The Instigator
saamanthagrl
Pro (for)
Winning
35 Points
The Contender
resolutionsmasher
Con (against)
Losing
28 Points

Gaming is underrated.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 9 votes the winner is...
saamanthagrl
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/23/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,409 times Debate No: 7064
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (21)
Votes (9)

 

saamanthagrl

Pro

In order to completely understand this debate we have to look at it from the opposing side. As in the others who are just really ignorant to video games. Whether it be they think its childish or that it be only for the younger generation. Maybe they think its irrelevant compared to the other forms of entertainment, and of course, there's the majority that believe that video games are the root of all evil. Video games are not that much different than watching a movie or reading a book. Its all just a form of entertainment, and I guess the mass media and the majority of society just refuses to look at it. If your a parent, teacher, or guardian, or offspring overseer you have probably had problems with video games.

In this debate I want to argue the fact that Gaming is underrated.
Defining underrated as "Not given enough recognition for its quality."
(en.wiktionary.org/wiki/underrated)

To be quite honest with you it has nothing to do with video games, I don't think you would take your 6 year old child to go see a rated R or NC-17 movie, well you definitely shouldn't buy an M rated game or an AO rated game for your kid. There's no difference between the M rated and the R rated or AO and NC-17. They are both rated for a good reason, so you don't buy them for your kid. I won't feel bad when your starting to regret buying that video game and now your child is off cursing and imitating beer drinking. That the parent, guardian, or who every fault. You should already know that the video game your buying for your child is, rated.

Okay, and for those of you that like to believe that "oh, just cause its a video game it doesn't really mean anything" Open your eyes man. Video games aren't just a kid thing anymore, their are adults and older much more mature audiences out their for video games.

Well back to my main point, the reason why you should be excited for video games to be more well recognized, is because it does add alot of good things for your child. You cant tell me that a video game has not taught a child, better hand eye coordination, or developed their reading comprehension skills, and problem solving skills. You cant tell me that video games take any of that away from a child, if not enhancing it in a child. Really all it takes is good parenting and your child will be able to separate video games, from reality.

And, finally wanting to not spread the word of gaming is just selfish. I mean I understand if you don't want the mainstream flooded with newbies, but to an extent. Why is it so bad that video games just become mainstream and well recognized in the entertainment district. If anything we should be fighting for it to be more mainstream. Why?

First of all, the reconnection you get will promote gaming, and pro gaming and will start becoming something that companies will be looking at. The only way gaming will get better is if it is brought into the light, I mean good light. The more I think about it, the only people that really understand what I am saying are actual gamers. Only real gamers can appreciate how far gaming has come. I mean if you think about it, someone had to come up with the concept of a high score, somebody had to think of saving a princess, somebody had to think of collecting coins. This kind of history of video gaming is not appreciated enough. And its sad to see because people respect movie making and how far its come, from black and white film to Technicolor. Or no audio against full blown surround sound, people can respect that, but why can that same respect be put towards video games?
resolutionsmasher

Con

I would first like to thank my opponent for and agree with the statement that games are rated for a reason and that they need be regulated in the same way as age limits on movies. But this brings me to my case.

First of all, games are not underrated because they have received appropriate legal and social recognition. Video games have shown up on societies radar in large scale otherwise there would not be any age limits placed upon them. The government, and therefore the people (since we are a democracy) have realized the seriousness of violent or otherwise adult rated games and have put legal implications on such games. This obviously shows that games aren't underrated.
Now I shall address my opponents argument that gaming hasn't been given an appropriate light in the entertainment market. To refute this argument I simply will provide examples from the world around us. Being a professional gamer myself I believe that I am quite qualified to provide this information. When I attend gaming conventions in cities all over the nation form NYC to OKC, from Dallas to Seattle, from Jacksonville to Helena I always notice that not just the local news stations are there to report it, but also national news networks such as ESPN to NBC to CNN and many more so obviously the media doesn't underrate the gaming world but instead gives it quite a bit of attention. Also, if you look at home entertainment providers such as Blockbuster and Hollywood Videos you can see an evolution that supports my argument. In the early nineties these stores primarily provided movies as a form of home entertainment, but over the past decade these stores have expanded to include huge sections devoted solely to gaming. I have even recently located a Blockbuster that was solely devoted to gaming and has no movies to sell or rent whatsoever.

I believe that the argument that I have brought to the table has well represented my viewpoint and that of the majority of America. I urge that voters choose this case as the winner.
Debate Round No. 1
saamanthagrl

Pro

I would like to thank "resolutionsmasher" for accepting my debate, I hope this is a good clean debate that we can both benefit from.

