Slashdot Mirror
Manhunt Violence Story Sees Updates, Threats
Thanks to Blue's News for covering the latest developments in a UK videogame violence story, in which the Rockstar North-created game Manhunt was very allegedly implicated in "a grisly murder" - it's revealed: "The game was present in the victim's home, not the killer's... This may present a problem for those looking to turn this case to their own ends." Nonetheless, previously mentioned attorney Jack Thompson is jumping straight on the case, even from an continent away, according to GameDaily, as he rages: "We are going to destroy Rockstar, you can count on that... [ESA head] Doug Lowenstein makes Saddam Hussein look like a post-reformed Pinocchio." Finally, Gamesindustry.biz injects a thoughtful note into the mayhem, arguing: "Rockstar do not emerge from this affair smelling of roses... game makers could help the case a lot by trying to push the boundaries in terms of gameplay, rather than gore."
Feel free to jump on the morality bandwagon (or create one if you can't find it). I for one will continue blithely on, cackling with glee at a world that lets me do everything I would never consider doing in my own.
If someone wants to play a game about killing Hell spawn demons (Doom 3 refrence : check), eating babies (Dunno :check) or stabbing old ladies then they should be able to. It's not their fault if some nutter goes off the rails and ends up killing someone.
I'm sick of hearing "GAMES DID IT!" because it's a cheap excuse for a fucked up society. You can't blame the car makers for a drunk driver so lets not blame the Playstation for the fucked up little kid.
Mod me troll if you wish, I don't overly care for karma compared to my opinions on this topic. I think the world is fucked up and blaming my hobby, I can earn Karma back but I can't earn back ignoring my opinions and staying silent in a discussion I feel important.
I like muppets.
I read the Gamebiz interview and I'm pretty surprised that Thompson is a lawyer. Any decently competent lawyer knows better than to say "we are going to destory the other side" and throw out name calling. Until the last half of the interview, I thought the article was a joke... At least he'll make this whole affair entertaining to follow.
Uh, I meant "Rockstar's games, such as GTA, Max Payne, Manhunt, etc." rather than "GTA", as, well, the article is specifically about Manhunt and I only managed to reference GTA. Tee hee.
At least they didn't show a breast! Now THAT would have been evil and would have corrupted the minds of everyone that saw it.
"Thompson: There have been dozens of murders that have been tied to their products throughout the world, so it's just a matter of piling on, and we will do that. "
IF their have been over 24 murders that can be linked to rockstar why doesn't he name ONE?
THis is just like the crap people like this pulled concerning D&D and Heavy Metal.
Mod down if you must, but... they're right.
Rockstar looks awful. This game is awful. I couldn't stand it. You get points for murdering people in gruesome ways, with weapons like "the plastic bag", with which you strangle, snap necks, and break noses - all in a live-motion cutscene EVERY TIME you kill.
It's awful. I wouldn't recommend the game to anyone.
Not that this should prevent the publication of said speech, but it's still not anything Rockstar's going to look pretty over.
Guns don't kill people, videogames kill people.
A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
Aw MAN he disses Rock Star HARD! I mean like, some guy who murders tens of thousands of people with nerve gas and, like tortured ethnic minorities for fun is, like, way less evil than those fucker trying to make a game. DUUUUuuudDDe!
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
I'd like to make fun of this guy, really I would...but how? He already sounds like a stereotypical villain from an Ayn Rand novel.
English is easier said than done.
With that guy representing the other side, I don't think we have anything to worry about. Insinuating that Doug Lowenstein is even lower on the moral scale than Saddam Hussein is all but a dead giveaway that the man possesses no faculties for logic, reasoning, or intelligent discourse.
No comment.
I look at it this way: Jack Thompson further proved himself to be an opportunistic scumbag. I'm surprised he didn't take the first flight to London as soon as he heard about it. But then again, we are talking about a total loon who would slit his mother's throat and/or sell his soul to the devil just to prove his asinine theories. Not to mention that he originated hearse-chasing(just like ambulance-chasing, except the destination's the funeral home) and he may be a necrophilliac. Let's analyze this scumbag, shall we?:
1) Thompson may be considered a racist since he helped lead censorship attacks against 2 Live Crew and Ice-T.
