"25 to Life" Demonized by Senator, Free Publicity for Eidos

[Cha-Ka]

Once again, a U.S. Senator blames anyone but parents for kids who play violent, Mature-rated games.

Read the story here. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/320618p-274211c.html)

[Aries7777]

LOL, silly senator, violent mature rated videogames are for kids.

[Varsity]

Blaming something or someone is one thing, but doing something about it is quite another.

Games like these might deal with adult content but in very childish, stereotyped ways. 'Gangsta' culture is popular amongst city-dwelling children and look: here's a 'gangsta' game set in a city! Children ARE going to play it, it WILL be bad for some, and pointing fingers WON'T achieve anything. Games like these are too much. Don't say parents should control their children or shops shouldn't sell it to them: neither will happen where it matters.

[GigaFuzz]

The game, created by the British company Eidos, is similar to the best-selling "Grand Theft Auto" series, currently in its fifth incarnation: "San Andreas."

Surely it's in it's 6th incarnation: GTA, GTA:London, GTA2, GTA 3, :VC, :SA.

Sorry, had to nitpick.

[NACIONAL]

this will be a never ending story until the frightened people finds another excuse to blame their own stupidity...

[Sion]

London was an expantion

[gojira]

Well, it's publised by Eidos, so is anyone actually expecting it to be good and sell?

Maybe the free publicity being generated by this senator's comments will actually sell more games than otherwise.

Way to go, US Senate.

[Cha-Ka]

Don't say parents should control their children or shops shouldn't sell it to them: neither will happen where it matters.

Controlling a child to a certain degree is part of parenting. That means not only helping your child to understand the world around then but, when appropriate, to also shield them from seeing things their squishy minds might get the wrong impression from. A good parent cannot hope to morally sanitize the lives of thier children, but to arm the young minds with the lessons they'll need to make thier own informed decisions "where it matters".

People like this Senator crack me up: they strive to censor the world around them in the name of freedom.

[GigaFuzz]

London was an expantion

Heh, guess that makes a pointless post even more pointless... I should have done a wee bit of research before posting. :)

Back on topic:
As Varsity says, this kind of game is very popular with a certain demographic, and I can imagine a lot of "Hey look at this cool way I just killed a cop!" comments to their friends.

[Varsity]

A good parent cannot hope to morally sanitize the lives of thier children, but to arm the young minds with the lessons they'll need to make thier own informed decisions "where it matters".I agree. But the fact remains that the people who learn that are the ones who don't need to.

[Commissar Rob]

Controlling a child to a certain degree is part of parenting. That means not only helping your child to understand the world around then but, when appropriate, to also shield them from seeing things their squishy minds might get the wrong impression from. A good parent cannot hope to morally sanitize the lives of thier children, but to arm the young minds with the lessons they'll need to make thier own informed decisions "where it matters".



Yep, it's not fun, but that's part of the job. My wife and I decided SW:III was a bit much for our seven year old. He wasn't happy, but that's just part of the job description. I'm also not going to let him play RE or GTA... :eek:

The teen years get a lot harder...but video games are pretty low on the list of things they can do eh?

[j00s]

Children ARE going to play it, it WILL be bad for some, and pointing fingers WON'T achieve anything. Games like these are too much.

I may be wrong, but it seems as if you believe that games like these simply should not be made, for fear of them corrupting some young mind. If that's the case, where should you draw the line? After all, your run-of-the-mill, "innocent" RPG promotes robbery, home-invasion and the wholesale slaughter of anything that gets in your way. Even Gran Turismo 4 could be blamed for speeding and unsafe driving in young adults.

It IS the responsibilty of the parent to censor what their child experiences, to some degree. It's also their responsibility to teach them the difference between reality and fiction, between right and wrong and to respect others. I very much doubt any of these crimes blamed on games were committed by children who were growing up in happy, healthy families.

If you get rid of the games, the next scapegoat will be movies and television. Get rid of those and it'll be music. Get rid of that and it'll be books. Really, blaming entertainment is absurd.

