Watch Mitt Romney's Game-Bashing Campaign Ad

July 18, 2007 -
Read the GamePolitics report New Mitt Romney Ad Decries Sex & Violence in Video Games; Opponent Brownback Calls Foul and then check out the Romney video:


Comments

On top of the William Shatner School of Acting we have some confusing message about inhaling dirty ocean water? I didn't hear much past "inhaling the waters that they swam in", isn't that drowning? What does two guys drowning years ago have to do with media violence?

I just don't get it.

Oh the irony...I just got done watching"Man of the year" and after seeing that I really thought I was still watching the movie.

:P

No offense I would hardly call this a "Game-Bashing" Ad. He comments on "violence and pornography" in a mixture of different media sources. He does not single out video games, I have no problem with the limiting of selling "violent"/"Pornographic" material to minors. As long as he is against this content in all times of media (as he stated), I do not consider this an attack on video games.

@Weatherlight

You're right. Game fans are far too sensitive and it ain't helping anyone.

On a tangential note...I've never fully understood why gamers in America seem to think making it illegal to sell M-rated games to those under 17 is such a HUGE DEAL. Especially when they take every opportunity to jump down parents' throats for letting their children play said games. Maybe I'm missing something.

@Eli Mordino

Well, it is a slightly complicated and probably hypocritical matter. Basically, games are protected speech and as long as they are not pornography, anyone can buy one. This is where the slippery slope argument comes in, that if a governmental body can regulated this sector, what is to stop them from regulating other sectors or from blocking even adults from whatever expression that they regulate.

The other half of the argument about parental responcibility is that the parents (the people who likely gave the kid $50 in the first place) should be involved in what games their kids play and give the yea or nay to each game brought up by their kids.

I hope my rambling has shed some light on the debate for you.

@Eli Mordino

To clarify on CyberSkull's points: It's a big deal because people are afraid what might happen if some piece of gaming legislation sticks. But more to the point, a lot of people think it's just fruitless. It wastes taxpayer dollars, as they're usually overthrown right away. It's unecessary, because the gaming industry has already proven itself to be a (mostly) self-regulating entity.

But it's also monstrous. A recent law that they're trying to pass here in New York would make the sale of games to minos a FELONY. I am not sure how the legal system in your nation works, but let me make clear what this means: Felonies are generally reserved for assault, for murder. The class of felony they wanted for this law would make it a felony of the "25 to life" variety, in other words, minimum 25 years in prison (and no maximum sentance), all for selling a game to a child.

In comparison, selling beer or cigarettes to a minor is merely a misdameanor here, and generally carries only a fine. Jail time, while infrequent, is certainly not a quarter of a century. So, a games retailer will be held more accountable than an alchahol seller? As I said: Monstrous.

So, it's a big deal, because... It's a big deal. Politicans are ham-handledly poking at the industry, trying to fix a problem that, by and large, does not exist to be fixed.

[...] Wesley Clark Link to Article mitt romney Watch Mitt Romney’s Game-Bashing Campaign Ad » Posted at GamePolitics.com on Wednesday, July 18, 2007 Read the GamePolitics report New Mitt Romney Ad Decries Sex & Violence in Video Games; Opponent Brownback Calls Foul and then check out the Romney video: WPvideo 1.02 "Ocean" View Entire Article » [...]

I agree with Weatherlight and Eli Mordino,

This ad isn't about video games at all, rather against providing violent and pornagraphic material to minors through all types of media ... exactly what people on this site are always asking politicians to do, not single out only video games

How poetic and so metaphorical, appealing one's fear of 'media and cultural cesspool' and one's 'love' for environmentalism. The shooters drowning in that cesspool? Come on, I can easily and metaphorically argue that they weren't taught to 'swim' or swim too far from shore. Give me a break!

He wants to keep pornography from popping up on kids computers? Done. Every ISP I know of has parental controls. Also, in order for porn to pop-up on your PC, you kinda have to look for it.