2) Thompson was ordered to take a psychological evaluation as part of a restraining order filed by Miami DJ Neil Rogers(IIRC, The Florida State Bar Association called Jack Thompson's sanity into question TWICE). In fact, Thompson can't even mention Rogers by name as part of that order, which came about when Thompson tried to have Rogers arrested over something he said on his radio show that Thompson didn't like.
3) Thompson has lost every case he started up involving the video game industry(the Paducah school shootings come to mind). When he tried to become Dustin Lynch's attorney last year(the case in Ohio where Thompson tried to blame(GTA3 for the murder), Lynch refused his services, so the judge banned him from being involved in the case, saying that Thompson had no right to defend a client that didn't even want him as his attorney; Lynch would later plead guilty anyway and in blood-stained letters sent to his victim's family members, he claimed he did it for "his own personal enjoyment" and that the game didn't make him do it. The prosecution even scoffed at Thompson's claims, saying that they had an open and shut case.
4) Thompson even enjoys calling HIMSELF a wacko(If you remember, he called himself "Wacky Jack" in a newspaper article about him joining the Haitians' lawsuit aginst Vice City).
Now about this particular case, Police officials don't even believe Thompson, the victim's parents or the British tabloid media. Officials have stated that robbery was the motive(The 17 year-old murderer killed the 14 year-old to rob him to pay off drug debts), and that the game was found in the VICTIM'S OWN BEDROOM!! Sounds to me like somebody has some explaining to do.
Jack Thompson has no credibility left, whether because of his own actions or because the federal courts continue to reject his claims. Yet the only reasons he's still around is 'cause of an apathetic news media(i.e. Anderson Cooper 360) and because he's an psychotic attention whore who's in need of mental help. And until a modern-day Edward R. Murrow questions the tactics of Thompson and his ilk, he'll continue this crap.
== BearDogg-X ==
I'm pretty sick of all the bullshit hype about Manhunt.
I've finished the game, and it's barely at the level of a good Peter Jackson movie. OK, the thought of some of the executions is horrifying, but the graphics in the game are pretty far from realistic. Certainly not bad enough to disturb anyone older than a small child.
Well, whats your point? Yes I've played the game myself and yes I think the game is just plain awful, but that doesn't mean Rockstar should get sued because someone killed another person. Could you imagine the implications following after that? We'd have to sue car companies because someone drove their car while drunk. We'd have to sue steak knife companies because some kid ran around with it and stabbed his little brother. Etc etc.
If the game went around saying 'kill people, kill people, its all just a game' I could see why people would start pointing fingers at Rockstar, but when you consider the context "con gets pulled off deathrow without permission to play a game of cat and mouse" why not? When you think of it that way, you could say the main character is acting out in self-defense.
And of course, another nice quote from the story posted on Blues News:
As for the link between Manhunt and the crime, the police are clear. Pooni said: "We haven't connected the game with the murder and we've already made that statement, but some sections of the media chose to ignore it...the motive was robbery."
..that he played Manhunt enough to become violently affected... it sucks.
Boring, repetitive and repetitive.
This from a guy that loved GTA3 and Vice City.
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." - Denis Diderot
Okay, WTF people, /. is not a BLOG, I repeat, NOT A BLOG. Under no defintion I can find it would fit the catagory blog, so I wonder what kind of drugs you are using, but would you mind quitting them.
First, to clear up a few things -- apparently the fact that the victim owned the game isn't really meaningful, because they (killer and victim) played the game together (so where they played doesn't really make a difference). Second, the police investigating the crime *are* saying the reason for the killing was "robbery", not "videogame induced psychosis" or some such nonsense -- it seems like mostly this lawyer who's demonizing the game.
:)
Okay, now onto the interesting part of the discussion. It's nuts to say that the game "caused" the murder. But it's also short-sighted to say that it couldn't possibly have been a factor. Yes, the movies you watch and the games you play affect your state of mind, and your thought patterns. Not necessarily permanently... but they affect it. If they didn't, what would be the point? That's what's cool about a good action flick or videogame -- you get involved; you get an adrenaline rush and a feeling of power. After playing a really immersive game you walk around for a few hours seeing the *real* world in such a different light. Now, most of us have a decent enough moral compass that we know how much of that world you can actually recreate. One of my friends went a little far when we were 10 or so, and shot me with his BB gun, which hurt like hell, and he felt bad (and didn't do that again). That's normal, right? Sure, the "shoot the running target" popped into his head mostly because of the videogames we played -- and he had a lightning-quick trigger finger in the games -- but it was still well in the range of kids learning "that will hurt your friend, and we don't want to hurt our friends". He could just as well have carelessly kicked a soccer ball into my face. Our videogame experiences were balanced off with a lot of normal social interaction, with adults around, where we could learn about peaceful conflict resolution and so on. We didn't solve arguments with hammers.