[EL CABONG]

did anyone see 60 minutes last night an 18 year old who shot 3 cops after being arrested for steailing a car and is useing the gta made me do it defence. they said it trains kids to kill even tho its a game that says its not for kids on the box and the "kid" was 18 an adult.

even if it was true what we should get rid of 'bad games" eventho adults like myself buy them and play them and committ no crimes. lets just take away normal law abideng peoples rights just because somebodys kid is useing the video games made me do it defence to try and get off.

some games are not for kids.but kids that kill peopls are messed up anyway.what ever happened to the idea that there are crazy people, why do we have to try and make the killer the victom?

[Dirty Harry]

London was an expantion
if you want to really nit pick, there is only 3 gta games, london, vice city and san andreas are all expansion packs in my opinion.

[Sloth]

Damn republicans and their moral majority...oh wait. Thats a democrat doing the whining. What is the world coming to when you can't blame the Republicans?

[MosBen]

Thought VC and SA don't have numbers in their names, I think the technological increases between games justifies calling them separate games and not simply expansions.

And as long as I'm here I might as well say what I always say in this stories: Though parents definitely need to be held responsible, kids should not be able to buy these types of games. The label says it's not for kids and there's no reason why stores should be allowed to simply ignore that just to get another sale.

[Varsity]

I may be wrong, but it seems as if you believe that games like these simply should not be made, for fear of them corrupting some young mind. If that's the case, where should you draw the line? After all, your run-of-the-mill, "innocent" RPG promotes robbery, home-invasion and the wholesale slaughter of anything that gets in your way. Even Gran Turismo 4 could be blamed for speeding and unsafe driving in young adults.
I draw the line at overly violent games clearly aimed at children and youth culture that portray events which are believable to them. IMO Doom 3 is fine because it is clearly absurd and unlike anything that will ever actually happen, but 25 to Life is trying to emulate what kids consider cool and is doing so in an at least somewhat believable environment, one that is right outside some kid's doors, albeit in it's non-stereotyped form.

[Kefkataran]

I draw the line at overly violent games clearly aimed at children and youth culture that portray events which are believable to them. IMO Doom 3 is fine because it is clearly absurd and unlike anything that will ever actually happen, but 25 to Life is trying to emulate what kids consider cool and is doing so in an at least somewhat believable environment, one that is right outside some kid's doors, albeit in it's non-stereotyped form.

I agree to a point. I agree that the game is ridiculous. It's pretty obviously full of bad stereotyping and aimed towards the "hip-hop" teenager crowd. there's no doubt there. But I do not agree that the game shouldn't be made. Why?

Free speech.

Would I choose to make something so trite and in bad taste? Never. Can I step behind taking away someone else's right to make it? Never.

[Varsity]

Make the game by all means, just don't make it for kids. Sure they have a right to free speech but that doesn't (and certainly shouldn't) mean they can use it irresponsibly.

[Alexious]

Whatever happened to the industry regulating itself? Aren't the stores already supposed to be checking ID's on some of these M-rated games?

A related question: why is the editorial opinion here on EA usually so strongly against laws preventing the sale of some games to minors? It sounds, at least in this thread, like most of us would agree that to purchase an M-rated game you should have to be 18.

[Kefkataran]

Make the game by all means, just don't make it for kids. Sure they have a right to free speech but that doesn't (and certainly shouldn't) mean they can use it irresponsibly.

They aren't giving it to kids, so there's not much else you can do except depend on good parenting and/or laws preventing sale to minors. Alexious is right. The industry SHOULD be self-regulating and stores SHOULD be checking IDs already. Unfortunately they aren't always, which is why laws are popping up.

[Luxoman]

The horrible irony of this entire thing is that the guys making this game, Avalanche... now OWNED BY A DISNEY COMPANY.... is the most innocent group of Mormon guys you have ever met. For the most part, at least.. not ALL of them are Mormon, but the vast majority, since they are based in Salt Lake City, Utah.

I mean, you meet these guys and think if they said 'Gee, Wally, that's swell', you wouldn't be the least bit shocked. They are just THAT nice. They are wholesome, fun, clever and intelligent guys from deep in the heart of Utah making a game about gangsters and killing cops...

It's kinda surreal in a way.

[KarmaGhost]

"It's not like I'm gonna do it in real life. I don't have the guts to do it."So a lack of courage is what's preventing her from shooting cops and using civilians as sheilds, rather than a wealth of common sense?

