Slashdot Mirror


Bully Banned by Some British Retailers

stormhair writes "The BBC is reporting that shops in the DSG Group (Currys and PC World) are banning Bully from their shelves. A spokesman says: 'We took a view that because it touches on a sensitive issue — violence in school — that it is not a product we would stock.' DSG has withdrawn other games from their shelves in the past — Hitman and Manhunt."

100 comments

  1. Pfft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What bullies.

  2. No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sounds like they are trying to be responsible retailers, according to their own reasonable definitions. Every store should have the right (and does in most places) to stock what games or products it wants, and if they think a title is not good for their customers, they don't stock it. Not sure why this is news.

    I am sure some will scream "censorship!", which is of course silly, and only the government can censor. I call this "setting standards for what products you carry". If you really want Bully, I am sure there are plenty of other places that sell it.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    1. Re:No biggie by Broken+scope · · Score: 2, Informative

      Eh,there has been a roaring discussion on gamepolitics today about this. The store that does this claims it is doing this to help their "Familiy friendly" image.

      Then they take pre-orders for vice city stories, the new scarface game, and the next GTA.

      Family friendly my ass. This is pure knee jerk reaction, it has nothing to do with settign standards.

      --
      You mad
    2. Re:No biggie by Zarniwoop_Editor · · Score: 1

      I would have to agree with you here.
      Any business should have the freedom to decide which products they wish to promote and sell, just as every consumer should be permitted to choose which products they wish to buy.
      As we all know, video games of any kind are the work of the devil and will make you go blind among other things. ;-)

      --
      - F1 NEWS
    3. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      It is their stores. They can carry what they want, that is the main point. You can choose not to shop there. Maybe they are just starting to filter out stuff to be family friendly, or maybe they think only those select titles don't fit the image they want to project. It is THEIR standard, not yours, that they use. Again, shop elsewhere if you don't like them. You have plenty of choices, so your rights are not being infringed.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    4. Re:No biggie by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

      Its there standard, and its my right to point out that they are lying through their teeth. I respect their right not to stock something, hell I wouldn't shop their. However it would be nice if they could just tell us the real reason why.

      --
      You mad
    5. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However it would be nice if they could just tell us the real reason why.

      So you tell me, what is the "real" reason why? You've already pointed out that they carry other "questionable" titles and unless you think that they're not carrying it because it won't sell, then it's obviously not a money motive. Then why? Perhaps some right wing group threatened to protest? Does it matter? Maybe this title "crosses the line"? It's not hard to think that some think that the violence in GTA is "far enough from the everyday experiences of most people" (obviously not for some) that it's ok, vs Bully which can be applicable literally anywhere (as recent history has shown), and that's what makes it cross that line.

    6. Re:No biggie by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Sounds like they are trying to be responsible retailers, according to their own reasonable definitions. Every store should have the right (and does in most places) to stock what games or products it wants, and if they think a title is not good for their customers, they don't stock it. Not sure why this is news.

      Reasonable? How is banning a game with no death, gore or killing reasonable when they sell they are happy to sell Saint's Row (swearing, murder, drugs, gang violence), Call of Duty 3 (realistic violence), or Company of Heroes (violence, swearing), or take pre-orders for GTA 4 (what the fuck?), Hitman: Blood Money (murder, violence) all through their pcworld.co.uk website. That isn't reasonable, that's hypocrisy. Besides, the Bully game has a 15 rating in Europe. If they are being reasonable and consistent they should pull all 15 & 18 rated games.

      It's one thing to stop kids from buying games that are rated. It's quite another to irrationally and erroneously single out one particular game when there are far worse ones on their shelves.

    7. Re:No biggie by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

      If they want to have such a family friendly image then don't stock any game above the 15 rating.

      Also what has "recent history shown"?

      As i said i would believe the family line if they refused to stock all games that got a ratign higher than the 15+.

      --
      You mad
    8. Re:No biggie by LargeWu · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's pretty apparent, they come right out and say it - they object to school violence specifically, rather than violence in general.

    9. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Are you sure that it's video games that make you go blind? I remember the priest telling me it was something else... ;)

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    10. Re:No biggie by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The fact that someone has the right to make a stupid, mis-informed, panders-to-ignorant decision does not make it any less stupid, any less mis-informed, or any less pandering to ignorant. Just as they have the right to make that decision, people have the right to complain about it. In a context where people are making the most outrageous and clearly untrue allegations about the game, a retailer who refuses to stock it on the basis of largely, apparently, bogus allegations deserves criticism, whether it's their right to refuse to stock it or not.