So the games are not inherently "evil". HOWEVER, if your only role model for living life and resolving conflicts is Manhunt, you're going to be one screwed-up kid.
Bottom line -- with decent parenting, there's no question that a kid can survive any kind of video game... but I suspect a part of decent parenting would be keeping your kid from playing these kinds of realistically violent games, especially where the game requires acting out behavior that is so totally against the morals you're trying to teach them. Yeah, they're going to have to sort out their own way in a morally relative world when they're older (and choices are more complicated); but they'll have a much easier time if they've got the basics down already by the time they get there.
Adult gaming... Personally, I don't play modern shooters (since the first DOOM, really). They make me nauseous. The spinning walls, the gore, the unrelenting tension... I just don't find it fun at all, and I do wonder how good it is for one to frequently engage in virtual brutality like that. But adults gaming is a different animal -- most of us already have basic habits for interacting with others that are pretty worn in. But kids who don't have those habits yet (and the worse their parents/peers/teachers are, the older they may be) just don't need that.
Here's a quasi-parallel situation to think about -- why is it that mothers teach their daughters to be "nice" to their dolls? ("No, honey -- you'll hurt baby's arm if you pull it like that") Because it's practice for dealing with *real* babies, and real other little girls. Pulling hair is bad, soft patting is good, etc.. And in reverse, children of abusive parents often beat up their dolls or toys -- they're just practicing what they've learned (and sadly, they'll frequently abuse their own kids the same way, years later).
Just my thoughts -- sorry if I started rambling a bit.
First off, I never had a problem with gore in games and still don't, and I don't think it "hurt" me having seen it as a kid, either. I'm just not "into it" for the sake of it myself.
I have however seen a fair amount of people who no doubt enjoy the violence first and foremost and to lengths that can get fucking creepy. PERIOD. I just had such an encounter a few days ago, a 25 year old who kept attacking corpses lying on the ground in gta3:vc, making noises with his mouth. (later on I realized he does the same with movies heh!)
This is not the fault of the games, to the contrary, the game is a harmless way to signal you have issues.. but I'm sure these people would say the same thing, "I don't play it for the gore". If I had to guess at reasons for liking violent media, then this particular person seemed to be fascinated by the fact that others had "such sick ideas" (quoted), he even seemed to daydream of taking revenge on people who hurt him etc. and this stuff made him feel better about having such daydreams. Okay, really creepy extreme example of a person with issues - but those people play these games too, and of just making a buck off them and otherwise sweeping their underlying issues under the rug is what I can't stand. Pointing fingers would be counterproductive, I don't have any real suggestions or solutions - but don't ignore it.
Well, I dont know about you guys, but I think its about time for video games to reach the high moral standards only lawyers have attained!
"Derp de derp."
He sure seems rabid enough. Hopefully some judge will shut him up soon.
In the beginning the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and is widely considered as a bad move.
After reading the article 50 times in one sitting I decided to take up arms against all video game developers and publishers. As Jack Thompson says: "We don't need luck. The vectors are locked in, these people are dead meat."
I remember I first saw Jack Thompson in Breaker Morant... although I can't remember if he won the case or not...
If Rockstar has a ball in their pants they will be suing this motherfucker for libel before the week is out, and asking for his disbarrment as well. It is quite obvious he has a personal problem with them, and can not be trusted to act professionally. When you say shit like "We're going to destroy them" before there even IS a fucking WE, you have no claim whatsoever to being a lawyer. You do NOT say shit like that and expect to keep your job for long.
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
It seems people have a hard time coping with singular labels.
Gamers aren't violent. Gamers aren't pacifists either. Gamers are (drumroll) gamers. Anything more is a premature conclusion and a gross generalazation.