[Varsity]

there's not much else you can do except depend on good parenting and/or laws preventing sale to minors
Or not aim it at them.

[Darkbase]

I'm 15, and I own GTA2, 3, VC, and SA. I think they're great, but what I really enjoy about them aside from the writing (referances to movies, jokes, etc) is the feeling you get when you're driving, San Andreas is the best for this because of the large landscape and the grassland/mountainside area in one map (name escapes me). The violence is bad, but it's not more than what you'll see in most R rated movies or even on TV. My freinds and I will sometimes just go on pointless rampages in the game and shoot anyone we fell like with M4s and Rocket Launchers, but we would never, ever even consider doing that in actuallity, games are just that, you play them because you can do things in them that you couldn't or wouldn't do in real life, like fat guys winning at extreme sports. The only reason violent games get more media attention is because everyone feels that they are for kids, but that's not true, and most everyone on this site knows that. Sorry if I'm pointing out the obvious, but I just felt like getting my opinon across.

[Kefkataran]

Or not aim it at them.

Yeah, but how do you stop that? Businesses are going to push their product towards what's going to sell, what's popular in culture. Hip-hop and this silly gangster mentality are that right now. They happen to be popular among twelve year-olds as well as twenty-year-olds. I'm just not sure what it is you want done besides flat-out censorship.

Besides which, whether or not a title is "aimed at children" is completely based in opinion. It's just too hard to prove one way or another.

[Varsity]

Yeah, but how do you stop that?
Through laws, so I suppose what you said in the last post was right. :)

Besides which, whether or not a title is "aimed at children" is completely based in opinion. It's just too hard to prove one way or another.
To a court of law or robot, maybe, but we are humans.

[MosBen]

There are plenty of things that we restrict the use of to certain age groups, not because there are no people of that age group that could responsibly use them, but because society in general feels people under said age group shouldn't have them.

What has always amazed me about discussions like this is that by restricting the sale of M-rated games to adults, the industry could say to its critics, "Look, we're not selling these games to minors. It's the law! If kids are getting their hands on them it's either because the parents thought it was ok, were clueless as to what they were purchasing, or have no idea what other adults their kids are hanging out with." For all the people worried about censorship, making sure the games aren't being sold to minors when they're blatantly marked as for "adults only" seems to me like a good step to protecting the industry.

[Cha-Ka]

Well, if Mature games are going to be a controlled substance, then maybe we'll see a ban on advertising Mature games in comics books and television like they do with liquor and cigarettes. That would most likely hurt the industry's bottom line, but it would be one way to avoid marketing to the younger gamers.

[Kefkataran]

To a court of law or robot, maybe, but we are humans.

Which is exactly why it's scary to be playing with that. Humans are fallible. Think of it this way: I'm publishing a book. This book has violence. Somebody doesn't like me. Somebody says my book contains violence and is aimed towards kids. This was never my intention, but he argues it in court and gets my book censored or banned or whatever. I think free speech is worth more than that.

[MosBen]

Sharp Monkey, I don't think it has to be so black and white. It's perfectly reasonable to say that kids shouldn't be bought by kids, but that we don't also need to regulate them as much as alcohol or tobacco. I think the Point of Sale is the choke point. As long as we control who actually buys the games, I don't really care if kids see adverts and bother their parents to buy the games for them. All that does is force the parents to be involved. Also, unlike smoking or drinking, which can be done far away from the parents' sphere of supervision, it's much harder to play a video game somewhere where an adult can't find out.

[Varsity]

Which is exactly why it's scary to be playing with that. Humans are fallible. Think of it this way: I'm publishing a book. This book has violence. Somebody doesn't like me. Somebody says my book contains violence and is aimed towards kids. This was never my intention, but he argues it in court and gets my book censored or banned or whatever. I think free speech is worth more than that.
IMO if an entire panel of judges, jury or equivalent can be convinced that something is overly violent and aimed at kids, and then restrict it to adults only (and not with some label), that isn't a problem. Why should it matter when it wasn't aimed at kids anyway? Banning outright is unreasonable and I'm not suggesting that.

Such a system discourages "kiddie violence" media being made in the first place, and that's the main thing.