      Every time there's a story about some institution promoting this kind of ignorance, there's always someone who comes up with the whole "It's their right!" bullshit. But nobody is saying it's not their right.

      Quit it with the straw men and address the issues here. Stop acting as if everytime someone has the legal right to make a decision, it's somehow beyond criticism. Dixon's decision is very much open to criticism, far more so than Rockstar's decision to make the game in the first place.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    11. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they want to have such a family friendly image then don't stock any game above the 15 rating.

      Oh, so you are saying that's it's "all or nothing". The quote was "'We took a view that because it touches on a sensitive issue -- violence in school -- that it is not a product we would stock." Really, is that what you're saying?

      Also what has "recent history shown"?

      Recent history has shown that extreme violence in schools knows no socioeconomic boundries. It can happen in an inner city school just as much as it can happen in an Amish school. It's far more reaching and far more unpredictable than much of the violence depicted in series like GTA. Big city, small town, it doesn't matter.

    12. Re:No biggie by m0rph3us0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe Families find that killing people is something they value, while beating up kids at school is not. Many people are OK with the concept of prisions, but not kidnapping / unlawful confinement. It's their store, if you want to make a store that stocks only gore games, go right ahead, and when the city council won't grant you a business permit we will rally right behind you. Freedom is the ability to do what you want, not make others do what you want.

    13. Re:No biggie by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Every store should have the right (and does in most places) to stock what games or products it wants, and if they think a title is not good for their customers, they don't stock it. Not sure why this is news.

      Of course they can carry what they like. The 'news' part is, they've done this without having actually seen the game (banned before it went on sale). So in this sense they can ban all they like, but we know for a fact that this was indeed a kneejerk reaction; they simply decided the controversy would cost more than selling the game. On that one I think they are probably wrong - but this is not a major games chain primarily, so its just WalMart all over again.

      --
      If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    14. Re:No biggie by grumbel · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I am sure some will scream "censorship!", which is of course silly, and only the government can censor.

      In a strict sense that is of course right. However what Walmart and other big retailers do results in practically the same situation. Publishers try very hard to avoid AO raitings, because an AO game simply couldn't be sold since the large retailers won't stock it. Its of course still the publishers that decides what should go in or out of a game, but ultimatly they get it dictated by Walmart and friends. The choice between 'publishing what you want and going bankrupt' and 'publishing what Walmart says and getting stuff sold' isn't exactly a free choice.

      Its of course everybodys decisions what he wants to stocks and what not, if large retailers however get so large that they are close to monopoly they get far more influence then they should have.

    15. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Strawman? People are saying "they shouldn't do that". The real strawman is when people say they support someone's Rights, but only if those Rights agree with their own ideals. The nut of it is that they don't want to sell games that show school house violence, and you think they should because they sell games that show other kinds of violence. They draw the line when it involves violence at the school house. This is controversial?

      The solutions are simple. Don't shop there. Vote with your dollars. Boycott them. Go stand in front with a picket sign. Buy their stock out and change the policy. Lame about it on Slashdot. Pick one.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    16. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      The choice between 'publishing what you want and going bankrupt' and 'publishing what Walmart says and getting stuff sold' isn't exactly a free choice.

      I understand what you are saying, but as a point of comparison: on the pc platform, over 80% of the online gamers playing FPS games are doing so on Steam. You can buy the games at Walmart, but you don't have to, and they don't carry all the titles. I am not sure that Walmart is the #1 seller of games, although it is desireable to be there. In an internet world, I would image that at least 50% of the games sold are done online anyway. I just can't see Walmart as having a monopoly when you have Kmart, Best Buy, CompUSA, and lots of other big box stores selling games.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    17. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You use there/their incorrectly twice in two different ways, and once correctly in your post. Please refresh your middle school grammar skills.

    18. Re:No biggie by laxcat · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't know if they're reacting to the game itself or to its (most definitely misinformed) reaction in the public. But misinformed or not, the reason they state for not carrying this game just happens to be true. I played 4 hours or so of the game last night and it most certainly "touches on a sensitive issue -- violence in school." Overblown in the media? You bet. But the simple fact of it is this game has plenty of violence in it. No guns, sure. No one dies, sure. But I've beat up like 20 kids already with pretty much no consequences. Some people in the community might, and justifiably so, take offense to that.

      It should also be noted that a good number of these beatings were required to progress in the game.

