Gta Kills Again!!!

Cake Fiend

I think we should ban Americans.

garthv

Sico wrote:

I think we should ban Americans.

I concur.

Thorbar

Would you ban the same Americans who wrote GTA?

PHB

I hope the store that sold them the game gives the mother about 100 mill, lets see if they ever do it again.

Its not the mothers fault, the mother has to do something with her grief, the problem is the christian-republicain loonies who want to ban games because of this, those are the people who we should all hate

rainbow kirby

Thorbar wrote:

Would you ban the same Americans who wrote GTA?

Aren't Rockstar North based in Scotland?

Thorbar

You're right, its Rockstar Games that's based in New york.

ambro25

Thorbar wrote:

Also don't you think the developers have some responsbility here considering the huge profits they're making out of this game.

Where is you equivalent claim in respect of Hollywood movie houses? Analogous material, same enormous gains, same case, surely?

Thorbar wrote:

As a programmer myself I consider my ethical obligation not to produce or release software that is damaging to society.

That honours you (and I mean that), but...

Thorbar wrote:

Now I don't believe GTA 3 is damaging to society in general but I'm not willing to say that there is absolutely no way in hell a realistic violent game wont have an affect on a child.

... considering how many serious psych' studies there have been on the subject (and there have already been a substantial amount) AND considering that none have proved conclusively, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this effect happens, what is your authority?

Any case asking for developers of any multimedia material to assume responsibility for the use made of it or the supposed effect of it upon the user, when appropriate marking has already been applied to the packaging AND (let's be honest here) the violence of this material is old news, isn't really worth the HTML it takes to display... Hot talks about a Nanny State? Well, how much more nannying do you want FFS?

pickarooney

smiaras wrote:

This post has been deleted.

This isn't about killing cops?

projectmayhem

GTA:SA's "fat-ass" engine (where you can gain weight by not working out and eating incredibly unhealthy amounts of fast-food muck) has inspired me to be fat.

i'm sueing. and i'll sue mcdonald's too. it's not my fault because my feeble mind can't tell the difference between pixels and real life.

stevenmu

SyxPak wrote:

Also, one of the titles named in the Columbine suit was Mechwarrior.
Utterly rediculous.

Are you claiming that Mechwarrior had nothing to do with a group of kids building a giant, heavily armed, killer robot and setting it loose on their school ?

Oh, wait, I think I may have got some of my facts wrong there.


Personally I plan on suing nature next time somebody hits me with a stick. After all it nature is going to produce such a dangerous product, which is obviously intended to incite violence, it has a responsibility to ensure that it will not fall into the hands of those who may may misuse it.

Thorbar

ambro25 wrote:

Where is you equivalent claim in respect of Hollywood movie houses? Analogous material, same enormous gains, same case, surely?

I hold the same opinion for movies but we're discussing games here, in a games forum.

ambro25 wrote:

... considering how many serious psych' studies there have been on the subject (and there have already been a substantial amount) AND considering that none have proved conclusively, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this effect happens, what is your authority?

I don't have an authority, I've said already in this thread I'm not in a position to state if violent games affect kids or the extent of which they do. I've haven't read extensively on the research done for this nor do I know if current research methods are accurate enough to gague the effect this games have on kids. That's not definative proof that games don't harm or affect kids either. How long did the tobaco industry hide behide research saying that there was no conclusive evidence that smoking harms you.


My opinion is that the laws and penalties which are applied to most age-restricted items (drink, fags, movies and so on) should also be applied to video games. I really don't thing we can rely on parents who in many cases appear to be ignorant or absent to be able to judge if little Johnny is mature enough for GTA:SA.

ambro25 wrote:

Any case asking for developers of any multimedia material to assume responsibility for the use made of it or the supposed effect of it upon the user, when appropriate marking has already been applied to the packaging AND (let's be honest here) the violence of this material is old news, isn't really worth the HTML it takes to display... Hot talks about a Nanny State? Well, how much more nannying do you want FFS?

I believe the developers are still responsible for what they produce after marking it as over 18s considering the age group we're talking about here. I know when I was a kid the 18 sticker on any game I got my hands on was considered as important as a 98% review from PC GAMER. Ok if an adult smokes a box of fags that has a warning on it saying "Smokers die younger" then that's their choice and they can live with the consquences of it.

I don't think its valid to ignore the violent and sexual content of these games based upon the fact that you consider it old news. Don't get me wrong here, I spend a fair amount of my time playing these games and my experience is enhanced by the fact that they're gory and have the odd bit of tits and arse in them. But these games are getting more and more realistic (I'm doing my best to get into a job where I can make them even more so) and all this has happened fairly fast. It was easier to laugh at duke nukem ripping someones head of and ****ting down their neck because the quality of the graphics in the game was almost cartoon like. But now that you're looking at situations where the graphical quality of the games is getting so good its going to get harder and harder to tell the difference between the latest game and the lastest hollywood blockbuster.