It is probably true that some people can be influenced to commit violent acts through exposure to violent media. It is also probably true that some people can be influenced to commit violent acts through exposure to calm, tranquil media, or through media deprivation. Even so, "influenced" does not denote a causal relationship.
I've said it before many times, and will probably continue to say it long after it's forgotten that I started the phrase: "Every disease has a patient." There are more than six billion people on this planet, and any concievable deviant act or lifestyle not only probably exists, but likely has a thriving community online.
Meanwhile, back on the topic, it should be noted that Jack Thompson, while still quite mad (in the stark raving sense, not in the angry sense), was previously calling for stricter controls on preventing games of this type from getting in the hands of minors, which wasn't all that unreasonable a request. Calling for "destroying Rockstar," however, is.
Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
The game has an 18 certificate... the kids weren't 18.. And the parents don't want to accept any small portion of responsibility? WTF?
.... once again, the computer is seen as a modern replacement for proper parenting...
"Oh, he's in his room on his computer"
if you do destroy rockstar, please do it *after* the release of GTA: San Andreas, and preferably GTA 4 if there is one.
thank you
That man tried to kill mah Daddy
I do have a good bit of sympathy with the main point of the gamesindustry.biz article. I don't believe in outright censorship or banning of games (although I don't object to an age-based classification system), but I do recognise that there is an argument over this which needs to be won and that games like Manhunt really aren't helping the case.
The Grand Theft Auto games were at least innovative in terms of gameplay (or at least, GTA3 was... Vice City perhaps less so). With Manhunt, by all account, the only selling point are the buckets of gore and the explicitely sadistic objectives. I saw a news article the other day saying that American Magee was intending to make "the most violent game ever"... but why? If you look at the world of movies, you'll find plenty of violence. However, the movies at the Manhunt end of the spectrum tend to be relegated to the straight-to-video category of "video nasties" and you don't normally get well known directors setting out to make "the most violent movie ever" (well... maybe Quentin Tarantino does, but at least his movies have other qualities, a la GTA3).
Ultimately, the great "videogames are evil" argument still has a couple of years to run. These arguments are inevitably won from the middle-ground. While I would support the right of developers to make whatever games they want, it would be nice if they had the common sense to keep things a little more low key for the time being. Right now, the only good news is that the anti-video-games crowd haven't done a good job of grabbing the middle-ground either.
Not to flame the US judicial system, but thank god Jack Thompson will find it a lot harder to peddle his nonsense in this country! Firstly British law does not allow a lawyer to take a share of damages recieved, which removes the profit motivation for this sort of ambulance chasing.
Secondly our judges are appointed, not elected, which reduces the chance that a judge will play this for the crowd, and support this boneheaded action to garner favour with the tabloid press.
What it does show is how poor the lobbying strength is of the videogames industry in the UK. Given that videogames make more money in this country than the music industry and the film industry times 2, Members of Parliament are still prepared to take cheap shots at it because this hasn't been made clear to them. If videogames don't put more money into schmoozing our policymakers they will continue to be seen as an unimportant minority interest, vulnerable to the vaguries of the tabloid press.
What annoys me is that these anti-violent-game lobbyists want everyone to understand that violence in games is not real. Yet at the same time they belive that playing them creates real world effects. So which is it?
Anyway, I liked "Postal 2" because of the moral ambiguity of that game. The fact remains.... you can actually win that game by not having to kill anyone.(stealing and doing drugs to avoid death from the game's assailants is a different matter though)
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Hopefully there arent' any Haitians working for Rockstar, Jack Thompson might have to sue himself.
or through media deprivation
You haven't seen "Big Brother (tm)" have you ?
Boredom leads to anger... anger leads to hate... hate leads to the dark side.
KILL, KILL, KILL!!!!!!!!
Now i read somewhere the other day that the average number of children killed every year in the uk is about 7 (even though people polled thought it was anywhere from 5 to 400) and this has been stable since the 50's. So what does that tell us? Soz for no link.. will have a look.
manhunt though is an average stealthpuzzle game, nothing to be proud of.
not really that violent either on what it shows, the violence part is pretty boring after a while and you just kill a bunch of criminals anyways in the game(that beg you to kill 'em).
it's a trendy excuse though("it's all due to damn videogames"), and people need excuses(they could just as well be books or movies.. ).. but blaming something that was found at victims home??? that's just fucking lame.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
As i understand it the victims parent blamed the game - not exactly a qualified opinoun especially when you consider the fact that they were aware they played the game together - its an "18" game, any parent letting two 13year olds play such a game, especially if they take the time to look at it themselves are, in my eyes, negligent. All i can see here is media hype as a result of a parent trying to blame someone other than herself. I cant see how the two kids could be quite "right" either..