      That said, I don't feel as if the US rating of "T for Teen" is wrong. I understand the rating is even a little stiffer in the UK.

    19. Re:No biggie by malzraa · · Score: 0

      Just because it is their right doesn't mean it IS right. Stephen Hawking is well within his rights to quit science and take up bowling, but that would be a stupid decision and have negative ramifications for the general population. As does voluntary censorship.

    20. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I am sure some will scream "censorship!", which is of course silly, and only the government can censor."

      So, you're saying that if the mafia decides to monitor the press and use threat of force to alter publicity, it doesn't involve censorship. After all, the mafia isn't the government, right?

      This is nonsense. Any organization or cartel with sufficient wealth/power can censor. Censorship is merely the deletion or suppression of other people's speech to control their power or behavior.

      Just as the government cannot, even through censorship, completely inhibit the movement of a piece of information, non-governmental organizations seeking to censor can only do it in proportion to their coercive strength.

      On a small or individual scale it's not censorship, and it may well not be censorship in this case. It is, however, delusional to believe that only governments are capable of censorship.

    21. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Telling you... or showing you?

    22. Re:No biggie by PeelBoy · · Score: 1

      The problem here is that they are banning it for the wrong reasons.

      They haven't even played the game, they have absolutely no idea what it is about.

      The only reason they are banning the game is the same reason everybody else wants it banned. It's a game called "Bully" and it's made by Rockstar.

      That's it. That is the only reason. Because it's called Bully and made by Rockstar it must be some horrible game where you play as a Bully and go around killing innocent children in school.

      Fact is these people don't bother to do any research and know nothing about the game. Go read the descriptions some of these people have come up with for the game. They're completely wrong.

      Funny thing is these same stores still have games like Saints Row.

      Rockstar is making these people all look like idiots.

    23. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      As does voluntary censorship

      Censorship is ONLY when a government does not allow someone to speak freely. "Voluntary censorship" is just two words put together, they mean nothing no matter how cool you think they sound together, nor how abuse this phrase is.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    24. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      So, you're saying that if the mafia decides to monitor the press and use threat of force to alter publicity, it doesn't involve censorship. After all, the mafia isn't the government, right?

      Correct. That is called extortion. Look it up, as it isn't my job to educate you.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    25. Re:No biggie by profplump · · Score: 1

      Maybe you're not saying it isn't their right, but some people are. Jack Thompson, for instance.

      I agree that we should discourage retailers from making sales policy decisions based on misleading or false information. But it's also important to acknowledge that their sales policies, if based on acurate information, can be reasonable even if you don't agree.

      The game *is* about school violence. It doesn't necessarily encourage school violence, but that is one of the themes in gameplay. School violence *is* a hot topic. It may not be a new topic, and the discussion may not be terribly insightful, but it is a touchy subject for some people. So it's not totally unreasonable for a store to decide not to sell this game; it may in fact be a good overall sales strategy, depending on their target market. A large bit of sales is the direct result of pandering. You may not like that, but it's a fact of life.

      Now if you wanted to whine about the people who want to be pandered to, and who would praise a retailer for making choices like this I'd be behind you 100%. I just don't think we should hold retailers to a higher degree of social responsibility than we do the customers that shop there.

    26. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      The market has a way of self-correcting, so if it isn't that bad of a game, other retailers will sell it and they will miss out on the revenue. To me, it isn't a big deal because it isn't infringing someone speech or limiting their ability to get the game (which isn't a "right" per se). If they screwed up, they will realize it eventually.

      I don't like the idea of a game designed around bullying in a school house, although i will defend your right to make one. I would also defend anyone's right to not sell it. Why they banned it doesn't matter to me as I can get it elsewhere if I so choose. I'm not here to say they are smart or dumb, just that they have the right to be smart or dumb. Admittedly, I CAN see why they would draw the line at schoolhouse violence, considering recent events. Whether I agree or not is not relevant with their rights.

      Again, I am not supporting what they did, just their right to do it.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    27. Re:No biggie by lgw · · Score: 1

      And yet the game is primarily about *preventing* school violence, so it's all very odd.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    28. Re:No biggie by lgw · · Score: 1

      I was chatting with the local game store proprietor about this recently. He expects PC games to stop selling on shelves within a year. He expects to stock only console games for christmas 07, as the PC market will have gone 100% online sales. It's not just Steam: a game developer gives up a lot of profit and a lot of control to put physical boxes on the shelf - if you can reach the same gamers online the profits are much higher for the same retail price.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    29. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you aware that an action can be described by multiple words? For example, when you walk to the store, you are both "walking" and "going to the store."