Thank you for agreeing with the statement that games are rated for a reason and that they need be regulated in the same way as age limits on movies. Since this was not refuted I believe I should win this debate, also.
Furthermore, something that was not refuted was, the reason that video games does add alot of good things for your child. With respect to the traditional rules of debate, these can not be brought up again.

Now to refute that was brought onto my mass media argument.
"Being a professional gamer myself I believe that I am quite qualified to provide this information. When I attend gaming conventions in cities all over the nation form NYC to OKC, from Dallas to Seattle, from Jacksonville to Helena I always notice that not just the local news stations are there to report it, but also national news networks such as ESPN to NBC to CNN and many more so obviously the media doesn't underrate the gaming world but instead gives it quite a bit of attention."

Now I understand that you believe with cameras, and new stations reporting your gaming you feel as if the gaming world isn't underrated. But bringing attention to local events isn't what I mean by "underrated", the negative advertising of gaming in the media world, heavily outweighs those of the positive. Now you mentioned that national news stations bring attention to the gaming world, but is this nessicarily positive?

One you mentioned was CNN, for example, they have reported that " Video games 'sparked hammer murder'. " (http://www.cnn.com...)

CNN has also reported, "Violent video games linked to child aggression." (http://www.cnn.com...)
Which has to do with my first argument that all it takes is good parenting and your child will be able to separate video games, from reality.

Now I would like to define mass media as : collectively, the communications media, especially television, radio, and newspapers, that reach the mass of the people
(en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mass_media)

With that said other sites such as gamepolitcs.com has reported how video games are bad,
(http://www.gamepolitics.com...)

Now I could list tons of instances where video games have had negative attention, but I seriously doubt you want to hear all that. I believe that everything I have said has great value and that you should vote in affirmation to the resolution. Thanks (:
resolutionsmasher

Con

I will address each of my opponent's arguments in succession.

First my opponent said that by agreeing with his/her original statement, "There's no difference between the M rated and the R rated or AO and NC-17. They are both rated for a good reason, so you don't buy them for your kid." that I must therefore agree with his/her whole case. This isn't true. I actually proves that her case supports mine. It does so in this way: When a video game is labeled as M or AO (my opponent says this is correct) it is therefore labeled appropriately. Because of this correct label games, at least in this instance are correctly labeled. Therefore they aren't underrated and my opponent's statement refutes his/her own case.

Next my opponent brought up the fact that I didn't refute her evidence that video games are good for a child. To put his/her mind at ease I shall do so now.
1. All of his/her evidence is purely opinion (and his/hers at that) with no professional backing of any sort.
2. A study by The World Health Organization shows two things. First, all people who regularly engage in video gaming are shown to have both reduced brain activity and capability. Second, 93% of all morbidly obese people had an addiction to video games prior to their diagnoses.
3. A study done by the US Department of Education shows that while gaming does slightly improve one's hand eye coordination, any and all sports do so on a much greater level without the above mentioned downsides.
4. My opponent states, "Now I could list tons of instances where video games have had negative attention, but I seriously doubt you want to hear all that." My opponent gives these instances of negative media attention as an example but doesn't provide any argument that they are incorrect. This inadvertently stands as proof that my viewpoint is the appropriate one.

Next I would like to point out that my opponent claims that my own personal experience was in fact an example of video games being shown in a negative light. I would like to say that I personally watched each and every telecast that had any thing to do with the convention in which I participated and I know that they have never reported them as negative but as interesting community events to be highlighted on the ten'o'clock news. So I must ask that my opponent cease contradicting facts because it is an ineffective form of debate and is getting us nowhere.

This concludes my input for this round.

()__()
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Debate Round No. 2
saamanthagrl

Pro

-. Because of this correct label games, at least in this instance are correctly labeled. Therefore they aren't underrated"

Maybe you should look at my definition of "underrated" again, you are bringing my first contention totally out of distortion. When I say underrated I mean " not brought enough attention to ". Therefore making everything you said about the labeling untrue, I do not support your case. Simply, because correct "labeling" has to do with the parent, guardian, or who every fault. Fault for buying that game. What you were referring to was simply an introduction. Not something that was meant to be twisted into some weird dilemma, where you overrule me in the debate and make it look like I agree with you.

"-1. All of his/her evidence is purely opinion (and his/hers at that) with no professional backing of any sort."
Now I am pretty sure what you read in my first argument was common sense, don't you agree? Now if I knew you were that type of debater I would of pulled you out on evidence for you being a "pro gamer" My opponent states,
"Being a professional gamer myself I believe that I am quite qualified to provide this information."

I honestly don't believe you to be qualified, because I don't have proof.