What seems to have been overlooked here, and something far more important than the game itself, is the BBFC Clasification of the game in question.
Over here in the UK, its Illegal (and pinishable by a big fine at least) to sell a BBFC rathed game to someone under the rated age. In this case, the game has an '18' certificate, which meants it is illegal to sell it to anyone under the age of 18 - something with retailers are typically very careful about.
Its the same system as used by the video/dvd retail industry, and not a requirement for games. if i remember correctly, only games which contain live action footage (which Manhunt does not) must be rated, but titles can be submitted for classification, which is something Rockstar do with all their titles.
The GTAs are 18 certificate, as is Manhunt, and if I recall correctly, MGS2 has a 15 certificate, while Eyetoy and Singstar have U (universal) and PG (Parental Guidance) certificates.
What is comes down to, is if the game DID have anything to do with the murder, then what were under-age children doing with a game that they cant buy, which is clearly labelled for adults?
In fact, to make matters worse, I remember hearing a quote somewhere that the favourite movie of the kid who comitted the murder is Scarface - something else that is 18 rated.
Its not like the rating system is new (its been in place for the last 20 years or so), or can be missed (distinctive red circle, which you see all over) - this is simply the case of the parents not paying attention at all.
Someone over 18 must have purchased the game, and someone was letting them play it, even though one of the first screens you see is a warning that it contains scenes of violence, and should not be viewed by minors!
This is fairly irrelevent now, but wither way, theres no excuse at all for it to be the game alone that is the cause here - its clearly lack of parenting.
"We are going to destroy Rockstar, you can count on that..."
Sounds like he's been playing a little too much Manhunt.
--Stephen
maybe he got reaaally frustrated at their game?
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
The amazingly revolutionary thing about GTA was that it was just as violent as you were. If you wanted to hop in a car and drive around, completely obeying all traffic laws, and not participate in any violence, it was possible. Granted, there were some missions that required violence, but the missions themselves weren't required to actually play the game. Sure, you have the freedom to grab a baseball bat and beat a hooker to death, but you also had the freedon not to. The game is only as violent and depraved as the person playing it. So many of the heinous acts that people complain about in GTA weren't a necessary part of the gameplay, they were simply not prohibited by an artificial set of rules. It isn't the violence that people are afraid of, it's the freedom to commit violence and what the absence of restraint allows them to do when they don't feel like restraining themselves.
This sig has been stolen. Return it to its original user for a reward.
So let me get this straight. The argument is that the game gives the killers ideas on how to murder their victems and should be banned. Otherwise, they would have killed the victem in a more traditional way?
Why don't we ban the news, everyday I turn it on and I see how someone kidnapped some 16 year old and raped and killed her, or how some people left their kid in a dumpster, or how some woman drove all her kids off a bridge in the family car. I never thought of that, I can mass kill my family by telling them we are taking a rode trip, then pushing them off a bridge! I can get rid of my kid by leaving him in the trash rather then facing embarassment at an abortion clinic!
Get this slashdoters, YOU CAN HAVE SEX WITH A HOT 16 year old! All you have to do is kidnap and have your way with her, THEN THROW HER IN THE WOODS WHEN YOU ARE DONE!!! AMAZING!
To think, I would have never come up with any of these things if I hadn't watched the news. They gave me all these great ideas for crimes. THANK YOU NEWS 11!
Parents who can't take the time out of their very important and busy schedule to find out what it is that their own kids are doing. Hey, let the TV and the PC be mom and dad, meanwhile we can have a life. And when they don't know real life from a video game, because they have had images of goatse implanted in their brains from the age of 5 and because every time you die you hit Continue, we'll go and blame someone else because we fucked up in bringing our kids up to be decent people. Of course those kids went guns a-blazin' into their school because they played Doom, why else? And now this guy too, the statements these parents make are pathetic - "Our 17-year-old son seemed to be obsessed with ritualistic killings, there was nothing, nothing we could do!".