      "Look it up, as it isn't my job to educate you."

      Though it would surely be a great boon to receive from you, I'd probably decline in deference to your greater need.

    30. Re:No biggie by lgw · · Score: 1
      I don't like the idea of a game designed around bullying in a school house,


      It seems that Rockstar didn't make that game. It's a headfake. While the game does involve violence in schools, the point of the game seems to be to confront school bullies and force them to see the error of their ways. I haven't seen a complete walkthrough yet, but it looks like Rockstar will be having the last laugh on this one.

      Anyhow, you seem to have missed Peelboy's whole point: the game is not being banned based on content, but simply on it's name and producer. Rather sad, really.
      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    31. Re:No biggie by Osiris+Ani · · Score: 1
      The real strawman is when people say they support someone's Rights, but only if those Rights agree with their own ideals.

      You'll find that it's very rare for people who claim to be great lovers of freedom to actually bear that conviction far beyond endorsing your freedom to agree with and act in accordance with their very specific points of view.

    32. Re:No biggie by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      I don't think Steam is the ultimate (although I have several of their games) but they have proven that online sales work. Personally, I LIKE not having to install, type in the key, find the cd to play, etc.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    33. Re:No biggie by orcrist · · Score: 1
      Censorship is ONLY when a government does not allow someone to speak freely. "Voluntary censorship" is just two words put together, they mean nothing no matter how cool you think they sound together, nor how abuse this phrase is.

      *Sigh* Not this 'factoid' again. Let's start with a dictionary definition:
      Censor
      : to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable "censor the news"; also
      : to suppress or delete as objectionable "censor out indecent passages"


      The only aspect of censorship which is tied to being performed by the government is the fact that the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution implicitly forbids the government from doing it. That does not mean that other censorship is not censorship, which in turn means that "Voluntary censorship" is a completely valid phrase. 'Correcting' this kind of usage of the word 'censor' is apparently something that wanna-be grammar nazis have started clinging to recently, but no matter how cool you think it is be very exacting about language, you should check that you're being exacting about the right thing; IOW look it up first!

      -chris
      --
      San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
    34. Re:No biggie by malzraa · · Score: 0
      nor how abuse this phrase is.
      Speaking of abusing a phrase... Besides, Chomosky has written many books about "voluntary censorship". Would you call what the *AA does censorship? They aren't government, but they sure as hell are bad for the free flow of thought and information.
    35. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure GTA 3 had a mission where you have to kill a bunch of gang members in a schoolyard....
      Yeah, you mean violence involving schoolchildren.

    36. Re:No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ... which is of course silly ....

      Ahhh, the mating call of the terminally rightreous -- those who can, at a glance, determine what is right for all others.

      I am sure some will scream "censorship!", which is of course silly, and only the government can censor. I call this "setting standards for what products you carry". If you really want Bully, I am sure there are plenty of other places that sell it.

      ... again showing how very little you know. Actually anyone can censor within their domain, not just the government. If all vendors in the area choose not to carry the product, that's de facto censorship, whether the government is involved or not.

      We've had a recent similar example in the drug industry. Many large retailers, with no apparent law to push them, decided to make it much harder to get meds with pseudoephedrine. They took it off the shelves; limited purchases per day, week, month, whatever; will sell only to adults; make you proffer id and sign their Stalinist little register before they will "permit" you to buy. If that's not corporate censorship, there is none.

      However, I wonder if all those bitching about Bully have ever done anything to protest Blockbuster's exclusion of skin flicks from their stores.

      Just another example of the poisonous "family friendly" PC bulllshit.

  3. -1 Misleading by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Funny

    Clearly they are not refusing to stock it because of its content -- the British apparently have some fetish against single-word titles.

    Are they offering Pong, Gorf, or Combat? I rest my case!

    1. Re:-1 Misleading by Broken+scope · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is called canis canum edit (Dog eat Dog) in europe.

      --
      You mad
    2. Re:-1 Misleading by 'nother+poster · · Score: 1

      Why the hell didn't they name it that here in the states? Ooops. Sorry. Now I remember. That name is too long for our attention span. Look, that kid has a beanie with a propeller...

    3. Re:-1 Misleading by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

      Eh, i like latin, it sounds elegant at times. Dog eat Dog.

      --
      You mad
    4. Re:-1 Misleading by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like something you'd see in the roped-off section of a sleazy video store.

    5. Re:-1 Misleading by madaxe42 · · Score: 1

      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amit amicitus est.

