Videogame debate on The Alan Titchmarsh Show; ITV Player

aaronayl1 wrote:Alan Titchmarsh should stick to building houses.

Wrong middle Englander

rudderless wrote:

Shadow wrote:Kieron Gillen, Ste Curran, Simon Byron, Tony Mott, David McCarthy, Margaret Robertson all could have dominated that discussion.

I don't think they could. Tim made the points anyone would have made in that situation. Just because all the above have written for Edge doesn't necessarily mean they'd all be really good in a similar situation. Whoever would have gone on would have been painted as the bad guy.

That wasn't my selection criteria, indeed I'm not sure how much Gillen and Byron have really written EDGE. I picked them because they're all people I've seen talking publicly about videogames, they're all very articulate and witty. I just think they would have been able to deliver more cutting retorts and defences than Tim.

Shadow wrote:

rudderless wrote:

Shadow wrote:Kieron Gillen, Ste Curran, Simon Byron, Tony Mott, David McCarthy, Margaret Robertson all could have dominated that discussion.

I don't think they could. Tim made the points anyone would have made in that situation. Just because all the above have written for Edge doesn't necessarily mean they'd all be really good in a similar situation. Whoever would have gone on would have been painted as the bad guy.

That wasn't my selection criteria, indeed I'm not sure how much Gillen and Byron have really written EDGE. I picked them because they're all people I've seen talking publicly about videogames, they're all very articulate and witty. I just think they would have been able to deliver more cutting retorts and defences than Tim.

And they'd have been equally as ignored.

Banjo wrote:

HSH28 wrote:Yeah the tsunami of violence think was very strange.

Obviously that woman was deranged. This is actually a good thing, imagine if the people arguing against violent games were rational...they might actually win.

It's an interesting hypothesis, but by the looks of things, we'll never see that side argued competently.

The trouble is they just won't listen to anything but "ban everything". Tim was even on their side, saying that children shouldn't be playing these games and trying to educate them on the subject but they were just so moronic they wouldn't even listen.

Fairly pointless 'debate'. The videogame guy was pretty useless, he should have ripped the blonde bint to pieces when she tried to link videogames to the Bulger case.

strawberry float you Tragic. Missing my joke.

I don't think anybody could have done a better job, really. Everybody's mind was already made up before the poor chap opened his mouth. I'm sure a lot of more-informed people would have watched the programme at home and agreed that it was a bit of a shambles. I mean, the audience is usually just a collection of coffin-dodgers anyway.

The audience just wanted the videogame discussion out of the way so that they could get back to Britain's Favourite Crooner.

What gets me is in all these debate shows they claim to be fair and balanced like Fox News and that their having a fair debate yet they have one representative from the gaming industry and three including Titchmarsh who are against him(No wait actually 300 against one if you include the zombie pensioners groaning in the background). What's the point of a debate if its just one sided anyway. I'd rather they just have a big sign saying games are evil on for 5 minutes and be done with it rather than have a passionate journalist like him writing about a perfectly acceptable hobby be lambasted by people who don't know anything about games.

There was an interesting point made by Mark Kermode in The Guardian about gaming where he compared games to the video nasties of the 80s and he didn't lambast games saying they were violent he concluded that because he didn't know about games he couldn't judge if they were violent.The people who know about games and understand them can make judgement about whether there violent.Not a bunch of pensioners who are ignorant of the medium.

Also reminds me of the Ed Byrne stand up where people think they have the upper hand in any argument simply by saying "Do have kids though". There's a sense of arrogance among people in society that If you have kids you automatically know more about life then someone who doesn't.

If we managed to fill the audience in one of these shows with rational gamers then imagine how confused the production company would be when we all backed the sane arguments being put forward.

jafro360 wrote:What gets me is in all these debate shows they claim to be fair and balanced like Fox News and that their having a fair debate yet they have one representative from the gaming industry and three including Titchmarsh who are against him(No wait actually 300 against one if you include the zombie pensioners groaning in the background). What's the point of a debate if its just one sided anyway. I'd rather they just have a big sign saying games are evil on for 5 minutes and be done with it rather than have a passionate journalist like him writing about a perfectly acceptable hobby be lambasted by people who don't know anything about games.

There was an interesting point made by Mark Kermode in The Guardian about gaming where he compared games to the video nasties of the 80s and he didn't lambast games saying they were violent he concluded that because he didn't know about games he couldn't judge if they were violent.The people who know about games and understand them can make judgement about whether there violent.Not a bunch of pensioners who are ignorant of the medium.

Also reminds me of the Ed Byrne stand up where people think they have the upper hand in any argument simply by saying "Do have kids though". There's a sense of arrogance among people in society that If you have kids you automatically know more about life then someone who doesn't.

To be fair McKenzie wasn't really against games, and certainly not against games as they stand today. He even said that he's a "war gamer".

Just watched it. It wasn't anywhere near as bad as you guys were making out. Tim stood his ground and the audience at home could make their own minds up. The bint was talking bollocks and the old guy was reasoned in parts and woefully out in others.

Of course the audience in the studio is the same as the audience at home - old and irrelevant - so there is no gain from changing these people's minds.

The weird thing about MacKenzie was that he mentioned that fact about the average age of gamers being 33, as if it had anything to do with anything. Was like he'd memorised that one fact and wanted to shoehorn it in somewhere, even though it had little relevance to what was being discussed at the time.

Shadow wrote:To be fair McKenzie wasn't really against games, and certainly not against games as they stand today. He even said that he's a "war gamer".

He said he wasn't a war gamer.

jafro360 wrote:I'd rather they just have a big sign saying games are evil on for 5 minutes and be done with it...

Spot-on, fella.

jafro360 wrote:There was an interesting point made by Mark Kermode in The Guardian about gaming where he compared games to the video nasties of the 80s and he didn't lambast games saying they were violent he concluded that because he didn't know about games he couldn't judge if they were violent.The people who know about games and understand them can make judgement about whether there violent.Not a bunch of pensioners who are ignorant of the medium.

Also reminds me of the Ed Byrne stand up where people think they have the upper hand in any argument simply by saying "Do have kids though". There's a sense of arrogance among people in society that If you have kids you automatically know more about life then someone who doesn't.

*nods* Talking sense.

I don't think there has been a room full of so many banana splits since the Manchester Derby.

Roonmastor wrote:If we managed to fill the audience in one of these shows with rational gamers then imagine how confused the production company would be when we all backed the sane arguments being put forward.

Let's be honest here, they'd have to cancel the interview when the audience, after a particularly short-sighted comment on videogames culture by the anti-gaming woman, implores Tim to "gooseberry fool on her tits".

blackoutHERO wrote:I don't think there has been a room full of so many banana splits since the Manchester Derby.

If only football matches were played in a room rather than a stadium, that joke might have worked. Unless you were talking about you and your mates sitting down to watch said game, of course. WINKYFACE.

JK wrote:Let's be honest here, they'd have to cancel the interview when the audience, after a particularly short-sighted comment on videogames culture by the anti-gaming woman, implores Tim to "gooseberry fool on her tits".

gooseberry fool on her Titchmarsh.

Oxx wrote:

JK wrote:Let's be honest here, they'd have to cancel the interview when the audience, after a particularly short-sighted comment on videogames culture by the anti-gaming woman, implores Tim to "gooseberry fool on her tits".

**** on her Titchmarsh.

I recommend an external lovely water feature.