Wants to keep violent games out of kids hands. The only way to do that would be to keep anyone from getting games. Let's compare any anti-game legislation to anti-alcohol/cigarettes legislation. Even if it says no one under 18 or 21 can buy them, "minors" still get them. I've known plenty of friends who were smoking at 16. Its been a conversation point that no one really drinks as much now that we're 21+. It's lost some of its appeal. Hell, drugs are completely illegal. Look how successful that's been.

@ Eli Mordino

Like Cyberskull and UTP said, it's a slippery slope. We are afraid how far it would go. Ever hear the phrase "give them an inch, and they take a mile"? Its as simple as it sounds. Give someone just a little and they'll take a whole lot. If we let them make selling M rated games to minors illegal, next it'll be illegal to buy M rated games for minors. Then it'll be illegal to have a store that sells M rated games located near where minors congregate. Then they'll hit music, movies, and television using the same arguments when that doesn't work. Sure, we may not see that in our lifetime, but maybe our children will. I want to protect my children (when I have them :P) from 1984.

Let's use a real world example. Back when I was in high school, we had a dress code and a few rules. Cards were simply forbidden. Any cards. They were considered tools for gambling. I had a few friends that played Magic, so that was annoying to them. If you were tardy to class 3 times, that was detention. Tardy was defined by the teacher and some were strict (not in your seat when the bell rings? Tardy!).

I went back recently to get some old records and found the front door was different, more sturdy. It had a notice posted on the window advertising how there are monthly locker checks using dogs. A student informed me that you were given detention on your second tardy now, and only given 5 minutes between classes. These are minor changes it may seem, but it caught me off guard. I've never really thought of my old high school as a bad place and crime in the area is not nearly as bad as other areas. Its a slippery slope though. One my old school is greased up for it seems.

One minor correction to UTP. New York is attempting to pass a law making selling a M rated game to a minor a Class E felony. From my understanding its up to five years in prison. Not 25 or better. Still bad. As he noted, selling alcohol or cigarettes to a minor (things that are actually harmful to your health) are mere fines.

Want a better picture of the world we fear? Here are a few books to try reading:
~ 1984
~ Brave New World
~ Fahrenheit 451

Sorry for the uber long post.

Gameboy: Thank you for your correction, though I was fairly sure that at least one draft of the law was gunning for life imprisonment. It wouldn't suprise me, because most of the politicans here in new York are insane. Must be the mercury.

And even with this correction, it's still utterly monstrous, considering that New York has a "three strikes" law (three felony convictions = life imprisonment), and considering that, as I said above, sale of alchahol and cigarettes to minors is only a felony, and usually is enforced with fines. Both those are, by degrees, much more harmful to minors than M-rated games. Certainly there's no DAPGTA ("Driving After Playing Grand Theft Auto) violation on record, at any rate.

I should note that it's not an Orwellian dystopia I fear, though I do feel strongly about anything that might, in the long run, erode free speech. Certainly I feel strongly about things that help engender resistance to games being accepted as a form of speech.

Crap. "Only a misdameanor" not "only a felony"

I have to learn to proof better... ~_~

@Gameboy
I look at it this way Mitt Romney is one of the first to comment on all types of media and not just video games. All forms of media should receive equal legislative controlling. It is not the argument of giving them an inch, its a mater of equal treatment of media sources.

I have to agree with him, there is an increasing amount of violence and sex on tv, and parents are not teaching their children how to deal with information they are receiving. So something needs to be done, the question remains however what should be done?

I would also like to point out that technically, as a minor, you have no such thing as free speech. Your rights are limited to protection from physical harm.

Ah, we bring out Reagan's paranoid speechwriter's quotes about how "media caused Columbine." Never mind that Harris suffered from an alphabet soup of psychological disorders, was taking psychiatric drugs, his application for the USMC was rejected for that reason, and his parents didn't seem to notice that he was stockpiling weapons and detailed plans.

Yet none of that can possibly be taken into account. It must have been the dagum TV.

I guess his campaign slogan here is: "If you are a terrible parent and your kid commits a murder, you won't have to feel guilty. Just blame it on something else."