[chronocrash]

OK, I typically stray from topics like this because what is said by page 4 usually covers all the bases. There is no easy answer, if there is to be an answer. And I don't think a "solution" is really all that necessary.
Here's my opinion on the matter: Let's look at why games like this sell so well. I'm not sure how to sum it all up, but I do notice that GTA and probably this game will do exceptionally well, more so GTA. Make all the justifications you want, GTA = violence. I'm not condemning the franchise though. But why do the more violent games sell better than less violent games? Same can be said for boxoffice numbers. I think it has to do with America's historical desensitization. We, as Americans, are drawn, collectively towards violence. How else is an unjustified war continuing to wage onward? Sure, politicians can blame video games and some people have every right to buy into that assumption, but not me. I see the violence that the same politicians support as a means to justify the violence Americans turn upon themselves.
So who is wrong? Can there be a wrong? Digital violence, IMO, is a lot less detrimental to one's mental health than a six month tour of Iraq.
Sorry, but making money on violent video games is one thing. But making money using this country's youth as human resources to fight an unjustified war is much more frightening, atleast still to me.
Eventually this won't be an issue, because it's not really an issue. We're just being fooled that it is in an attempt to sway our collective consciousness away from real issues.
I hope I've come off sounding as I've meant to.

[Kefkataran]

IMO if an entire panel of judges, jury or equivalent can be convinced that something is overly violent and aimed at kids, and then restrict it to adults only (and not with some label), that isn't a problem. Why should it matter when it wasn't aimed at kids anyway? Banning outright is unreasonable and I'm not suggesting that.

So you're suggesting laws. Which is what they're doing anyways. So I'm not sure what the problem is.

[Cha-Ka]

Sharp Monkey, I don't think it has to be so black and white. It's perfectly reasonable to say that kids shouldn't be bought by kids, but that we don't also need to regulate them as much as alcohol or tobacco. I think the Point of Sale is the choke point. As long as we control who actually buys the games, I don't really care if kids see adverts and bother their parents to buy the games for them. All that does is force the parents to be involved. Also, unlike smoking or drinking, which can be done far away from the parents' sphere of supervision, it's much harder to play a video game somewhere where an adult can't find out.

I agree that sale of M-rated games should be restricted by LAW to those who are 18 and over.

But the article I linked (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/320618p-274211c.html) to at the start of this thread was about Sen. Chuck Schumer's effort to actually halt the retail release of '25 to Life'. That's the sort of censorship I'm opposed to. I am not an advocate of restricting M-rated adds, but I'd rather see that then see the morale crusaders start censoring entire games.

Of course, this is all for the sake of discussion since I don't believe Chuck's political stance amounts to more than a publicity stunt (fingers crossed).

[Varsity]

So you're suggesting laws. Which is what they're doing anyways. So I'm not sure what the problem is.
I think at one point it was that playing the blame game is a waste of everyone's time and we should instead be thinking about what action whould be taken. ;)

[Furious Wang]

I sincerely wish this gangsta craze would go away. Its been almost 20 years now. This is truly a case of life imitating art. It does nothing to help race relations. It keeps poor people who emulate this lifestyle poor. It glamourizes violence, promiscuity, drugs, theft, guns, being dumb and unemployed, and all the other things wrong with society. A culture of acrimony that was once only a biproduct of the ghettos and the extraordinarily unfortunate has now, by way of the media, spread throughout the entire lower class and is creeping its way into the middle.

And to top it off, they look ridiculous. Its somewhat telling that the majority of the "fashion" these "thugs" wear is made by homosexual designers.

I'm pretty libertarian when it comes to social issues, but a ban on all this gangster media would do a lot of good.

[Phades]

Here's my opinion on the matter: Let's look at why games like this sell so well. I'm not sure how to sum it all up, but I do notice that GTA and probably this game will do exceptionally well, more so GTA. Make all the justifications you want, GTA = violence. I'm not condemning the franchise though. But why do the more violent games sell better than less violent games?

