Consoles Killed The Arcade Star

Get In The Game (or out of it?)

As a child of the late 70′s (1977), I was part of the generation that grew up playing video games, both at home and at the arcade. When I think back on my history with this illusory past time, I remember all the fun and excitement that I had with playing them. Yet, at some point in my life I grew past playing video games all the time. I don’t quite recall when the turning point was, but I also know it never fully left. The last console I purchased was the Gamecube Nintendo and that all changed a little over 6 months ago. During a pre-black Friday sale, I bought an Xbox 360. For a brand new system, I paid only 99 dollars. I figured it was a good deal and given the hell of a year it has been, it was the first “gift” to myself in a long time (even before the lay offs). After buying this system, I got it home and opened it up, just to make sure everything was in the box. Then I packed it up and put it in a storage bin where it sat for a little over three weeks. And again, that all changed months ago. So, as of today, I have been actively playing my Xbox 360 and using the Xbox Live service. I’m meeting up with some friends online and meeting some new gamers via the online games that I have. I’m enjoying it a lot and the more I play the more I start remembering the part of me that I left behind, and how I used to be.

Over the past eight years I have had a few skirmishes here and there with playing video games, but even with my new console, I still haven’t scratched the surface of the hours I used to give to my gaming past. In many ways, I am glad that this is the case. However, there has always been, and I suspect always will be, a desire in me to get back into heavy gaming. Even though I have controlled the habit over the years, I still get that persistent itch once in a while and I have given into a few all night sessions. However, after getting back into the groove, I’ve started to reflect upon my memories as a child growing up in Seattle, WA, (more…)

Disclaimer?

Warning: What you’re about to read has a blog disclaimer

On Saturday, May 16th, 2009, I went and seen the movie Angels and Demons. Personally, I thought this movie was a much better attempt at Dan Brown’s book, then the previous Howard/Hanks movie The Da Vinci Code. This post today, however, is not about the movie, but it is about the absurdity of disclaimer statements. As the trailers for this movie began to play, one of the trailers that was shown was Public Enemies, starring Johnny Depp. Right before this movie started, there was the familiar green movie disclaimer statement that pops up before each and every trailer. What was inherently absurd, in my view, was the fact that its disclaimer had a line in there that noted that this movie contained “gangster violence“. As I looked at this statement for the few seconds it was on the screen, I couldn’t help but think how silly that statement is. As if there is a distinction between violence and gangster violence. If a movie has a guy running down the street who is looking to murder people, but is not in a gang, and shoots people down, how is that intrinsically different then a gangster using a gun to shoot people down? There is no difference. So, why does such a distinctive description need to be made?

I started to think how we’ve become a society of disclaimers. Everything we read, watch and use has a disclaimer. It’s as if someone out there knows that something is not right, but to compensate for having done it anyway, they slap a disclaimer on it to “make it OK”. I’m sure much of this has to do with legal issues, because companies do not want to be sued for someone who didn’t read that a movie was rated R vs. PG-13 and decided to see the movie or allow their kids to see the movie. However, I place that blame on the party for not being personally responsible and paying attention to the rating system. With that being said, if I am going to a movie like Public Enemies, Transformers, Star Trek and Batman; do I really need to be told that there is violence in the film? Isn’t that part of what we call the action of a movie any way and isn’t it part of the reason we go to see the film in the first place? In other words, when I go and see a Jet Li film, I’m not going to see or expect really great acting. I’m going to see what new Martial Art move he uses to beat someone up and take them out. If we’re going to have a disclaimer for Public Enemies called gangster violence, then shouldn’t we have a disclaimer for Transformers called robotic violence, another for Star Trek called space violence and lastly, for Batman called (I don’t know what to call this, maybe…) Bat-violence? And speaking of Jet Li, along with other Martial Artists, their disclaimer should be called martial arts violence or maybe ass-kicking violence (but then we’d have to have a disclaimer for the disclaimer, because we used the word “ass” to describe the violence and that word is profane). I realize that my blog is not going to do away with the inundation of disclaimers, but can we at least agree to reconsider the absurd descriptions contained within them?

——-@ds