I think it's the right idea, but the wrong target. Violent video games in and of themselves aren't the root cause. What really ramps things up in the violence department is the competitive aspect of the multiplayer. Who on here HASN'T unleashed a tirade of frustrated words (some colorful) at the TV after being destroyed in a MP match or had their evening spoiled because they are grumping about a bad string of matches that left their K/D ratio in the negative? It happens. And yet, the instances of gamer-predicated violence is SO RARE it's almost nonexistent. Just like listening to Korn, Godsmack, Disturbed, etc. to get jacked before a workout or a football game doesn't lead to a violent act by itself, there HAS to be at least one underlying mental stability issue to cause people to jump from "I can shoot people in this game" to "I can shoot people IN REAL LIFE." Games nowadays may be quite violent, and discussion on how that violence is depicted on-screen can be productive if done reasonably, but please don't single out games in this debate. It's all forms of media.

@JustArtificial He was there for Lego Star Wars III and 1313, that's it. Why is he suddenly the fool? Also, TFU fit in canon, TFU II didn't. Neither of them fall under Meegan's purview. Realistically, he probably left due to the rigid control the company has over the material, including the rules of canon.

Isn't it about time for LucasArts to throw the fans a bone and give them the Battlefront III they so desperately want, as well as an Indiana Jones game that may actually be GOOD? New concepts are good and all, but ignoring the pleas of the fanbase for a game that was all but done (Battlefront III) is really ignorant...especially if they're interested in making money.