    6. Re:-1 Misleading by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    7. Re:-1 Misleading by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      I rather think they re-named it (it's canem, by the way, not canum -- the misspelling could make life difficult for someone trying to find it in an online shop) because they figured British customers would be alienated by the word "bully". School bullying is probably the single hottest issue in public discussion of the school system in the UK. Well, maybe number 2.

    8. Re:-1 Misleading by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

      Okay gimme me a little while. est.... is amicitus friend. not sure of the grammer. I said i liked how it sounded, i didn't say i remember anything from highschool.

      --
      You mad
    9. Re:-1 Misleading by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Qui custodes custode.

      Who will protect us from our protectors?

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    10. Re:-1 Misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:-1 Misleading by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      It's not real latin. It's parts of words from one of Cicero's works though.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  4. Remove it from the shelf by gomiam · · Score: 1

    ...and it will do so much to stop people downloading it from somewhere else.

    1. Re:Remove it from the shelf by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 1

      I don't think they're trying to stop people from buying it, they just choose not to support that game. Like the fact that I don't sell pornography doesn't mean that I give a shit if people buy it from somewhere else. I just choose to not support that.

  5. PC World and Currys... by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just to clarify, PC World and Currys are NOT major games retailers, Currys is an electrical goods store and PC World is primarily for PC hardware. This isn't much of a blow to Rockstar at all.

    --
    Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    1. Re:PC World and Currys... by EVil+Lawyer · · Score: 1

      I think people care less about how this will affect Rockstar than just the general issue of a store refusing to carry a game based on its content. Perhaps the most salient issue is a store refusing to carry a game based on grounds that are completely unfounded: Bully contains little to no violence.

    2. Re:PC World and Currys... by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 1

      Any store can refuse to stock any title it feels like for whatever reason. The only reason this is news is because they have come out and explained why they are not socking it. If they hadn't come out and explained, no-one would have noticed. They'd maybe have tried to buy it in those stores, found it wasn't there, and gone along to Game or HMV, or a Virgin Megastore etc etc instead.

      I suspect these stores are putting this story out into the press, because as the grandparent says, these stores aren't really known for selling games and this is a way for them to remind people that they do.

      Bob

    3. Re:PC World and Currys... by joe+155 · · Score: 1

      indeed, they did this over manhunt aswell, but Gamestation - who are one of two biggest game retailers in the UK (I think the biggest) - continued to stock it. I'd image that because of this it'll sell quite well

      --
      *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
  6. There will always be a few by Thansal · · Score: 1

    Companies like Walmart and this group (I am not a brit, so I am not familiar with 'em). They wana be a family friendly company and only stock family friendly games. So be it.

    I am still curious about Bully, is it realy about school violence? To me getting into a fist fight isn't school violence. School violence involves knives, guns, and sever beatings.

    Are there any reviews out there on the game yet? or moreo n what the game is HONESTLY like? All I have seen are the numerous articles about that idiot attacking the game, and nothing about what the game is really like.

    Is it GTA style? Can you wander around and just pick up 'missions'? Is it a more linear story line ? Is it a linear story line with choice on what path to follow (ala Deus Ex)?

    cmon now, I am a gamer, I am interested in the game, not the 'negative' hype!

    --
    Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
    1. Re:There will always be a few by Jamu · · Score: 1
      --
      Who ordered that?
    2. Re:There will always be a few by linuxci · · Score: 1

      Walmart's so called moral values for the items they stock vary on a country by country basis to fit their target demographic. Obviously they decide that banning anything slighly offensive is a pointless policy in the UK that will only lower their sales as people will go elsewhere.

    3. Re:There will always be a few by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I am still curious about Bully, is it realy about school violence? To me getting into a fist fight isn't school violence. School violence involves knives, guns, and sever beatings... Are there any reviews out there on the game yet? or moreo n what the game is HONESTLY like? All I have seen are the numerous articles about that idiot attacking the game, and nothing about what the game is really like.

      I can tell you what its really like. Played for hours last night.

      First off: it is basically GTA meets Harry Potter. But the violence is nowhere near what GTA was; for instance, nobody ever dies, you can't kill people (near as I can tell). And I didn't see any blood.

      What you will see is your protagonist hoodlum kid - who is not particularly likeable - immediately set upon by one of the myriad other cliques in the school (jocks, preps, etc). And yes, they sometimes come at you sporting planks of wood or bricks or slingshots.

      And you beat the living crap out of them.