I'll agree that many people will play it in that way and there's certainly a violent story at the center of the games but I don't really think the violence is what makes the games sell so well. The complete freedom and feel of a living city is what makes the GTA games so special. You do whatever you want and go just about wherever you want. It's fun to be able to drive all these different vehicles around and participate in all these different activities. The best example is San Andreas. You could play basketball, pool, arcade games, go skydiving, ride a bike and do stunts at a park, etc.. There's just so much to do in this world and so much freedom. The violence is just another aspect of the game, but not the most important. I think if someone had made a game with the sheer scale, freedom, and depth of the GTA games but made it less violent then it would still have been an enormous hit. The simple fact is, GTA did it first.

[Furious Wang]

OK, I typically stray from topics like this because what is said by page 4 usually covers all the bases. There is no easy answer, if there is to be an answer. And I don't think a "solution" is really all that necessary.
Here's my opinion on the matter: Let's look at why games like this sell so well. I'm not sure how to sum it all up, but I do notice that GTA and probably this game will do exceptionally well, more so GTA. Make all the justifications you want, GTA = violence. I'm not condemning the franchise though. But why do the more violent games sell better than less violent games? Same can be said for boxoffice numbers. I think it has to do with America's historical desensitization. We, as Americans, are drawn, collectively towards violence. How else is an unjustified war continuing to wage onward? Sure, politicians can blame video games and some people have every right to buy into that assumption, but not me. I see the violence that the same politicians support as a means to justify the violence Americans turn upon themselves.
So who is wrong? Can there be a wrong? Digital violence, IMO, is a lot less detrimental to one's mental health than a six month tour of Iraq.
Sorry, but making money on violent video games is one thing. But making money using this country's youth as human resources to fight an unjustified war is much more frightening, atleast still to me.
Eventually this won't be an issue, because it's not really an issue. We're just being fooled that it is in an attempt to sway our collective consciousness away from real issues.
I hope I've come off sounding as I've meant to.


Much of the fascination with violence comes from the judeo-christian belief system. You know the Old Testament, right? Nonstop stories of the Hebrews slaughtering whole civilizations and races of people, razing cities, being conquered then destroying their conquerers, putting untold numbers of people to death all in the name of Yahweh. Its insane. The Bible is one of the most violent books in creation and much of this nation is weaned on it from birth.

Once you have something as fundamentally deep as religion glorifying violence at a young age, its pretty much going to stick with most people for the rest of their lives.

[xcalibur]

Games like GTA, 25 to Life, etc. are not aimed at "kids". They are aimed at the largest demographic of consumers who buy games - males age 18-35. In other words, adults. The games are clearly marked with the rating on the front of the box. That is all the developers are responsible for. If the retail stores ignore the ratings and sell to kids, blame them. Or better yet, blame the parents who let their kids buy and play the game.

It is not the government's role to police your children. That is responsibility you accept from the point you have sexual intercourse. Of course, most people don't want to carry that burden, so they try to shovel it onto the shoulders of the government, so that they don't have to worry about it.



-X

[xcalibur]

Wang, you have a very skewed interpretation of the Bible. If you think the Bible "glorifies violence", then I suggest you read through it again, BOTH testaments this time.


-X

[entropy123]

I agree. But the fact remains that the people who learn that are the ones who don't need to.

Every street ought to have a room marked "Do Not Enter: Instant Death Inside". If anyone goes in there: "zap". Instant IQ improvement for the whole town. :) :) :) :D

[RMan]

But I do not agree that the game shouldn't be made. Why?
Free speech.
This is an argument for why the game should not be limited by law, not why it should not be made. For instance, you should not wear a t-shirt saying "hitler was right", but at the same time the law should not restrict this.

[doyama]

I don't really get too worked up over these things. If you've been around long enough you begin to realize that politicians just pick the latest 'hot button' to babble on about to get re-elected or whatever. In my own somewhat short lifetime there have been many such discussions. You could take the article and substiute 'violent videogames' with:

Heavy Metal music
Dungeons and Dragons
Punk rock music
Movies (this discussion resulted in the current rating system in 1960s, with X renamed to NC-17 in the 1990s)
Communists
Pornography (this usually creeps up when they've run out of other things to yell about)

So really don't get too worked up about it when some senator trolls about the latest thing. It'll pass and they'll just yell about something else in the future. It's all very cyclical.