I'm not so much upset that games were mentioned, but that violence and sex are the focus of the ad. With so many more important issues, I'm appalled that time and effort would be invested in creating so pointless an ad.

Grow a pair and do something worthwhile if you want my vote.

The regulation of videogames is more than just a slippery slope. IN the USA no other medium is government regulated. While a lot of people seem to think that movie ratings are government enforced the truth is they aren't. Just like videogame ratings they are created, applied, and enforced by the industry and not the government. Therefore to single out videogames for government regulation would take a mountain of evidence. No such mountain exists.

I lol'd. It seems an advertisement with an ocean and talk of dirty waters didn't contain anything about environmental protection. It's still months until the primaries and I'm pretty sure by then this little piece will long be forgotten.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-Oq-KvcM5I4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=WCJG1TO5dRE

I actually saw that episode of Futurama last night and then I see this. It gets cut off early, but Hermes (the man you see at the end of the 2nd clip) says "but we just don't have the time" and then Bender (The robot) says "Well make time".

The whole point of that episode was that the 2 kids (Hermes and Dr. Farnsworth's kid) both wanted to be cool and to be cool they needed cool stuff, so they stole from the cool robot, Bender. They eventually spill the beans and blame Bender for giving them the idea.


I would support this one. Only because he's at all different angles of media. However, there are more important issues at hand. Besides, Porn doesn't go into gaming as much as he thinks. Theres only 1 game officially out there on a console and 1 that was a mistake and can't get anymore.

@ UTP

No problem. Hell, I could be wrong in my correction, but I doubt even the most up tight politician/soccer mom would condone sending a person to jail for 25 years for selling something to a minor. Then again, I would thought they wouldn't have condoned sending a person to jail for 5 years either.

Yes, I remember that New York has a three strikes law as well (it was a subject of discussion here a while back). And yes, the two laws combined can technically sentence a person to life in prison. Its sad, but I doubt those idiots even considered the implications.
Here's the story I mentioned:
http://gamepolitics.com/2007/06/01/attorney-ny-game-law-could-mean-a-lif...

OK, so using those books as examples may not be completely fair. I'll grant that. They represent a worst case scenario. I guarantee you that no one that is trying to pass these laws think they will lead to an Orwellian society, but that the danger. Who will be in power 10 years from now? They may not think we did enough today. They may decide that we need to "protect the children" and use a weak law as a springboard for stronger legislation. Which may in turn become even stronger 10 years later. That's the truest danger. These politicians are too short sighted.

@ Weatherlight

Yes he did mention ALL media. That doesn't make me any happier. Yes, many people here have condemned anti-game activists for being too narrow minded. We have argued that its more than the video games that CAN affect people. That doesn't mean we think anything really does.

The problem with the media hurts our children theory is that you have to seek the media out. Sure, some is easy to access (like the Internet), but that's also easy for the parent to curb. The bottom line is that media is not forced on you, no matter what some people may say. You can turn off the TV, computer, music or game.

No matter what happens, there will always be crazy people out there. I've mentioned the Son of Sam before. Show me what media he viewed that made him kill people. By all accounts, he was insane, and believed that a dog was telling him to murder people. A man I know told me that he has had conversations with Jesus. Satan, and Zeus... in the shower. What media has influenced him? A guy I knew believed he was possessed by two demons. He later committed a pretty big list of crimes including: theft by taking, rape, kid-napping, auto theft, and driving without a license (all in one day).

Once again. How did the media influence these people? Blaming the media is merely an excuse. People want a scapegoat when something happens they don't understand. People want to blame something else when they do something wrong. People. That's the problem.

Minors have no First Amendment rights? Bull SHIT! Do you also not permit children to speak at dinner? Do you rip up the crayon pictures they draw? Do you believe that a child should never ask questions? Do you believe that anyone younger than you has no right to speak? I was fine with everything else you said, but that sickens me. I'd like to point out that children are also not restricted from Freedom of Speech. Last I checked, the U.S. constitution doesn't say "this doesn't apply to those under 18".

Once more, sorry for the long post.