      Now, I will leave it as an exercise to the reader if this goes beyond the bounds of 'acceptable' entertainment. I thought it was a blast. It is basically your standard male revenge-fantasy, put into a GTA-like sandbox setting with a lot of crisscrossing plot points that you can pick up and put down at will.

      Getting into fights will get you busted by overpowering 'prefects' who are essentially the cops of the game. You 'wake up' at the Principal's Office, or the infimary, etc. when this happens. If you get away, you get away. The only thing you can do to the prefects is a fast kick in the nuts, and then you hoof it out of there (or into a locker, or trash can; many shades of Metal Gear in this part of the game - particularly the hiding in lockers part).

      If you attack a girl, she instantly neuters you and runs away at light speed. Then the prefects nab you.

      So - its not like Columbine, even remotely. No firearms. No trenchcoats. In the standard Rockstar style, they try to obviate the lighter moral questions by making sure that practically every character in the game is an utter bastard in some respect or another. The prefects are assholes. The nerds are assholes (they can't fight but have other tricks). The teachers are assholes. Everyone is an asshole, including you.

      (I tried playing the game initally as a sort of 'noble Bully' and you can do that - but quickly you realise that you are just helping another faction.)

      So in the end, the controversy is that kids beat each other up in this game and play mean pranks. That's it. It's rated T for Teen in Canada, and that is a fair rating in my opinion.

      --
      If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    4. Re:There will always be a few by Thansal · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

      I think I will deffinatly be picking it up then. I love the GTA style sandbox game, and Rockstar's black humour. That and the voice acting reminds me of Fable (a game I still pick up every so often)....

      (yes, my FP was really just trying to find out if I wanted to buy the game or not)

      --
      Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
  7. Hahaha by imaginaryelf · · Score: 1

    This will ensure the game's success.

  8. so??? It's a private enterprise by davidwr · · Score: 1

    "Nothing for you to see here."

    Private enterprises can stock or not stock whatever they want.

    It's not like they are a regulated monopoly or utility or anything.

    They'll lose some business and gain some business. Those who want to buy the game can buy it elsewhere or even organize a boycott if they want to make a statement.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:so??? It's a private enterprise by deadstatue · · Score: 1

      exactly right......blockbuster doesnt stock any porn, by choice, i dont see anybody complaining about them.let them sell what they want. you can start bitching when governments start banning games in certain countries altogether.

  9. Different name by Jboost · · Score: 1

    Interestingly, the game is called "Canis Canem Edit" here in Europe to avoid these kind of reactions .

    1. Re:Different name by EVil+Lawyer · · Score: 1

      WTF? How did they decide on Canis Canem Edit? Is Latin really hot in Europe right now? I see that the translaion is "Dog Eat Dog"-- that is perhaps a vaguely appropriate title, but I cannot understand the Latin approach.

    2. Re:Different name by Wizard+Drongo · · Score: 1

      I believe that Canis Canem Edit is the motto of the school in the game. Of note, it wouldn't really be that much of a biggie in Europe, since europeans are used to games being in either a foreign language (english) or having elements in a foreign language (often even if a game is translated, characters names, levels, and other in-game stuff isn't.). Of course, here in the UK, we'd probably find it a little baffling as to why a game is in latin, just as the yanks will. I guess the only difference between us and the USA in this area is that a fair number of UK people will realise it's latin, not some weird language or alien pseudo-language. There may even be some total freaks like me that know a little latin.

      --
      The truth shall always be free: Boris Floricic is Tron.
  10. Frist Psot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First Post!!!!1111oneone!

  11. In other news... by Xest · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...Scientists discover that the amount of Dixons stores in the UK is inverseley proportional to the amount of games they ban.

    Keep on digging Dixons, those high street stores are dropping like flies, this kind of stunt isn't going to save you!

    On a more serious note it's a shame that our stores seem to so freely endorse censorship but then I've never understoond this country, sometimes we seem to be fairly free in what we can do and say and Americans envy this and other times we seem to be so pro censorship on certain issues yet no one seems to bat an eyelid. Things certainly seem to be done differently here, in the US there's lawsuits to ban bully but shops sound like they're willing to stock it, here individual stores randomly decide to put themselves at a competitive disadvantage by banning it off their own back, I'll never understand that one, I guess they just feel that it strengthens their family friendly brand which I guess is understandable, it is only your run of the mill know nothing about IT families that do shop at Dixons/PC World.

    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is somewhat dimwitted.