[doyama]

Of course my previous discussion is somewhat separate from whether these kinds of games are really any 'good'. I find with very few exceptions, that these kinds of games use the violence as a gimmick and not really as an integral part of the gameplay. Basically they're fairly boring and dreary games that allow you to do violent things.

[Heretic Machine]

The world cannot be sanitized for the minority of people who will be "harmed" by mature entertainment.

[Kelegacy]

this game ISNT for children anyway. To ban it would be a demolition of the 1st amendment. To make it not available for kids...i see no problem with that.

HOWEVER, if you cant sell M rated games to minors, then in theory you cant sell T rated games to 12 year olds. You cant just say no GTA for the 16 year old; you also have to say no Jak 2 for the 10 year old.

This whole BAN THEM ALL thing really pisses me off. Why not ban all R rated movies too? Videogames are not JUST for kids, godfuckingdamnit!

Edit: As a democrat, it sickens me to see Democrat politicians take such strides to ban videogame violence. They ARE proving themselves to be a bunch of pussies. At least Republicans like to kill stuff and could give a rat's ass about videogames. Can't senators find more imporant things to set their sights on? We pay them so much to help govern our country, but they go and finger VIDEOGAMES instead of real issues like education, poverty, and bad parenting as the real causes for our children growing up, commiting crimes, and killing one another? If Jesus were around HE'D like Grand Theft Auto!

[emjoi]

Once again, a Game Website blames parents for the actions of kids, so that they can gloss over the violent nature of the games they play.

[mister_slim]

This is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. The number of upcoming GTA clones combined with the heightened realism of the next gen is going to put the ESRB through hell. It would really make sense for publishers to push through some sort of binding federal law defining who can buy M-rated games to preempt the furor. Ordering their own house, before being forced to it, a la the Comics Code Authority (which completely fucked the creativity of the comics medium, btw).
Surely it's in it's 6th incarnation: GTA, GTA:London, GTA2, GTA 3, :VC, :SA.

Sorry, had to nitpick.
Don't forget GTA Advance. I'd say that counts as an incarnation.
Well, if Mature games are going to be a controlled substance, then maybe we'll see a ban on advertising Mature games in comics books and television like they do with liquor and cigarettes. That would most likely hurt the industry's bottom line, but it would be one way to avoid marketing to the younger gamers.
Liquor ads are no longer banned, by the way. I don't really watch TV that much any more, but I assume San Andreas ads aren't running during saturday morning cartoons. TV has narrow enough demographics that targeted advertising can work pretty well. For example, one of the dirty secrets of MTV's success is that their audience is actually younger than the content makes it appear. Selling 12-18 year-olds stuff by appearing to target the 18-35 demo works out pretty well.

[Neosho]

Once again, a Game Website blames parents for the actions of kids, so that they can gloss over the violent nature of the games they play.

Haha. You're kidding, right? I mean, we're the ones selling the games to these children, we're the ones that are responsible for these children, right?

I mean, god forbid parents have to parent or anything.

That sentance makes me laugh, it's so absurd.

[Kefkataran]

This is an argument for why the game should not be limited by law, not why it should not be made. For instance, you should not wear a t-shirt saying "hitler was right", but at the same time the law should not restrict this.

A fair nitpick. But that's what I meant, as I'm sure you realize. Like I said, it's not something that I would choose to make because of my own taste and morals, but I'm also not going to stop anyone from making it.

[Blue]

Much of the fascination with violence comes from the judeo-christian belief system. You know the Old Testament, right? Nonstop stories of the Hebrews slaughtering whole civilizations and races of people, razing cities, being conquered then destroying their conquerers, putting untold numbers of people to death all in the name of Yahweh. Its insane. The Bible is one of the most violent books in creation and much of this nation is weaned on it from birth.

Once you have something as fundamentally deep as religion glorifying violence at a young age, its pretty much going to stick with most people for the rest of their lives.

I was never taught any of that at a young age and I was raised in an amazingly tight Christian home. You assume too much. When I decided to personally start studying the Bible and form my own opinions on what I'd be told all my life, I then fully discovered everything you mention above. In Sunday School, the majority of topics focus soley on the New Testement and, if it's Old Testement stuff, you get Daniel, David, Samson, etc. Now I realize even these are violent (Samson killing all the people with the pillars, David kills Goliath), but they're not presented in that kind of way. We're not told David used a rock and threw it into Goliath's face. It's much more subtle than that.