"-2. A study by The World Health Organization shows two things. First, all people who regularly engage in video gaming are shown to have both reduced brain activity and capability. Second, 93% of all morbidly obese people had an addiction to video games prior to their diagnoses.
3. A study done by the US Department of Education shows that while gaming does slightly improve one's hand eye coordination, any and all sports do so on a much greater level without the above mentioned downsides."

My opponent fails to provide any evidence for any of this, so I find it to be false. Therefore, I cannot debate it.

"-My opponent gives these instances of negative media attention as an example but doesn't provide any argument that they are incorrect. This inadvertently stands as proof that my viewpoint is the appropriate one."

I give these "instances" because you were proving to me that games aren't underrated, because news stations such as CNN and ESPN have brought positive attention to video games by broadcasting them. Well I honestly don't feel obligated to provide an argument on examples, that are there merely for you and the judges'. I am not going to make irrelevant arguments on why an example is incorrect, that is just stupid.

"- So I must ask that my opponent cease contradicting facts because it is an ineffective form of debate and is getting us nowhere."

Since my opponent fails to provide me with any arguments, he basically leaves me to tell you all, that every allegation he has made toward me is not true. And they aren't. Sorry this debate hasn't gone how I planned, I thought I would actually get somewhere. Thanks for trying though.

I urge you to vote PRO :)
resolutionsmasher

Con

Now for my final input in this debate.

My opponent in her 3rd round of debate addresses what she thinks is a failure to understand her definition of underrated. This is incorrect. I actually provide arguments that games are not underrated in both hers and my definitions of underrated. I show how the media gives them plenty of attention (my definition) and how it gives it the due negative attention (her definition) because video games actually have earned the negative media coverage that they receive. I argue this on both ends so as to give the voters peace of mind that there is no doubt that games aren't overrated in any way, shape, or form.

I do not agree that my opponent's first argument is a stroke of common sense. This is negligible any way, since my opponent has not provided any evidence that she is qualified in any way as to how video games help you. She has no PHD in medicine, she has no PHD in psychology, she has no PHD in sociology, or pharmaceuticals, or health & fitness. I on the other hand do not use my own experience as hard fact and proof but instead use that of perfectly qualified and accredited university research facilities (which my opponent still claims are false but with no proof thereof).

My opponent makes the statement, "My opponent fails to provide any evidence for any of this, so I find it to be false. Therefore, I cannot debate it." When my opponent claims that she has no proof to these statistics that they must be false. But by saying this my opponent refuses to must therefore believe that the US government, or Duke University, or the World Health Organization does not exist and this is of course fool hardy to think. When she demands proof in order to prove proof a vicious cycle begins and we continue to ask this question of the proof until both of us run out of proof and that will not benefit this debate. Instead my opponent would be better off providing proof that what I said is not true as I did with her case, but because she didn't then voters surely would agree that I am the better debater in this round.

As a note to my opponent. Just because you don't fell obligated to provide argument against my counter argument does not mean that you are excused from doing so to win this debate. It is because of this refusal to actually provide evidence and argument against more than half of my round two argument due to her thinking that it is "stupid" that I must therefore win this debate.

Thank you for debating with me and may no animosity come between us because of this debate. Good luck on your debating career.

()__()
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Debate Round No. 3
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
Dang it it did it again!!!
Posted by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
Ok it's back to normal. What was that?
Posted by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
What the hell!!!! I thought that I won this?
Posted by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
That was an awesome debate.
Posted by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
Yo 18freckles. You are mistaken. The pro side of the case is saying that gaming is underrated not overrated. If you believe that games are a waste of time then you would vote for Con. Just read through the case and change your vote appropriately.
Posted by 18freckles 8 years ago
18freckles
board games or video games?.... if video games then totally pro because they are a waste of energy
Posted by gregthedestroyer 8 years ago
gregthedestroyer
lol thats ture. nik. if even you had a great arguement on here. the vote wold be biased. you might get a few but it would be a landslide.
Posted by saamanthagrl 8 years ago
saamanthagrl
Ha, their might be a parent on here that feels otherwise.
Posted by Nik 8 years ago
Nik
yeah I am scared, for exactly those reasons. Its like arguing for racial equality at a KKK rally.
Posted by gregthedestroyer 8 years ago
gregthedestroyer
ha its sams excuse to bug me about not accepting it.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by cool_dude 8 years ago
cool_dude
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by theitalianstallion 8 years ago
theitalianstallion
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by pieman 8 years ago
pieman
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by baconator 8 years ago
baconator
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by 18freckles 8 years ago
18freckles
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Wii_Master_Nin 8 years ago
Wii_Master_Nin
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by saamanthagrl 8 years ago
saamanthagrl
saamanthagrlresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70