      Dixons group rebranded _all_ of its high street stores to Curry's Digital, and closed some. It probably has very little to do with games sales, which you could hardly call a major part of their business, and more to do with the fact that it is no longer cost-effective to have a huge chain of stores _and_ an internet operation _and_ out-of-town megastores.

      It's not 'censorship', deciding not to stock a product which is at odds with your image. It's also not a 'stunt' to do so, though pursuing PR about it might be.

      You don't shop at DSG stores - good for you. Nor do I - I can usually find something cheaper elsewhere with no loss of convenience. Just try not to make out that it is ideology when it is really just snobbishness.

  12. Banned? Too strong a word. by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do specialist Heavy-Metal music shops "ban" classical music? No, they just choose not to stock it.

    Why? Because they don't think their intended audience want to see it in the shop.

    That's all DSG are doing: choosing their stock to suit their market.

    HAL

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    1. Re:Banned? Too strong a word. by LoudMusic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's all DSG are doing: choosing their stock to suit their market.

      I don't know if I'm surprised that /. used a media hype tactic, but you are correct. "Banned" is not the appropriate word. They've simply decided to not stock the product.

      A friend of mine ownes what is effectively a modern arcade. He has XBoxes and PCs set up for playing current games and actually packs the house on the weekends, with regular customers throughout the weekdays. Parents often ask him what kinds of games the children will be playing and what activities go on there. He tries to keep it clean and friendly and chooses to not offer certain games. It keeps the parents happy and after all it's their money he's getting.

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
  13. Bully for some... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...tiny Union Jacks for others! /YAY!

  14. The best part? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The game is totally tame. It just got a "T for Teen" rating from the ESRB. With the provocative title, Rockstar totally played the press and Jack Thompson like a fiddle.

  15. In some countries this might BE censorship by davidwr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you lived in a country with only one major retailer, or a single consortium of retailers who as a whole decided to not carry the game, then this would be a good SlashDot Censorship story.

    Even then, you could still buy it online or from abroad, or from a minor "independent" retailer. But that's a lot more work than going to your nearby Super Mega Mart or even your corner Kwikee-Mart.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:In some countries this might BE censorship by RexRhino · · Score: 1

      What country are you speaking of?

  16. I'm guessing by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

    Do ya think they'll carry "Destroy All Humans 2"?

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  17. Oh well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their loss. There are plently of other retailers who'll be happy to take the money.

  18. I wish more stores would ban games by the+Gray+Mouser · · Score: 0

    Especially the ones that suck.

    That would save me a lot of money, time, and grief from picking a bad title that looked good on the box.

    1. Re:I wish more stores would ban games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha ha! *wipes tear* Oh, that's so Raven!

  19. Ironic by keyne9 · · Score: 1

    It's ironic that they'd ban a game that denounces bullying, yet still sell games that allow the cold-blooded murder of prostitutes (GTA series). I guess they're "thinking of the children."

    1. Re:Ironic by LargeWu · · Score: 1

      Yes, but retaliating against bullies is often cited as a primary reason for many real school shootings. The Bully game specifically relates to that, and they don't want to seem like they're condoning that behavior.
      Here, retaliating against bullies is the central focus of gameplay in the Bully game. In the GTA games, yes you can kill prostitutes, but then again you can kill everybody, and while killing people takes a central role in the GTA series, killing prostitutes specifically does not. Now it could be argued that killing gang members and drug dealers is no better than killing prostitutes, but that is another argument.

    2. Re:Ironic by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1
      Yes, but retaliating against bullies is often cited as a primary reason for many real school shootings.


      Such retailitations are often cited as the primary symptom of a defective school system that railroads students into an artifical social environment.

      Any of the following will significantly cut down on the number of "school shootings":
      - Private tutoring. (e.g. Home schooling or private schooling)
      - Education based on skill level instead of chronological age.
      - Reducing the impact of young offender protections (e.g. repeat violent offencers are more likely to enter adult court.)
      - Providing an education within public schools.
      - Removing the "grind" necessary to advance through most courses. (Not recommended, but neither is the 2:1 homework ratio that appears to be the most common.)
      - Martial arts training.

      In the GTA games, yes you can kill prostitutes, but then again you can kill everybody, and while killing people takes a central role in the GTA series, killing prostitutes specifically does not. Now it could be argued that killing gang members and drug dealers is no better than killing prostitutes, but that is another argument.


      In GTA, the player is already implied to have made the choice to enter a life of crime. (In theory, he could pull out and travel across the world and change carreers.)