> The game was present in the victim's home, not the
> killer's... This may present a problem for those
> looking to turn this case to their own ends.
Your slogan seems to be literally true in this case.
Thompson: Right. The Daily Mail explains that even with this story on the front page of the newspapers in the U.K., they took a kid and were able to walk into retail outlets and buy the game. So everybody knows that the restrictions are a joke.
Okay, right there, you've named the appropriate target for any and all lawsuits. Video games, just because they USED to be aimed at children, aren't necessariliy in the domain of the 12 and under group. It's like periodicals, nobody is going to say (anymore!) that Playboy, Penthouse or Hustler shouldn't be sold at stores. The stores are supposed to be responsible for making sure that nobody unde 18 gets their hands on them. How are MA17 games different?
--trb
I for one belive that it is acceptable to blame the games industry for the death of their son while they grieve. But as happens everytime, it will blow over and sales of manhunt will continue. What I do not belive is acceptable is a report in yestardays Metro. Their article says that the parents are going to sue rockstart games as well as sony.
All spelling mistakes are due to solar flares...honest
"The game was present in the victim's home, not the killer's... This may present a problem for those looking to turn this case to their own ends."
I've trawled through most of the links but I can't find where this quote was taken from. I've seen contradicting quotes stating that a copy of the game was removed from the killer's home by police. So which is it? Have I just gone blind?
I think rockstar has added a lot of creativity to all their games including manhunt, theres a ton of games about stealth but manhunt (and mgs) allows you to attract your pursuers by using "sound" (not a stupid sound system in which you lose if you are too loud!) you can even use your mic if you have one. GTA was a complete revolution in gameplay and they are extending it in every volume, they invented "free roaming" for crying out loud they deserve awards not lawsuits! Society is completely hipocrite in this terms, if people want so much nonviolent games how come they sell so bad? try to pull any game without a known license that doesnt use any violence and or gore and you get an instant flop in the shelves if any publisher grabs it. Has anyone considered game developers do this because thats what gamers want? a lot of people complaint about GTA:SA has any gamer complaint with them to tone down the violence?
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here
OHHHH... thats right, its a news site. With journalists and reporters. Or maybe its an e-commerce site with goods or services produced. Or maybe its just a collection of quick blurbs and links to interesting places where people can post comments. Yea, that aint no blog, yes sirree.
A game, movie, or whatever does not make someone violent. I have played games like this for years, and watched the most violent movies. I mean take account for your actions, but lawyers have to eat to. Remember we have freewill, if anything or anyone is to blame it is probably the parents. Living in a blame first society well, it is not my fault. But not to name names..more like SCO i guess.
Deserving got nothing to do with it.....shuffle
What do the societies afraid of? Mind Control from an alternate universe? This has been said multiple times (Too many in my opinion) but it still needs to be said. "Video Games Do NOT cause these problems."
Everyone before me has said that it's is the parent's decision to choose whether or not it should be in the possession of thier child. I am not of legal age, but I know that I should not blame a Video Game for my screwed up life. What screwes it up is high-school and Junior High...
I play a game like True Crimes, or GTA and I would occasionally think like, "Ooooh nice bike... I wonder..." but I never do it because I know what would happen if I did (one of them is having it crush one of my legs, I'm aswesome in games with motorcycles but I have no REAL experience with them).
It's like some of the story in Metal Gear Solid 2. The idea of a giant walking machine to filter out internet data to "spur" the evolution of the human race. Why should information be filtered? I have a need to know an NO ONE should make it impossible for me to find out.
Empathetic-- 94% You tend to walk in someone else's shoes a hundred miles before pointing a finger.
Doug Lowenstein makes Saddam Hussein look like a post-reformed Pinocchio.
That's almost as ridiculous as when that NYT writer said that GTA3 was worse than child molestation. Here's hoping that this guy gets disbarred.
Rob
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2000-10 -09&res=l
Rumor has it... that Catholic School Girls Rule
First it was science fiction.
Then it was comic books.
Followed by Dungeons and Dragons.
Next was heavy metal and rap.
Now it's video games.
And those are just the ones we care about as nerds/geeks. Don't forget mini-skirts, hula-hoops, the Twist, the Beatles, birth control...
Not to put too fine a point on it, but it's all about control and subservience; anything that might allow or encourage others to think for themselves is feared and belittled by the overly conservative & powerful.
