Gaming philosophy - is video gaming sustainable in a world at peace?

[binary solo]

mrstickball said:
Given that we won't have world peace, ever, your argument is kinda irrelevant.

Aside from that, if we did have world peace, the conflicts of decades prior still exist, and could be used for games. We haven't had a major war in 70 years, yet we still make games as if one happened tomorrow (or about prior major conflicts).

Gosh, I wish I was as prescient as you. Can you give me next week's lottery numbers too? One way or another there will be world peace, the only question is whether the human species will still be around at the time. I think we will be. Do you seriously believe humanity can carry on the way it is/has for another 1000 years, or 10,000 years or 500,000 years? Is human civilisation really incapable of evolving to a more mature state than it is now? Assuming we survive, I think world peace is an inevitability.

Interesting points of view. I think if human consciousness doesn't transform away from viewing violence as a legitimate response to conflict, and  brute force as psychologically or emotionally satisfying then violence in society will remain. So, if violent videogames are a popular form of outlet for aggression then we will still have significant violence in society.

It doesn't matter that there haven't been any major wars in 70 years. This is not a necessary condition for war and violence to be part of the public consciousness. In fact with the advent of the mass media and now with instant coverage on TV and through the internet the public's direct exposure to war and civil unrest is greater than it ever has been, except for those who live in the actual warzone of course. War isn't the only form of severe violence in the world, and in like manner war games are not the only violent video games on the market.