Everything he mentioned in there is probably the dumbest ideas of ever heard. Do you even seriously think it is humanly possible to keep porn from a kid when they can go into a bookstore and always unwrap a Playboy? I see this all the time in larger Border's retailers as well as Barnes 'N' Nobles (The ones that span multi-stories). He also played the classic Columbine card. The most over-played card since 2000. Keeping drugs of the streets? When I was in middle school, I saw more drugs than I'd ever seen in my life. Literally the next year I entered high school, the middle school I'd just left had a sting operation performed in which so much stuff was seized it wasn't even funny. Good luck there. Environmental Issues? I can agree with that... Less Violence and Sex on TV? There is a ratings system! If console makers don't want games rated Adults Only on their systems, then thats there problem. Though, if thats the case, whats the purpose of a ban on a rating for things that CLEARLY marked to be played by Adults Only? It says 18 and older. That should be a hint. The ratings system does its job, nearly perfectly. Let it be.

@Weatherlight

Umm! Minors do have First Amendment right. Otherwise why would all these anti-gaming laws be struck down as unconstitutional. You don't gain First Amendment rights once you reach some magical arbitrary age limit. Yes, it true minors do not have the exact same first amendment rights as adults but only when it comes to two exceptions. If the speech is obscene to minors (in that it follows the miller/ginsberg obscenity test) or if the government can prove the speech in question is actually harmful to minors in which the evidence claiming this is extremely weak, inconsistant, incredibly flawed and biased (not to mention all the studies claiming there is no harmful effect on minors caused by violent media). Beyond those two exceptions the government cannot ban Free Speech material to minors. Claiming that minors have no First Amendment rights or shouldn't have any First Amendment rights is incredibly ageist and anti-youth. It makes you sound like Jack Thompson.

"inhaled too deeply" WTF.

BmK:

Minor's also do not have First Amendment rights at schools.

There was the student who was suspended from a school for a banner he held at an off site event.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/06/25/free.speech/index.html

The sign was 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus'.

Perhaps he should have mentioned that the cesspool also included corrupt, pediphillic governement officials. But then he would have to do something about that.
People don't trust their government's stance on the "moral high-ground". We've learned just how depraved our governement is since the Nixon era.

Soooo... basically once more "I want to ban steak because babies can't chew it?" is what this boils down to?

Actually, I'm not particularly impressed. This guy doesn't exactly go out of his way to bash games. He's lumping them in with all the other "hot button" items that nearly evry politician likes to grandstand about. He''s making a promise without actually making promises, so to speak.

I've seen way worse than this. It seemed like video games were almost tacked on as an afterthought; they certainly were not the focal point of the ad, as the title of the article implied. More offensive to me was the reference to Columbine and its assumption that media violence was the culprit.

As a minor you do not have any rights except, those granted by your parents. So even if the law allows you to do something they (your parents) can prevent you from doing it. The only exception is when physical harm come into play.

It is correct blaming the media is a sad excuse for kids acting up because it like anything is a source of information that children need to be taught how to understand this information and in general how to act. However media does have an effect on children, no matter how you want to argue the subject, the true question is question is how and to what extent.

My argument is simply that all forms of media are to be treated equally when it comes to minors or "protecting the children", I then will argue where that line needs to be drawn on what is acceptable for children to view. This is the burden that truly should fall on the parents and not be dictated by the government, however, a large number of parents have grown lazy, and children are no longer taught how live in society and act responsibly.

Mitt Romney did say "we" is he talking about Congress or the American people? That is the question. If he is referring to a grass roots campaign, like what many people here are espousing i.e. parental/community involvement, then no problem, supply and demand and all that other brick-a-brack. If he is talking about a legislative effort in regards to media then there is reason to take pause; any governmental interest in manipulating/legislating the private sector is often iffy, health care anyone?

We still do not know were gaming is going to end up as an issue in ‘08 so it would behoove the gaming community to keep any and all candidates open for possibly endorsements.

T5

I think GP is blowing this out of proportion. This isn't a "game bashing" ad. He is talking about culture in general and then he slips in video games amongst other things for a few seconds.