As to a nanny state, I don't these games should be banned. I just think they should be treated no differently then how we deal with violent movies. A lot of states in America are introducing tougher legistation on selling video games to kids and I think that's a good idea. I think the penalties which are applied to the renting and sale of movies to minors should also be applied to video games. I know this isn't a perfect solution but at least its a step in the right direction.

I can understand why people are so defensive when it comes to debates about violence and video games. The majority of people outside the gaming community are fairly ignorant of the topic at hand, generally infulanced by shock media antics and very reactionary. I know I get pissed off everytime I hear some old coon on the radio giving out about Grand Auto Theft. That still doesn't mean we can't as a community set back and honestly discuss the situation amoung outselves.

Superman

dare i say it!

Where were the parents?

Cake Fiend

I don't think the issue here is really the age of the murdering psychopath in question. I that if someone is or will be a murdering psychopath, the question of whether they are 16 (under-age) or 17 (legal) isn't going to be very important. This kid was fu<ked up. I don't believe for a minute that him playing GTA before his 17th birthday is responsible. Of course, the parents will try to use this as leverage (although they shouldn't be allowed, as it's not Rockstar's fault that some irresponsible shopkeeper sold him the game), but it's not the real issue IMO.

I've been playing violent computer games since I was very young. I'd imagine many of the regular readers of this board have. I've never killed anyone, and you lot probably haven't either. That's because we're not murdering psychopaths; it's got nothing to do with computer games.

(For the slow-of-thought, I've emboldened the important words in the above post. Notice there are no video game-related words in bold.)

Thorbar

By the same logic Sico saying it hasn't rained on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of this week means its conclusive evidence that it isn't going to rain for the rest of the week.

Do you reckon that there should be no age restrictions on movies as well? I watched violent movies when I was young and sure I didn't go and kill anyone but I wouldn't be so sure that they didn't have some sort of an effect on me.

Cake Fiend

Thorbar, I think you're missing my point.

Are you saying you believe this particular perp's age is an important factor? That the fact that he played GTA before his 17th birthday was a significant influence on him?

Do you think he wouldn't have committed these murders if he had waited until the legal age (17) to play these games?

How about if he had never played the games at all?

BlitzKrieg

Now I don't believe GTA 3 is damaging to society in general but I'm not willing to say that there is absolutely no way in hell a realistic violent game wont have an affect on a child.

interesting enough, film theory believes (look up metz) that it is the lack of control and choice in the imagry you see in a film that has the most affect on a viewer and on their sub concious, due to its similarity with dreaming, bringing in a element of control, for example like in a computer game shatters this connection with the sub concious due to the alienation of the control in relation to the actions on screen. therefore playing a computer game has the same mental effect as playing a sport without the physical exertion.


therefore the only way a computer game can in anyway create anything close to the subconcious level of a film is by creating controls which are not alienated. For example the house of the dead games with the lightgun or arcade racers. But even in these there are limits to the control system (movement etc) And even after that the effect the product will have on a gamer will still be minimal compared to 2 hours in a cinema.

therefore by their very structure games cannot have a serious mental affect on gamers.

Thorbar

Sico wrote:

Thorbar, I think you're missing my point.

Are you saying you believe this particular perp's age is an important factor? That the fact that he played GTA before his 17th birthday was a significant influence on him?

Do you think he wouldn't have committed these murders if he had waited until the legal age (17) to play these games?

How about if he had never played the games at all?

I'm not talking in particular about this one person. At no point in any of my posts did I say that the reason he killed these people was because he played GTA before he was 18. What I'm saying is that we can't beyond a shadow of a doubt say whether or not violent video games effect young kids so we should treat them in the same way we treat violent movies.

That's a good point Blitz but what about the cut scenes in games? Are they not like short movies embedded within the game?

Cake Fiend

I don't disagree with you Thorbar, and I support most of what you've posted so far, but I don't think it has relevance to this particular case. I hope the US courts place the responsibility on the perp rather than the game company. I don't think it's their fault that this kid is a psycho killer. Any sane, responsible person of his age will know that they shouldn't murder people and unless the courts take this stance, it'll only pave the way for more unfair lawsuits.

Thorbar wrote:

we should treat them in the same way we treat violent movies.

A seperate issue IMO, but absolutely true, and most responsible game stores do. But the game developers can't do much if the stores don't take a responsible attitude.

