Your response read as if you were dressing this up that way.
I did not say this has happened here, but I will not rule out the possibility that it could happen, because it has happened with other games and franchises.
The possibility of it happening has no bearing on it being related to ganking or griefing activity. That's an assumption based on a hypothetical situation which is a
very flimsy argument.
There's nothing at all dishonest about it, or the point, which is, there are realistic dangers associated with long-term and marathon gaming, and Elite is a game that can, very easily, lead someone, especially someone with certain behavioral disorders, to dangerously long sessions - such as trying to recoup the costs of an expensive, expensively-outfitted ship.
And as I said, one can die from an excess of
water. Anything in excess can be dangerous, pretending that this applies especially in this situation is misleading.
Are you going to make the same argument about farming for Fleet Carriers? What about Imperial Rank? Elite in Exploration? Reaching the Galactic Core? Any of these activities could also lead to a dangerously long sessions. Does this example only extend as far as is convenient for your argument?
Were I to post a full-page, flashing RGYB GIF there would be outrage, as this sort of thing has been known to trigger epileptic episodes in some people. Will you decry this as a "dishonest way to make a point"
Oh, very much so, as it is very much a dishonest comparison.
You are equating
directly and immediately affecting an individual's health through an epileptic gif, with possibly giving somebody an incentive to play a game for a very extended period of time, where their interaction with the game has
no affect on their health; what is dangerous is neglecting their health for an extended period.
if I were to cite examples of this in counterpoint to someone making a claim that "nothing bad every happens to anyone playing video games"?
I see you brought your very own strawman.
What was said was not "nothing bad every happens to anyone playing video games", it was:
A bit tenuous - as there are no life-threatening consequences to playing a video game, safe and warm in ones preferred gaming environment - all that one can really lose is time (spent recouping losses).
Those are two
very different statements. Robert Maynard correctly said that there is no consequence to playing a video game. The game will not hurt you.
You, however, have phrased it to encompass anything bad that happened to anyone playing video games, related or not. As if games are responsible for whatever may happen while you are engaged with them.
That was the entirely of my point - that there certainly can be more than just time to lose - should someone overindulge to make up for their losses.
The reality remains that this has happened, and can happen, just because we have not had a known case of it happening here.
Shall we
talk about that point? Shall we
talk about reality?
Your
very first example of a player who died playing a game did not "die from League of Legends", he died from a
heart attack. Same for the second, cardiac failure, not "video games"; you may as well blame the
chair he was sitting in. The third died from
unknown causes as a healthy, active adult, but he just so happened to be playing a video game when he died, not "WiiFit to death".
Have a little compassion.
Do not use the names of the deceased as a bludgeon in discussion and then tell anyone else to have compassion. You bent their deaths to suit your argument.