And honestly, most Western Religions (Islam included) have a good deal of violence within their holy book. Just pointing out Christianity is a bit short-sighted and convenient. And actually, the Old Testement stops all the 'blood and gore' quite often.

My fascination with GTA or anything else violent (Resident Evil, say) has nothing to do with my Christian upbrining. It has to do with the fact that it's a good game and I'm drawn to it because I have a heck of a good time when I play it.

When all else fails, blame religion.

[Cha-Ka]

This is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. The number of upcoming GTA clones combined with the heightened realism of the next gen is going to put the ESRB through hell. It would really make sense for publishers to push through some sort of binding federal law defining who can buy M-rated games to preempt the furor. Ordering their own house, before being forced to it, a la the Comics Code Authority
Ugh! I'd hate to see anything restrain the creativity of the industry like that cursed CCA. Makes me feel lucky I got into comics after the code lost its grip when Frank Miller and Alan Moore were really starting to shine!

As for legislature, I think big players in the game industry are reluctant to push for laws that will regulate thier sales and. ultimately, diminish their delicious profits. The press would have to get a whole lot worse before anything like that happens. As things stand, all these sorts of news stories do is boost awareness of whatever game they choose to witch hunt.

The world cannot be sanitized for the minority of people who will be "harmed" by mature entertainment.
Let's hope not!

I don't really get too worked up over these things. [...] You could take the article and substiute 'violent videogames' with: Heavy Metal music, Dungeons and Dragons, Pornography, etc..
That's a great point. I don't think this latest scare will stomp on the 1st amendment rights of game developers anytime soon. Still, it's creepy to see so many Democrats shaking this particular tree so often.

Once again, a Game Website blames parents for the actions of kids, so that they can gloss over the violent nature of the games they play.
Okay...you need a time out!

[AversionFX]

So it's heinous that you can kill the occaisonal "police officer," but not that you can kill every single black/white/asian/mexican person you see? What is so special about cops? They get killed the same as any other person. Would anyone care if a game came out where you were a thug and you killed all the janitors?

What about military-themed games? I mean, why does nobody complain about your squad getting killed in Full Spectrum Warrior? I mean, gosh, you can't go more than 20 feet without seeing some kind of banner saying "SUPPORT OUR TROOPS GODBLESS AMERICAN FREEDOM FRIES," or something like that. So, with the American "support our troops," mindset, why does no one complain about the depiction of American soldiers being killed? Yes, I understand it's a scapegoat, and all, but still.

I think the thing that's really sad, is no one here could ever be a politician -- You've got to be a complete moron to get in.

I miss the days of blame being placed where it belongs. If you stab someone to death nowadays, people blame:

-The manufacturer of the knife you used.
-Violence on television.
-Video games (and creating poor links between behaviour)
-Not you.

[Phades]

Much of the fascination with violence comes from the judeo-christian belief system. You know the Old Testament, right? Nonstop stories of the Hebrews slaughtering whole civilizations and races of people, razing cities, being conquered then destroying their conquerers, putting untold numbers of people to death all in the name of Yahweh. Its insane. The Bible is one of the most violent books in creation and much of this nation is weaned on it from birth.

Once you have something as fundamentally deep as religion glorifying violence at a young age, its pretty much going to stick with most people for the rest of their lives.

You're absolutely right. I mean, a majority of the Christians I know are horribly violent. If you go to a church service they do nothing but preach about how we should all just kill each other because there was a lot of death in the Bible. In fact, I believe that's one of the first things they teach you in Sunday school. Rush out and anihilate your neighbor before he does it to you.

Then again, you might just be full of crap.

[Varsity]

Is it just me, or did this thread go downhill fast after America woke up?

[DannoHung]

I think it's funny how absolutely nobody, not the good Senator, not the newspaper, not even YOU guys, takes note of the fact that this isn't purely a Gang-banger game. It's Cops AND Robbers. You get to play as a police detective during the game in addition to a a gangster (who, in fitting with the DMX gangster hero stereotype, has a heart of gold and is only doing it to keep his kid out of the world he's sunk into).

Expect most of the cops you shoot to be of the "dirty" variety.