As a minor you do not have any rights except, those granted by your parents. So even if the law allows you to do something they (your parents) can prevent you from doing it. The only exception is when physical harm come into play.

This has nothing to do with the GOVERNMENT deciding through law what free speech materials minors can or cannot have or make. The First amendment applies only to the government, not parents or cooperations or independant websites such as gamepolitics if they wish to censor speech. If a parent doesn't want his or her child to own or read the Bible because they're jewish, muslin or atheist, then that's there choice, but the government can't pass a law barring the dissemination of the Holy Bible to all persons under 18 just because some parents don't want there child to read it. And violent video games are just as much Free Speech as the Holy Bible is. They have the ability to express ideas, information, messages and opinions as literature like Harry Potter, The Holy Bible, The Holy Quran, The Origin of the Species all books and pieces of literature that many parents out there don't want there children to have. The fact is it is the sole responsibility of the parents to keep speech materials that they find inappropriate or unsuitable away from their children.
The Supreme court itself said in Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville
"Speech that is neither obscene as to youths nor subject to some other legitimate proscription cannot be suppressed solely to protect the young from ideas or images that a legislative body thinks unsuitable for them. In most circumstances, the values protected by the First Amendment are no less applicable when government seeks to control the flow of information to minors."

This is the burden that truly should fall on the parents and not be dictated by the government, however, a large number of parents have grown lazy, and children are no longer taught how live in society and act responsibly.

Well then shouldn't we be taking those kids out of the homes if their parents are to lazy and negligent to take care of them rather then restricting First Amendment rights and letting the government decide what minors and all those under some magical arbitrary age limit can or cannot read, watch, play or listen to. Because lets face it, the of the matter is if kids have lazy and negligent parents, then their chances of being fucked up are pretty much the same regardless of whether they've played Grand Theft Auto, watched Scarface or listened to Rap Music.

(re post from the newer rock star rant thread)
So if Nin,Sony,MS say no AO and 60-80% of retailers say no dose that not make it a presudo ban?

Devs should at the least be able to make AO games for the systems and the retailers can pick up the slack from there but with the console makers saying no theres no middle ground with that and the issues is stalled until a new rating is made or the console makers break.

As for laws…do you really want fed/states choosing what adults can buy because that is what it will come down to because that is the kind of country we are in, if we were not ,the “think of the children crowd” would not have so much power.

"This has nothing to do with the GOVERNMENT deciding through law what free speech materials minors can or cannot have or make."
My comment has everything to do with the government, because they can make it against the law to sell some form of media to a minor, however they should not be able to tell parents what media they can or cannot expose their children to.
"Well then shouldn’t we be taking those kids out of the homes"
There are to many parents out there like this, so that isn't an option. Not to mention that then the government would be taking care of these kids again.

WTF????

First off, I don't think kids are as easily influenced by media as you make them out to be. Every time there's some shooting or tragedy, parents and mass media have to point the finger as to what "caused" it. Chris Rock says it best: "Whatever happened to people just being CRAZY?" Court cases have shown that minors have First Amendment rights, and I'm not ready to take that away on account of a few who should be in Bellvue.

Even if I do buy your theory that kids are influenced, and there are too many lazy parents, I'm not ready to sacrifice constitutional rights to make us "safer." A few bad apples may slip through the cracks, and it may result in tragedy, but that's the price I'm willing to pay to live in a free society.

I have a lot to say on this subject but it'd all be recapping the above commentary...

Still, one thing I may have missed above is that we hear a lot of things from politicians, and even if they do walk the walk of decrying violence, reducing taxes, and feeding the poor our government and politics makes it so that they cannot deliver. Do you remember just how liberal Arnold was? Now he's as Republican as the rest of them. Do you remember George Bush Sr. "No new taxes?" He probably meant it, until he got in and got pushed about like the figure-head a politician often time becomes.

What's my point? This is politics, what Mr. Romney says here may not stick worth a damn should he be voted into office. He wants to get your vote to do his best to get into that office.

Remember that politics is just a business...

