Police regarding GTA

Yesterday I was in GameStop (ewwww) picking up Ni No Kuni and Mugen Souls (both new! I swear!) and there was a police officer standing there, watching an advertisement for Grand Theft Auto V.  Much to the initial chagrin of my wife, I decided to ask him a question: "I've never heard an officer's view on the Grand Theft Auto games, may I ask yours?"

A rather displeased expression passed over his face as he thought hard for a moment. "I'm really more of a Saint's Row guy. I don't care for the GTA games too much. Although it's kind of nice to be able to go home and do all the things I'd like to do to people out there."

We barely contained the uproarious laughter until we got outside. Awesome.

Well that's the skinny: America isn't playing too many violent video games, they're just not always playing the right ones.

Silly Lawsuit With Real Danger Behind It

This is news but not about gaming. I felt that I should share because this is important information. There is a lawsuit against Tylenol because Tylenol contains Acetaminophen. If you look at a bottle of Tylenol you can read the label which will state that Tylenol's active ingredient is indeed Acetaminophen. This, I thought, was common knowledge, but Tylenol is getting sued due to "improper labeling." I don't think that's accurate, but the decision is not up to me.

Acetaminophen is pretty nasty stuff when you do more research on it, and overdosing on it, which is part of the claims, is very possible. It can cause major damage to your liver if you don't take it as prescribed (or follow the directions on the Tylenol label). For people who don't know about the dangers of Acetaminophen, it can be extremely dangerous. People will often take too much of something in hopes that it will help more (which often isn't the case anyways). It makes me sad that there are people out there who didn't read the label and who didn't do research about what they are putting in their body. Even if you don't do your own research there is some information on the container itself. The information is out there and readily available.

Due to people not properly reading the label, Tylenol has come out with new labeling, which seems redundant, but at this point I can't blame them.

The reason I am putting this article on here is because it is useful information to people in general. It is not specific to any group which is why it should be spread. Please read the label of anything you are going to be putting in your body. Even if it something you have taken for pain a bunch before, if you haven't read the label then you should. Educate yourselves about what is going into your body and what it does. It may save your life.



Take only as directed,
~Skye

Nintendo 2DS

I honestly wish this was a joke....

Nintendo is releasing a new handheld gaming console called the Nintendo 2DS. This console has a touch screen and has screens of the same size as the normal 3DS. 

This will be part 3DS family but without any of the 3D capabilities. It will, however, be able to play 3DS games and DS games.

It is planned to release on October 12 of this year and for $129.99 which is a price drop in comparison to the 3DS and the XL version. The slogan for this product is  "Unbelievably fun, seriously affordable." I applaud Nintendo for trying to release something that is affordable so that their products can reach more people. It's a smart move, I just don't know that I like the idea. It will make the 3D in the 3DS less important (which quite a few people didn't care for anyways) and it feels weird to me. It's a re-released Nintendo DS that can't fold. It doesn't seem original and just feels like a money-grubbing technique. I am, however, happy for all the kids who have a better chance of getting a relevant handheld that  can play the new games. It goes both ways.

The official Nintendo website for the product doesn't say much about it's features because they don't have to. It's all been done before. There really isn't anything new about it with the exception of it's tablet-like appearance and the price. 

If you want a non-3D Nintendo gaming system that can play all the new games for a lower price, then this system is for you.

~Skye

More Violence "Due to Video Games"

This news makes me especially sad. Violence linking to video games is not a new topic in the news, but this one is heart breaking.

"8-year-old shoots, kills elderly caregiver after playing video game" ... For those of you who don't want to read the article I will explain what happened. Marie Smothers, an 87 year- old woman living in a "mobile home park" in Slaughter, Louisiana, was pronounced dead from a gunshot wound to the head. The culprit? Her 8 year-old grandson. Apparently right before the incident he had been playing Grand Theft Auto IV on the PS3. The boy and his grandmother were said to have a normal and loving relationship. The boy will not be charged due to Louisiana law and is with his parents. A neighbor was the one who had questions about where the gun was and whether or not it was in plain sight. A lawyer stated that the boy had "not know about the impact of the consequences of the act he committed." The CNN report then goes on to talk about violence linked with video games and different peoples' takes on it like the Governor of Colorado, the Vice President of the United States, and the president of Electronic Arts. The article tried to seem unbiased but the tone of the article was very clear... video games are a big reason for violence.

Here's my take on the entire situation and feelings on the matter at hand. KEEP YOUR GUNS IN A SAFE PLACE AND AWAY FROM CHILDREN! This is an extremely sad case and I am sorry for the family's loss. I am also sorry that the boy is going to have to grow up with the knowledge that he killed his own grandmother. However, blaming this on the boy playing a video game is not accurate. Video games don't cause violence and guns don't either... people do. Some questions people should be asking about the situation is: why was the gun loaded? Why was the child unsupervised? Why was he allowed to play a video game that is rated for adults? Why was he able to find the gun so easily? Children do tend to mimic what they see that they like (especially in any type of popular entertainment) which is why some things are not meant for them to see or use.

