I feel bad for people getting into console gaming over the last couple of years. The PS3 and X360 should cost no more than $200 for the high end model by this time, yet these companies still continue to sell them at $300. Didn't the last gen LAUNCH at $300, why are people expected to pay such a price for hardware that will be out of date within a couple of years? Let's not forget that we just went through the worst recession in our lifetime as well, so spending so much is not that easy for a lot of people, regardless of what inflation may have taken place.
To give credit where it is due, you can get a PS3 for $250 now (except in Europe), and that price is down from $500. However that price was inflated due to the new format and Sony's ego. Blu-Ray drives are now cheap, so they could easily sell the system for $150.
This is the reason I am looking at migrating into PC gaming. The cost savings involved with consoles is not there, and PC gaming hardware is much cheaper and lasts much longer than in previous eras as well.
As someone from a country where guns are not part of our contemporary culture, I must admit that when playing an FPS or other weapon based titles the violence seems more fantasy like. This includes games which take place in more contemporary settings. I really cannot comment how someone relates to such games in a society where guns are a part of daily life.
While determining the motives to gun violence are important, I think that addressing the tool of the trade is also very important. Despite deflection efforts from the NRA, in a civilized 21st century society ready access to lethal weapons is not right. I'm not even in favour of banning guns, I'll admit that the gun lobbies have made some fair and rational arguments for civilian possession of firearms. But this argument against any and all licensing, regulation, and monitoring of guns is simply irrational and irresponsible.
I'll admit I'm not an expert on the US Constitution, but I don't think any of the other amendments refer to access to a physical item, most refer to personal rights and legal protections. A gun is a lethal weapon, and as such it should be controlled, period. We have registrations and licensing on items which can be lethal if used improperly (cars being a prime example), why can't we have said registrations and licensing on an item which can be lethal if used properly? Because some people 300 years ago said so?
Regulating guns may not stop the root causes of such violence, but it is a start. At the very least, it is much harder to take out an entire classroom or theatre with a knife than it is with a gun.
Dr_Feelgood's comments