      In Bully, the player is railroaded by his parents - he doesn't have a choice in his path.

      Whether one is better than the other isn't much of an issue - the issue is that the PC is forced to do his actions and doesn't have much of a choice.
  20. Times change by mccalli · · Score: 1
    Twenty years or so I bought my copy of Skool Daze from Dixons. It requires you to flatten teachers, punch other kids or knock them over with a catapult and the objective is to steal your school report from what I remember (might be your exam results).

    Cheers,
    Ian

    1. Re:Times change by eddy · · Score: 1

      I played Skool Daze, but never figured out what you were supposed to do.

      If only we had had Wikipedia back in 1985.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    2. Re:Times change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All in gloriously realistic two-colours-per-block Speccy graphics! Yeah, fun times. I think those concerned have an eye on graphics becoming more like video simulation though...

  21. As Jim Bowen would say... by linuxci · · Score: 1
    You can't beat a bit of bully

    80-90's UK TV reference

    1. Re:As Jim Bowen would say... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      My favorite British comedy reference is...

      How's that for a slice of fried gold?

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  22. To capitalize on hot coffee by tepples · · Score: 1

    The name gives Rockstar an out when people modify the game to add unsavory content: "That's not Canis Canem Edit; that's Canis Canem Edited ."

  23. They aren't specialist shops though. by Generic+Player · · Score: 1

    These are not specialist shops, far from it. They are like futureshop or best buy. And they have carried plenty of other games that are actually violent. This game is rated T, and is very tame. If they were simply not carrying violent games, or games that are rated M then you would have a point. But they are singling out this particular game because it involves a kid who goes to school.

  24. Actually not very violent by barkholt · · Score: 1
    According to this http://ps2.gamespy.com/playstation-2/bully/739868p 1.html review the game is actually not violent in the sense that GTA is violent.

    "Interestingly, the title of the game has less to do with bullying and more to do with a play on the name of the school. Bully essentially puts players in the role of a likeable young hero, not quite as Machiavellian as the characters that players have taken control of in GTA titles."

    Sounds like an interesting game.

    --
    - barkholt
  25. Banned? How sensational. by PFI_Optix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The stores didn't ban it. They chose not to sell it. They made a business decision and that's their right. This isn't a ban; they won't be preventing others from selling it or kicking in your door to take it from you.

    But don't let the facts get in the way of your Slashbotism.

    --
    120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  26. One Rule For the Upper Class Bullies by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Another one for the consumers who patronize their shops.

    The reason they wanted to ban it from their stores - where they do sell GTA and other games - is that it would expose their "public schools" (British for what Americans call "private schools") and the abusive bullying that most of the upper class twits take as a given.

    It's a sensitive issue, sure. Sensitive because it exposes them for what they are.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:One Rule For the Upper Class Bullies by foolAloof · · Score: 1

      i'm not sure about the age-rating for this game. if they are seriously concerned about the game promoting "violence", surely they could just check the id card of the customers? just to make sure that the buyer is far older than average schoolers. of course, this won't stop the kids from asking someone older to buy the game for them, or downloading it.

  27. Why is this a story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone who thinks that this is censorship is a fucktard and an asshat. Get your thumb out of your ass and get on with your lives.

  28. Waa? by thelonestranger · · Score: 1

    Really? Who the hell actually goes to Currys or PC World to buy games? I dont even go to PC World to buy PC stuff let alone games. Nothing to see here, move along.

    --
    To err is human. To forgive is not company policy.
    1. Re:Waa? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno, my local PC world has a pretty decent games section. They probably carry as many PC games as GAME or Gamestation, at the same prices, and have a reasonable selection of console stuff too (no gamecube though). They even have demo stations sometimes. I don't buy from them because online is cheaper and I prefer to get console games used, but if I wasn't a cheapskate or needed a game in a hurry I would go there.
      It's the best out-of-town PC games place in my area, though I think supermarkets might be better for consoles. Horrible ambience, but I can cope for 10 minutes.

  29. You're right, but it doesn't matter by LKM · · Score: 1

    Yes, they have every right in the world to not sell whatever they want. Here's the thing: Nobody disputes that.

    Nobody is claiming that they should be forced to stock the game.

    People are simply discussing their intentions. You yourself say that we "can choose not to shop there," but in order to do that, we need to be informed about what's going on. That's why this discussion here occurs: To alert people that they may not want to shop there if they disagree with this chain's politics.

    So you're right, they have the right to not sell whatever they want. It's just that for this discussion, it doesn't matter at all.