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
If your going to ban violent video games you better ban those peskey books.... Lets see Running Man comes to mind as the same theme as the game. I think books are actualy worse for you because you have to visualize the violence yourself! Books are even unrated any kid can go and pickup a book about violence and sex, oh wait they are made to read those books by school. Anyway everyone thinks its dumb to ban books its also dumb to ban video games.... if you cant tell reality from fantasy youll be dropping anvils on your friends heads after watching the Road Runner! Im rambling but this whole subject pisses me off because it is just a repeat of past events Books, Rock and Roll, Pen And Paper roll playing games.. All these things have been blamed on kids killing each other. When one becomes more exceptable or a better target comes out stupid people jump all over it I mean who today thinks that areosmith is the Devil?
"Rockstar do not emerge from this affair smelling of roses... game makers could help the case a lot by trying to push the boundaries in terms of gameplay, rather than gore."
As we all know that GTA3 wasn't revolutionary at all, and didn't break -any- boundaries in terms of gameplay.[/sarcasm]
Mod me redundant if the obvious has been said allready ;)
Btw, Manhunt sucked donkeypooh.
This lawyer cat (and any bastard who blames video games, movies, books, tv, or any other media for problems with youth and other people) is a complete idiot.
Similar to the assholes that think that just because these rave kids dress in colourful outfits, wear candy bracelets and suck on pacifiers, they are doing so to attract children to the Ketamine and Ecstacy laden nights of drugged out psycodelic dance parties. completely not true. It's part of the spirit of the event. Depictions of donald duck, pokemon, and cell phone brands on the pills? It's for the fun of it.
The same goes for video games. Anyone can get obsessed over any thought. Some people get obsessed with washing their hands until they bleed. Some people have disorders where they scream all night, or try to remove imaginary insects from their body with razor blades (GET THEM OFF MEEEEEE!). Does that mean we should ban soap? Should we ban sharp things? Should we live in a world without entertainment?
What's good to one person can be a complete detriment to another. Look at firefighters. Some people are completely phobic of fire, others don't mind it. Most people lie somewhere in between.
No one's going to little Johnny's kindergarten class with posters of GTA or Manhunt or Doom3 and saying "tell your parents you want this!" Hell, I don't think video games are marketed ENOUGH. They're still pretty underground, it seems.... for the most part...
You know something... I think I'm gonna start obsessing over Darwin's theory of natural selection. Maybe I should go around putting bullets in the heads of every stupid person who blames media for problems in the world. I should go on a killing spree and take out every person who is horrified by my actions. You know, that's what I'll do....
My defense... well, that's easy. Jack Thompson inspired me. I'm doing it for him. He's my idol. My god. He'll get me off. He tells me what to do in my dreams...
That's the ticket.
...spike
Ewwwwww, coconut...
He better hope that I don't roll a 14 after entering the plains of Azkar: a +1 Gelatonous Cube!
Oh my god! I've become one of them!
MOUNT TAPE U1439 ON B3, NO RING
Mojo, Thanks for doing that. It just proved my point about him. Until someone comes around and takes him down(like Mick Foley did to the Parents Television Council with his book, "Foley is Good: and the Real World is Faker Than Wrestling"), he won't stop with his garbage.
Also, think about this: on every thread on GameFAQS and Stern Fan Network that were about e-mails that people sent this turd-hustler, all he would do is insult them, making it look like either he didn't read the messages or he just doesn't care. I choose the latter simply because he feels like the only opinion that matters to him is his own.
Mojo, e-mail him back with this response:
If my brain didn't have any neurons left, I wouldn't have any brain activity at all. Now my question to you is this: If your "claims" are so truthful, why is it that not a single person believes you. Oh, I forgot, because of the majority opinion that PROSTITUTION IS A MORE NOBLE PROFESSION THAN YOURS, it's no wonder that no intelligent person would believe you. Have A Nice Day!!
== BearDogg-X ==
A few years back when I was about 22-23, I had the expereince of seeing crossairs on people's head after playing too much Half Life and RtCW. When I was bored in a meeting, all I could think of is if I launch a grenade, how would it bounce from wall to wall like in Quake3. And sometimes I just do strafe turns at street corners. I mean really, games were conditioning me to see the world differently, react differently.
