and havin arguments!


                    play on!



                    P.S.: EA put a bug in NBA live 2004 - oh.. id love to shoot these b*tches!

                    Comment

                    • olec
                      Rookie
                      • Oct 2002
                      • 181

                      #115
                      Re: shooters..

                      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                      Tayze said:
                      But see, if you kill a soldier, that couldnt have been your grandfather. Like i said, these games are fiction, an imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented. Sure they are based on history but they are still fiction, historical fiction if you will. Just like historical fiction novels or movies, these games are not real. They are fictional games in a historical setting. Also like i said, many people just dont put it on the level as you do. But thats your choice and i'm cool with that. Like my dad was in the army and fought in desert storm back in 92 or whatever and had he died, i dont think i would have a problem playing the first person shooter set in that time period. I dont see it as my dad fighting in the war. Or also my best friend, who is living in Germany right now, has a dad in Iraq right now. I dont think he has a problem with first person shooters either. But like i said, I have no problem with your way of thinking. If you feel that way, so be it. But i just dont think that most people see it that way and the makers of the games dont intend for them to be seen that way.

                      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                      very nice last words!
                      thank you for not feeling insulted and havin arguments!


                      play on!



                      P.S.: EA put a bug in NBA live 2004 - oh.. id love to shoot these b*tches!

                      Comment

                      • pk500
                        All Star
                        • Jul 2002
                        • 8062

                        #116
                        Re: shooters..

                        Olec:

                        I disagree with your opinion, but you're certainly entitled to it!

                        Rock on ...

                        Take care,
                        PK
                        Xbox Live: pk4425

                        Comment

                        • pk500
                          All Star
                          • Jul 2002
                          • 8062

                          #117
                          Re: shooters..

                          Olec:

                          I disagree with your opinion, but you're certainly entitled to it!

                          Rock on ...

                          Take care,
                          PK
                          Xbox Live: pk4425

                          Comment

                          • pk500
                            All Star
                            • Jul 2002
                            • 8062

                            #118
                            Re: shooters..

                            Olec:

                            I disagree with your opinion, but you're certainly entitled to it!

                            Rock on ...

                            Take care,
                            PK
                            Xbox Live: pk4425

                            Comment

                            Working...