With all that senseless killing in the headlines again, the infernal debate over whether or not violent videogames lead to real-world violence rages on more fiery than ever before. Somebody who wishes that debate was a little more one-sided is California senator Leland Yee. He would rather appreciate it if gamers shut the hell up.
He believes that gamers, and the gaming industry at large is, as far as this debate goes, biased and self serving.
"Gamers have got to just quiet down," Yee said. "Gamers have no credibility in this argument. This is all about their lust for violence and the industry’s lust for money. This is a billion-dollar industry. This is about their self-interest."
Naturally, people didn’t like that too much. I mean who does he think he is? Saying gamers are little more than psychopaths, with an otherworldy a lust for violence? I’ll kill the son-of-a…
Yee has no credibility in this argument himself; if anything he’s particularly biased. He tried to get law passed in 2011 that would criminalise violent games.
Doing a bit of a PR cleanup, Yee later tweeted an apology of sorts. “Gamers, I admittedly didnt use best words to SFchron. Meant video game industry has inherent conflict of interest in the gun violence debate.”
“I have a lot of respect for many gamers – many are on my staff and in my family – but the industry has profited at the expense of children,” he said
I'm old, grumpy and more than just a little cynical. One day, I found myself in possession of a NES, and a copy of Super Mario Bros 3. It was that game that made me realise that games were more than just toys to idly while away time - they were capable of being masterpieces. I'm here now, looking for more of those masterpieces. I am also the emperor of the backend