If a gun shop sells a 16-year-old a gun, whose fault is it - the shopkeeper or the gun manufacturer? How about an Xtra-Vision that rents an 18-rated movie to a child - Xtra-Vision's fault or the director's fault? An off-licence selling beer to a child - the proprietor's fault or Budweiser's fault?

BlitzKrieg

Thorbar wrote:

That's a good point Blitz but what about the cut scenes in games? Are they not like short movies embedded within the game?

they take up such a insiignificent aspect of the overall product that i doubt it could affect anyone in a significent way. But no one ever blames the cutscenes anyway when it comes to game violence... :rolleyes:

the_syco

The dude was 17 @ the time of the crime, and is 18 now. He played one game, got arressted for nicking a car, grabs a gun whilst in the police station, kills all 2 cops, and makes it out to another police car, and drives off. He blames all this on GTA.

I've been playing violent video games since Wolf3D first came out (before Doom 1), and I still haven't killed anyone.

I am the rule; the cop-killer was the exception.

Some people just kill. The video game is just an easy scrape-goat.

Blitzkrieger

Took a cops gun and shot three of them in the head? What a highly trained police force they have.

Tbh they should get Darwin awards.

d22ontour

Blitzkrieger wrote:

Took a cops gun and shot three of them in the head? What a highly trained police force they have.

Tbh they should get Darwin awards.

Shockingly amusing

po0k

SantaHoe

Where in the GTA manual does it tell you where to turn off the 'safety' on a handgun? (I'm sure these officers didn't have the safety off while the gun was holstered.)
I've played shítloads of these games and seen guns used in films etc etc, but I'd need to fumble around with a gun for a good 30 seconds to find the safety... plenty of time for a cop to restrain me... er, not that I'd ever put myself in such a situation... not being a nut-case and all.
As for "life is a video game" I wonder what he'll think of the Prison level, it's pretty hard, everyone who makes it that far by taking the cop-killer teleport always gets stuck there for a loooong time.
I'd say it'd come down to proving he wasn't a complete psycho-tard before playing GTA.
Sad to see this happening though whatever the root cause.

Cake Fiend

SantaHoe wrote:

As for "life is a video game" I wonder what he'll think of the Prison level, it's pretty hard, everyone who makes it that far by taking the cop-killer teleport always gets stuck there for a loooong time.

Yup, I hear the boss (Bubba) is a real pain in the ass...

seamus

Gotta love penny arcade:

Part 1: http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2005-02-21&res=l
Part 2: http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2005-02-23&res=l

Sums it up perfectly.

Otacon

I suppose its true that video games affect us. You can't deny that any media affects us, even in a small way.

However, I also believe that game developers are trying to make money by entertaining people. They make enjoyable games that we, the consumers, buy. That's basic business.

The reason ratings are around, or at least the reason they should be around, is to ensure that the affecting media does not get into the hands of younger, more 'impressionable' people.

Clearly, Grand Theft Auto is an adult game. It should not be sold to children. Game developers are not to blame, the retailers who sell the games to underage children are.

The game developers do not have any responsibility in regards the selling of their games. How can they realistically enforce any measures to prevent underage people buying their games? (...And don't say stop making violent games, thats an unrealistic solution. Violent video games don't damage society. Psychopaths damage society)

Vodka_Junkie

If the guy realy did commit such a crime due to such a hollowed series as GTA, which I highly doubt, then it was because he couldn't seperate the game from realitly (which he practically said himself). Is that the games fault or the publishers? I don't think so, the blame falls with him and those who should have seen he needed help.

GTA ALL THE WAY!!!!

pyro jim

This blame the computer game thing is too old!! I play game ALL the time and i wouldn't hurt a fly never mind shoot anyone in the head!! And plenty of my mates are the same. It's just bull!! It takes more than a computer game to "train and motivate" a person to kill another person. And in this case 3 people!! He was probably some f@#ked up little prick that would have killed someone anyway. It's just something for the parents to blame!! Oh our sweet little boy wouldn't have done a thing only for that horrible game! I hate people using the sh1t that compurt games make pepole violent!!! PURE BULL :mad: :mad: :mad:

Oh and one more thing...... ONLY IN AMERICA :rolleyes:

Nietzschean

to quote chris rock "Whatever happened to crazy? When i was a kid some people were just plain crazy."

summs it up quite well imo, i wonder if i go out n do something can i balme it on reading about a stabbing in the news paper? tbh the most violent things we are likely to hear/see are from the news these days cause it makes for good ratings. Sure in GTA u rob a few cars n kill some people, watch the news, that type of stuff barely makes it into the news anymore, its just not horrific enough. So if its not extreem enough for the news why such a fuss over games for over 18yr olds?