I can't say too much about Manhunt or about this police case because I'm not the killer, but since I've watched a 16 years old playing Manunt, I can see the impact of it on some people's mind. I believe people can be conditioned to behave in a bad way without them knowing, in the case of Doom, Half Life etc, you are fighting demons, aliens, other people who want to kill you. It's not a good reason to kill, but at least it's something I can say, ok if I'm in that kind of situation, I'll probably do so as well. But the subject of Manhunt is just plain sick. The player is there to kill people because it gives the avatar plesure, it gives the camera man plesure, the camera man tells the player how good the player feels for killing, in turn, it gives the player plesure. The repeated encouragement (kinda like a subliminal message) gives the player the impression that killing people is the most amazing thing.
Now that I'm older, I can control my mind better, but as someone who play way too much games, I have to say that reality can still be blurry to me sometimes. And I've seen the bizzard effect of some games on kids. They are more aggresive, simple minded sometimes down right unreasonable. To me, games like hitman, gta, carmaggedon are still within a thine red line that shouldn't be crossed, they're talking about bad guys with purpose. But Manhunt has just stepped over the line into stupidity.
I'd be the last to blame a developer for anyone's behavior. But come on, is this really the best that game developers can do? Sinking to the lowest common denominator to sell games?
You can blame the parents all you want, but if the parents truly WERE effective, the sales of games of this nature would plummet. Indeed, developers are taking advantage of parental failure.
If I want to see grisly stuff on TV, I can turn on the news, or RealTV, or shows like that. Games are great because they be an escape from the horrible stuff in our world, even if the game is about horrible stuff in another world. At least it's clearly not real. Nobody's going around in green and white slaying people with a Master Sword.
Have some ethics. Stop taking advantage of bad parenting. Show some pride in your craft. Create games that push limits in ways that don't earn you an M/Ao rating.
I mean, not that I do anything wierd like that... really.. umm.. I'll just be over THERE! *runs*
"If Common Sense was so common, it wouldn't be such a valued trait."
I just had such an encounter a few days ago, a 25 year old who kept attacking corpses lying on the ground in gta3:vc, making noises with his mouth. (later on I realized he does the same with movies heh!)
He makes movies in his mouth?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
t's a trendy excuse though("it's all due to damn videogames"), and people need excuses(they could just as well be books or movies.. ).. but blaming something that was found at victims home??? that's just fucking lame.
We have a complicated world with complicated problems. Much of the problems are due to the way the system has worked itself out, with business interests in control of the government.
Many people know there is much that is wrong in America and in the world, but aren't willing to look at the complexity of the issues or question themselves. Instead, they look for the easy answers.
How much easier is it to blame violence on videogames rather than parental responsibility and the easy availability of guns? How much easier is it to blame the destabilization of the family on gay marriage rather than on an economic system that pushes more and more families into poverty or not able to spend enough time with the family due to both parents working full time?
When opportunists try to scapegoat someone instead of trying to solve the real problems, we must stop them. The same people that blame gay marriage are the same people blaming video games are the same people blaming music.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
No haha! It was some action flick, and he made noises with his mouth then just like he did while playing SoulBlade or GTA. Something I remember from my own youth (who doesn't... "BANZAAAAAAAAI"), and which totally shocked me coming from a "grown up" heh :P
I knew what you meant. I was just being silly.
Just as silly, and on topic, is what I do sometimes, when the mood hits. When I'm pushing a cart at the grocery store I make engine sounds. At the corners, I make squealing brake noises. If the supermarket is uncrowded late at night and I'm with a friend, I'll challenge them to a race down the aisle.
So, I'm probably as retarded as your friend. =)
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Nah, I do that too =D That guy wasn't as much retarded as, uhm, I think he had a kinda harsh life from the snippets I gathered.. growing up in hospitals, being slapped around by his father who said he'd never amount to anything and who died recently.. I think he's just living out violent fantasies, and I can't blame him for those fantasies. And I think it's better he beats up hookers in GTA than hurting himself. I just feel that when it comes to violent games or movies, this side of it is totally swept under the rug. It's just a market, and I don't really see any attempts of producers to handle that more responsibly, to the contrary. As far as silly shit goes - the world needs more of that. Way more. So keep racing, and keep that part of you alive under all circumstances =)