There is no doubt in my mind that Grand Theft Auto games are incredibly violent and graphically so, but that isn't the point. Ratings of video games are displayed on the boxes, the inner pamphlet, and the disk so the purchaser (or parents of kids with borrowed games) can see what the rating is.  The back of the case often explains why the game go the rating it did. The ratings are easy to follow and even if you don't know exactly what each rating entails the ratings are generalized so you can tell approximately if it's okay for somebody to play. The ESRB website also has tons of detailed information on what goes into their process and also what kind of themes generally go into which category. The ESRB rating is around so people know typically what kind of things that are going to be in a video game... Parents need to set guidelines for their kids and need to do research when bringing any kind of entertainment media into  the house. Ratings of movies, music, and video games are there for a reason. There are even genres in books that are for young adults, "tweens," and children. Ratings are everywhere and should be used appropriately. I know, however that I have no say in how other people raise their children, nor am I trying to be a tyrant, but I am trying to caution. Certain materials are not made with children in mind and are more appropriate for older audiences who are more mature.

This is a sad situation and a situation where appropriate guidelines were not set. The gun should not have been loaded, where the child could easily get to it, and he should not have been allowed to play a game that was rated Mature (M 17+). CNN played the violent video game angle up quite a bit and so did most of the interview quotes they put into the article. I can't say that I'm surprised because the media isn't supposed to report the news but to promote fear. This is not the first article that links violence to video games, and lately when reporting on some violent events the media tries to lay the blame on violent video games. How long is the media going to keep blaming the video games instead of the people behind the gun? Is it not exciting enough of a news article if the culprit is just another person?

I have some tips for parents, or even older siblings, out there. Do some research on a game before you buy it for a child. Even if the rating, or a blurb about the game, is not enough to know for sure, most times you can find videos of gameplay online. Most games have been played through and streamed on sites such as youtube so finding something about it will be easier. Ask a friend or family member who knows more about video games if they think the game will be appropriate. Also, ask the child's friend's parents about what they allow at their house and make sure that they know what you allow for your child. Penny Arcade wrote an article on this event and brings up good questions and methods of talking to other parents. Talking to your kids is also the best way to deal with a lot of situations. My last tip is about guns. If you have a gun in the house where a child resides make sure the gun is in a safe place where the child cannot easily find, or reach it. Make sure the gun stays unloaded and when they are old enough, talk to your kids about gun violence and how it is not okay. Kids understand more than you might think if you give them a chance.

Be careful out there gamers. You may be called violent if you play the wrong game.
~Skye

Angry Birds - BREAKING NEWS!!!

At this point in time I don't think I have come across a person who hasn't at least heard of Angry Birds. If you honestly haven't tried it then I would suggest that you do because it's fun. It's a fun game where the player slingshots birds at pigs to get their eggs back... it's a cute and fun game. Well after it came out it became a craze. Everybody and their mothers were playing the game (or had at least tried it) and more versions of Angry Birds came out; Rio, Seasons, etc. One of the most recent ones that I have seen plastered everywhere is Angry Birds Star Wars... Why? I can't even imagine how (besides costumes) this could relate to Star Wars and how (besides there being birds and pigs) that this could be related to what Angry Birds was originally. I will admit that I have never played Angry Birds Star Wars so I imagine that it is still fun to play. The part that scares us here at Infunity Gaming News is that this version is set to have a console release.

The first place I heard of this was at gamesradar.com. I hoped that it was a joke but it surely was not. Here is the video to prove it.

My jaw dropped in disbelief. Why are they going to have a full console release of a mobile game? Then it dawned on me... It's "what the people want." People who love the game will be excited and greedily pick up the newest game no matter the price. I think this is a mistake.

What started out as a cute and fun to play mobile game is quickly turning into a big money trap. There are Angry Birds gummies, plushies, hats, shirts, and even an Angry Birds Visa Credit Card... I am honestly scared to think about where this Angry Birds culture is going. 

I do feel that I should say that I do like the original game and I do still think it's a cute idea. What I am really trying to say is that it's not what it used to be. If you are following the games then have fun in space.

~Skye

Study on Violent Gaming Proves Little

Are violent video games bad for you, your loved ones, and others? Many think so and allegedly many studies give evidence that they are. One recent study [link], reported by Time.com [link], gives evidence otherwise - very poorly. Here at Infunity Gaming News we're happy to see evidence that one of our favorite pastimes isn't socially corrosive, but less so when the study is so unconvincing.

Here is a really quick summary of the findings. A grand total of 160 participants were asked to play violent or nonviolent video games (randomly assigned) for 8 or 20 minutes (varies between experiments), and then observed to see whether they would tell a researcher when he dropped his pen. 49% of violent game players and 39% of nonviolent game players 'helped', which for these sample sizes is statistically insignificant. For reference, the violent games were GTA4, COD:Black Ops, and Lamers. The nonviolent games were World of Zoo, Portal 2, and Lemmings.