[BigJonno]

Once again, a Game Website blames parents for the actions of kids, so that they can gloss over the violent nature of the games they play.

I hope that was supposed to be an attempt at humour. If not I weep for the future of the human race.

Personally, I prefer something like:

"Once again, a politician blames popular culture for the actions of complete morons, so that they can gloss over the violent nature of the games they play."

[Furious Wang]

Wang, you have a very skewed interpretation of the Bible. If you think the Bible "glorifies violence", then I suggest you read through it again, BOTH testaments this time.


Read Please. I specifically said Old Testament.

Destruction of the Egyptians. Jericho. Canaanites. All the worshipers of Baal. Esther. David & Goliath. Samson. Tons of shit man. That's just the tip. Any time you say you're right to kill because God's on your side...well you can't glorify it any more.

Are you saying the Bible isn't violent? Maybe you should reread your KJV.

[Furious Wang]

You're absolutely right. I mean, a majority of the Christians I know are horribly violent. If you go to a church service they do nothing but preach about how we should all just kill each other because there was a lot of death in the Bible. In fact, I believe that's one of the first things they teach you in Sunday school. Rush out and anihilate your neighbor before he does it to you.

Then again, you might just be full of crap.

Fascination with violence. Not proclivity for violence. Or is the distinction too difficult for you to catch?

[Furious Wang]

I was never taught any of that at a young age and I was raised in an amazingly tight Christian home. You assume too much. When I decided to personally start studying the Bible and form my own opinions on what I'd be told all my life, I then fully discovered everything you mention above. In Sunday School, the majority of topics focus soley on the New Testement and, if it's Old Testement stuff, you get Daniel, David, Samson, etc. Now I realize even these are violent (Samson killing all the people with the pillars, David kills Goliath), but they're not presented in that kind of way. We're not told David used a rock and threw it into Goliath's face. It's much more subtle than that.

And honestly, most Western Religions (Islam included) have a good deal of violence within their holy book. Just pointing out Christianity is a bit short-sighted and convenient. And actually, the Old Testement stops all the 'blood and gore' quite often.

My fascination with GTA or anything else violent (Resident Evil, say) has nothing to do with my Christian upbrining. It has to do with the fact that it's a good game and I'm drawn to it because I have a heck of a good time when I play it.

When all else fails, blame religion.

I'm not sure what denomination you were, but if they didn't tell you David through a rock at goliath and broke his head...well I just don't know what to say.

And I agree with you the Quran has a lot of violence. There's really no reason to point that out, however, because there are so few muslims in this nation.

[Kelegacy]

Fascination with violence. Not proclivity for violence. Or is the distinction too difficult for you to catch?

It stems from a sheltered life. Just like how alot of Catholic school kids ( girls i've known, primarily) that became absolute whores when finally getting out in the real world or switching to a non-religious high school or college.

When you take the religous blinders and shackles off, they are like putty in the cruel world's hands.

Not trying to make a generalization, just an observation.

[Blue]

I'm not sure what denomination you were, but if they didn't tell you David through a rock at goliath and broke his head...well I just don't know what to say.

And I agree with you the Quran has a lot of violence. There's really no reason to point that out, however, because there are so few muslims in this nation.

I was raised Methodist (really the only thing you're allowed to be in Ohio, as I understand it) and of course I was told what happened - with David, say - but it wasn't done in an overly violent way. Sunday School has a way of giving out the stories without attaching the gore. David picked five smooth stones, went out to face Goliath, put one in his sling, and struck him down. That was the long and short of it. Now were they going for effect, I'm sure some adjectives would have fit very well in there. I mean, Samson did some serious beat-downs with a donkey's jawbone. That's gotta be enough to at least drop a little blood. Point is, I knew these stories but the method in which it was presented was (for the most) tame. It wasn't the violent all-chaotic mayhem I thought you were implying.

I wasn't necessarily pointing to Islam but using them as an example within the Western Religions bit as they fit into that. However, statistically, by 2020, there will be more Muslims within the United States, and too the world, than there are Christians. That is, if the growth rate of religions remain the same. I had an entire course (one of my majors was Religion) dedicated to the growth or religions and how it will, eventually, effect various parts of the world. Good stuff.