All time favorite quote from this article: "Soooo… basically once more “I want to ban steak because babies can’t chew it?” is what this boils down to?" Thank you for the morning laugh Erik because it fits the bill perfectly. ;)

GamePolitics covers games and politics

A politician mentions video games in some way.

GamePolitics reports on it.

Not necessarily blowing it out of proportion, but putting the spotlight on it, as specialized blogs should. Seems about right to me.

My comment has everything to do with the government, because they can make it against the law to sell some form of media to a minor, however they should not be able to tell parents what media they can or cannot expose their children to.

Haven't you just read my previous posts, the government cannot restrict minor's first Amendment rights. Minors especially older minors and teenagers have the ability to form their own viewpoints based on Free Speech media that express ideas, information, messages and opinions. Read all the court cases striking down anti-gaming laws as unconstitutional. None of the laws were struck down only because video games were being singled out BUT because minors have First Amendment rights to receive those video games and the evidence that the government claimed made violent video games cause violent behavior in youth was even close to showing that it did that.

There are to many parents out there like this, so that isn’t an option. Not to mention that then the government would be taking care of these kids again.

So essentially kids are fucked regardless as there are too many shitty parents out there. But please tell me how restricting minor's First Amendment rights is going to help kids with shitty parents because IMHO if the kids have shitty parents then their chances of being messed up because of that are no different regardless of whether the government passes a law barring them from playing GTA, Halo or watching, reading, or listening to any other violent media out there. The fact is, it's not going to solve any problem.
Also the government wouldn't be taking care of the kids if taken out of the home, the foster family who they are given to to take care of would be.

Thanks to everyone who answered my question. To clarify, I absolutely agree that the laws that are being pushed at the moment are insane and unjust, but the principle (ie don't sell 18-rated games to under-18s) is sound. Over here (Ireland) games mostly use the non-legally-binding PEGI system, but a game with a 15- or 18-rating will often have a legally binding rating put on it by IFCO, with those who break it subject to a fine. Which I have no problem with.

As regards the "slippery slope" argument...I think that's a cultural thing. Until recently in Ireland (we're talking up to the 1960s at least) there was very harsh censorship. Books banned, authors essentially blacklisted, and so on. We've got our shit in order since then, however...for instance, our equivalent of the conservative party currently holds 2 out of 166 seats in parliament, and even they've never shown signs of being remotely as conservative as the Republicans seem to be. In other words we've been sloping upwards for decades now. But with the political climate in America at the moment, and the fact that America has always been famous for its social freedoms, I suppose it's understandable that you're more sensitive about this kind of thing.

Even if I do buy your theory that kids are influenced, and there are too many lazy parents, I’m not ready to sacrifice constitutional rights to make us “safer.” A few bad apples may slip through the cracks, and it may result in tragedy, but that’s the price I’m willing to pay to live in a free society.

I agree with that, the rights of the majority of citizens should not be short-changed solely because of a minority of blooming idiots out there. Regardless of whether it's kids or adults. Most older kids and teenagers are fully capable of understanding the difference between right and wrong, reality and fantasy and what is or is not acceptable behavior in real-life situations and should not have their rights restricted because of a few morons around their age don't.

The answer is quite simple, but no politician wants to "step on peoples toes", start a Healthy Family initiative to educate parents on game ratings and parental controls on TV's, game consoles, and computers. They've done it before for smoking and child obesity, so why not?

No fair! the first picture of the water was at sunset! Of course its going to be darker compared to midday! lol

They should be focusing more on why people turn to violence, drugs, and sex rather than blaming it entirely on the media.

Ok let's face it, the media does endorse it, however, it's only for entertainment purposes.

The reason why those shootings happen, is not because their #1 on CS, it's because they are fed up with life, most of those kids that do that stuff are outcasts in their schools and that abuse provoked them, not a game or movie.

This is further evidence that Romney doesn't have a real plan for the Presidency, and is only commenting on this third-tier issue so he can get some easy agreement and keep his name in the papers. He'll be forgotton soon enough.