What did we learn? That what type of video game you play for a short period of time has a little to no effect on your behavior. This is being reported by Time? This is the best we've got? In the face of all of the accusations of the harms of video games, "failed to be bad in a small inconclusive lab test" is the best we can get? There are articles such as "Video Games Linked To Aggression" referencing very convincing-sounding meta studies.

Time and again, whichever media the press decides to target takes the blame for specific incidents of violence among young people, regardless of the causes. Whether it's Marilyn Manson getting blamed for violence caused by extreme fans of Natural Born Killers, or violent video games getting blamed for violence caused by someone who didn't play violent games.

It's possible that video games and media have an effect on the rate of violence by youths. Something particularly interesting to keep in mind, however, is a graph found here, and mentioned below:

Rate of serious violent crime by Juveniles, Ages 12-17, from 1980 to 2011

By the metric of major violent crimes, youths aren't getting more violent. All of the hype is nonsense. Some of the violence is spectacularly horrifying, its true, yet there is no reason to believe it is some kind of pandemic.

Heck, there's a little reason to believe that playing violent games is likely to make you more helpful, ridiculous as that sounds. Time for me to go blow up some pixels and help an old lady cross the street.

League of Legends: Terrorist Breeding Ground?

Based off of this title you may think I am crazy or maybe am just asking for trouble. Well, I can assure you that it is neither. I decided to do the first report of this blog on something that was brought to my attention through Penny Arcade. It may be slightly old news now or maybe it hasn't spread as quickly as I imagine it has.

I am talking about the Justin Carter case. You can find the MSNBC article here: Justin Carter article . I find the whole situation appalling. For those of you who haven't read the article and don't care to at the moment I will give you a run down of what happened. Justin Carter (a 19 year old Texan resident and League of Legends player) was having a facebook dispute with a fellow League of Legends player. In that dispute the fellow player said he was "messed up in the head" to which Carter replied something very disturbing. ”I’m f—ed in the head alright. I think I’ma shoot up a kindergarten and watch the blood of the innocent rain down and eat the beating heart of one of them.” Now out of context I would say that it is quite a disgusting comment and overall I would say that it should not be taken lightly. Apparently after that Carter had said "lol" and "jk" to imply that he was joking. Well as most know... things that are posted on the internet don't stay on the internet. A woman from Canada saw it and took a screen shot and notified the authorities. They arrested the kid, took his computer, and searched his house for weapons (none were found). Carter was in prison on a $500,000 bail (which his family couldn't afford) and  "has been in jail for nearly four months. Carter says he has been assaulted repeatedly by other inmates and subsequently placed in solitary confinement." Thankfully for him an anonymous donor stepped in and paid his bail, which is quite amazing. He is still facing felony charges of making a terrorist threat for which, if convicted, he will face serious jail time.

So far all I have done is lay out the facts for you to read. Now I will explain my view on things. I don't think that this is right. You can find horrible comments like this all over the internet. Threats against people, places, things, institutions, etc but not all of them are looked at this hard. What is so different about this one? Nothing. The only thing that has changed is the fear from increased public shootings in the United States. That fear has fed politicians, lobbyists, and spurred countless protests about guns and other violent mediums and materials. I won't go any deeper into those things.

With all that said I don't think that they should have completely overlooked it either. I agree with searching his computer and house for any proof of actual intention to go through with such a claim. Finding none they could give him a stern warning about the consequences of saying such things (especially in such a public forum) and been on their way. Had they found something then they could have taken immediate action to neutralize the threat. I honestly could understand him being in jail for the amount of time it took them to search the house and computer. However, he was in jail for much longer and his life is now ruined for it. Even if he is proven not guilty, he still spent time in jail getting beat up and emotionally scarred.

Back to the title... Anybody who has played League of Legends has encountered at least one really rude person. I, personally, have played and been subjected to people being belligerent toward me and others. I'm not saying that all League of Legends players are rude, but they do exist. Horrible comments like the one that Carter made are commonplace among those gamers, but they have not received the same treatment.


What does this all mean? Well it means if I say something stupid that I didn't actually mean I could be reported and sent to jail. Does that sound like free speech to you? It's not. If Carter is convicted, doesn't that make all of those rude players terrorists too? Also... if they are terrorists and they were making those kinds of comments look socially acceptable doesn't that make League of Legends a terrorist breeding ground? I don't truly think that it is but I also don't think that Carter made a terrorist threat. I think he said something stupid and got beat up by a society that is afraid. I do think that people should learn from this, though. Don't speak before thinking. Be careful about posting things in a public place. Don't use facebook unless you want to publish something the world can see.

Waffles' Take: League of Legends may not breed murderers, but it's more likely than any other PC game (except its' moba siblings) to give you and your friends diarrhea of the mouth. Be smart with your trash talk. The internet is the home of freely saying stupid things, but anything you post on facebook is likely to last until well after you're dead. This shooting scare thing is overblown, but people are stupid when whipped into a frenzy. Even if it wasn't a joke: Calling a violently mentally/emotionally distressed person a terrorist is astonishingly stupid. 

Tl;dr : Don't say stupid things on the internet. If you do you may go to prison.

Be careful out there gamers,
Skye