I fully support the sentiment, and agree there are tons of non violent games, but many shown here are violent games. I wonder why they included them.

Because violence is a part of life and games reflect that, the same as movies, books, tv, etc.

It would be nice if the “non-gamer” part of society would grow up and finally realise that games aren’t just for kids. If you want to ban violent games, you have to ban the Godfather, the Lord of the Flies, Breaking Bad and Guernica.

Ok, it just seemed odd in a video responding to Trump's m rated game video. It made sense to me to counter that with a g rated game video with no violence at all. Granted, this is more honest in it's depiction of games in general, but doesn't juxtapose as strongly.

I fully agree with your second point, and I note it's most often the right making the case that the government needs to ban things already restricted for adults only...for the children...abdicating their parental responsibility and adult rights to the same government they say is too big, too powerful, too out of control, and incapable of ever functioning properly. Odd that.

I'm glad they went this route.

There's a certain attitude that says that only cute, indie games about children with big heads lost in a scary world can be art (shamelessly stole that from Zero Punctuation), but big-budget action games are disposable nonsense.

And there certainly ARE plenty of good, clever, indie games and insanely dumb, tone-deaf, "press f to pay respects" AAA games.

But you can have violence be a part of your story and still be a good story. Hell, your story can be about violence and what it does to you. Spec Ops: The Line is a great example of this.

It's disingenuous to say that video games are nothing but sadistic murder simulators, but it would be equally disingenuous to pretend they're all sweetness and light.

The first God of War is as brutal and sadistic as they come and it's a great game. "Hatred" sets out to be the most brutal and sadistic game ever but it's terrible.

Freaking Firewatch, man!

Go play that game for a beautiful game and an amazing story. No violence that I can remember.

I wish they'd included some flightsims in this montage.

For the guy's that did the attack on the twin towers those were 'true' murder simulators.

As far as the inclusion of violent games go, I didn't see any here where the object is to kill other humans. There were some where you fight monsters, or corrupted humans (The Last of Us), but I didn't spot any that actually feature / primarily focus on people killing other people. I'll admit to not being familiar with every game featured however.

I feel if the Trumpadon's people can cherry pick the worst of games, the rebuttal SHOULD cherry pick the best and most artistic parts of the SAME games.

To be fair, they aren't making a statement against *video games*, only the ones with violent content.

You'll pry their Candy Crush from their cold, dead hands.

A little bit of Overwatch, which is pretty PG, and Mirror's Edge, which does allow you to kill people but it isn't core to the game. I haven't played The Last of Us, but aren't there still human enemies, not just the infected? I agree it's a fairly tame list though.

Clearly Getting Over It with Bennett Foddy is the only game that should have been in Trump's montage. If that doesn't incite you to violence it will probably destroy any self esteem you might have instead. Ban this sick filth please.

Reps blame evil games for violence.

Dems blame evil guns for violence.

Both forget about the individuals actually responsible.

Retard fight, GO!

-scheherazade

You cannot regulate against or even readily identify evil individuals (at least not before they demonstrate the evil, at which time it's too late), so regulating access to the tools that make murder incredibly easy is the next best thing.

The evil game thing is a blatant red herring meant to distract from that needed gun regulation because one group wants no action at all.