I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100% regarding s Game-Bashing Campaign Ad, but it's just my opinion, which could be wrong :)

[...] Mitt Romney - Look here - lumped violent video games into a ”cesspool of violence, sex, drugs, indolence and perversions.” [...]

[...] GamePolitics.com ” Blog Archive ” Watch Mitt Romney’s Game-Bashing … Watch Mitt Romney’s Game-Bashing Campaign Ad. Read the GamePolitics … 46 Responses to “Watch Mitt Romney’s Game-Bashing Campaign Ad” CyberSkull Says: … Official Romney Campaign Site [...]
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

How do you usually divide up your Humble Bundle payments?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew WilsonI have said it before net nutrality will not be made in to law until Google or Netflix is blocked, or they do what they did for sopa and pull their sites down in protest.04/23/2014 - 8:02pm
Andrew EisenGee, I guess putting a former cable industry lobbyist as the Chairman of the FCC wasn't that great of an idea. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html?_r=204/23/2014 - 7:26pm
Andrew EisenIanC - I assume what he's getting at is the fact that once PS3/360 development ceases, there will be no more "For Everything But Wii U" games.04/23/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew EisenMatthew - Yes, obviously developers will eventually move on from the PS3 and 360 but the phrase will continue to mean exactly what it means.04/23/2014 - 5:45pm
IanCAnd how does that equal his annoying phrase being meaningless?04/23/2014 - 5:09pm
Matthew Wilson@Andrew Eisen the phrase everything but wiiu will be meaningless afer this year becouse devs will drop 360/ps3 support.04/23/2014 - 4:43pm
Andrew EisenFor Everything But... 360? Huh, not many games can claim that title. Only three others that I know of.04/23/2014 - 3:45pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/23/another-world-rated-for-current-consoles-handhelds-in-germany/ Another World fulfills legal obligations of being on every gaming system under the sun.04/23/2014 - 12:34pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/steam-gauge-do-strong-reviews-lead-to-stronger-sales-on-steam/?comments=1 Here is another data driven article using sales data from steam to figure out if reviews effect sales. It is stats heavy like the last one.04/23/2014 - 11:33am
Andrew EisenI love RPGs but I didn't much care for Tales of Symphonia. I didn't bother with its sequel.04/23/2014 - 11:21am
InfophileIt had great RPGs because MS wanted to use them to break into Japan. (Which had the side-effect of screwing NA PS3 owners out of Tales of Vesperia. No, I'm not bitter, why do you ask?)04/23/2014 - 10:52am
RedMageI'm still disappointed the 360 never broke into Japan either. It had a bevy of great RPGs in the late 2000s.04/23/2014 - 9:48am
TheSmokeyhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/22/call-of-duty-swatting-hoax_n_5195659.html?utm_hp_ref=canada&ir=Canada CoD loser calls SWAT on person who beat him04/23/2014 - 7:13am
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/23/xbox-one-reaches-japan-on-september-4/ Just give it up, Microsoft. You're NEVER going to be big in Japan, especially now that the notoriously clunky in Japan Kinect is MANDATORY.04/23/2014 - 7:10am
Cheater87Has this been posted yet? http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/Lord+Spencer/ssv-saudi-arabia-bans-bravely-default-because-it-promotes-pedophilia--272016.phtml04/22/2014 - 9:31pm
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/133898-Fatal-Frame-V-Coming-Exclusively-to-Wii-U04/22/2014 - 8:50pm
Matthew Wilsonit is a game worth playing if you have a pc/360/ps304/20/2014 - 9:34pm
MaskedPixelantehttps://twitter.com/IGLevine/status/457552538343325696 The Lutece Twins show up in some of the most unlikely of places.04/20/2014 - 2:44pm
Andrew EisenAs it happens, Chinatown Wars is the only GTA game I've played.04/19/2014 - 10:43am
Papa MidnightWith GTA5 (to date) failing to even provide indication of a PC release, I'm realising that this might be the first GTA game that I have not played (outside of Chinatown Wars) since the series inception.04/19/2014 - 8:14am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician