A lot of people seem to be pretty angry about this article- but from the comments I'm not sure they all read it properly. This article isn't saying "violent games are bad" or that video game violence is in any way responsible for recent shootings. It's saying that while violence, even extreme can be an important and effective way to further the story and should in no way be open to censorship.
What he's criticising is when games use violence for it's own sake, as a cover for a poor story or when there is no clear purpose behind it. He then points out that this gratuitous violence doesn't help the public image of the games industry and gives a skewed perception of what games are about these days- a misconception that can be used by opponents of the games industry to make it's argument, no matter how flawed it may be. The article then suggests that we should take a long look at what gamers are defending rather than instantly write off any criticism as wrong.
I'm not saying that I agree, or that anyone should. I'm just saying that if you want to criticise the article, maybe read it all first rather than just telling the writer to shut up, because if you read that bit at the end then you'd realise you're just proving his point.
The absolute end of the story might be the same, but there's plenty of potential variation in plot points throughout. Id be interested in seeing how a save import would play out. That said, I'd be interested in a season 2 no matter what! Also, a Star Wars title of similar type and quality to the Walking Dead would have my money.
This game sounds really interesting and I'm both pleased and impressed that someone made it, but to be honest I can't every see myself playing through it. I just don't have the patience.
Do only families who hand over games and such get a gift? It's just that I imagine all families in the town could do with a free day out.; not just the ones who jump on the bandwagon...
madjack1812's comments