I dont give a shit...

what Abucah says is RIGHT. The game is not a violent fanstasy or something.. it is a game that mimics and belittles real life violence and portrays it way too accuratey. I think its completey distasteful.

In the game, u can punch and kick a person to the ground, and then kick them till they r dead and blood flies out all over the pavement.

THEN u can nick their money...

I have played the game and i have to say.. while i felt it WAS the best game ive played in a long while.. it only points to how sick we r as humans, what r basic darker natural insticts are, and we shouldnt tune in to this side.

Games like this are a disgrace. Just because it is fun, doesnt mean moral obligations should be thrown out of the window... we cant just do what we want "in the name of fun"

As far as i can c, abucahx is making a valid point. Games like this r no good for children. Even though its not meant 4 children, they r the main players of the game.. so.. dont make it! im sure over 18's can find something better to do with their time... and if having the right to play games like that is their idea of "Freedom" then we had better think again.


In all my life, i dont think ive seen such a sick game. Yes i found it fun.. which is why i never played it again.

No one is saying that u play a game.. and then go and copy it u fools.

What we r talking about is that its just another way of completely destroying the borders of right and wrong.. more mindless violence that is taking its toll on the psycology of children, about what is ok and acceptable in society and i dont care what u say about me or what u think... over time games like that have an INFLUENCE..

I just dont see how u can justify a game like that because its "fun"and it fills our perverted fantasies. While adults r far less likey to b affected, children .. who are in the process of shaping their mind are easily IMPRESSIONABLE..

if u think thats a load of cock and bull.. then why do we have 18 stickers then?? (18 in uk)



just my opinion, Bring on the slating.. abucahx... im gonna need u man!

PurpleHouse said:

Hi dude, you are right. It really amazes me that if the game is meant for adults then why in the hell the vast majority of players are kids? The game is indeed marketed to kids whether one believes it or not..look in the gaming magazines, the vast majority of gaming magazines readers is kids and ads of the game are placed in the magazine.

Videogames are entertainment. They aren't there to mould your young person's mind and educate them. That's what school is for, and parenting. If your kid spends more time playing games than doing homework, you may have a problem.

Violence is a part of life, and popular culture has discussed and portrayed violence for a very long time. Even the Bible is littered with violence and Old-Tastament stype nastiness.

I have a real problem with people bandying around terms like "obscene" and "disgusting" - that's just your opinion, and quite frankly everything from Shakespeare to Goodfellas can be considered obscene and disgusting by somebody. Real life is obscene and disgusting.

You're adults, and you should be able to decide for yourself what is acceptable entertainment. If it means you spend your time running around shooting digital representations of people on your TV, go for it. Lose the hysterical hyperbole - videogames aren't drugs. Videogames aren't "evil". And believe me, it really isn't all about the money, any more than Prince's music is all about the money. Videogames are artistic endeavours undertaken by creative people - sometimes with commercial goals in mind, and sometimes not. 90% of games make a loss. The salaries suck. The risks are extremely high. It's not all about the money. The industry was created by bedroom coders who enjoy making games, and that ethos still coexists with the big business side of the industry.

I'm not "disgusted" by shooting someone on a computer screen. Not even slightly. It's just a game, and I'm directing the entertainment. On the other hand some of the goriest scenes from a movie like "Saving Private Ryan" stay with you for ever.

ian said:

Hi, i'm not saying that videogames are evil...i'm not trying to get a petition to ban this game or something. What i'm trying to say is that I think that this game SHOULD be extremely difficult for a kid to buy..instead of this game ad in a videogame magazine why not put the game ad in Men's Journal or GQ magazine? And by the way, the fast food chain sponsoring cafeterias is not mainstream here in the States.

I don't know about your country, but here in the UK and Ireland a person under the age of 18 cannot purchase a movie or videogame if it is rated 18. End of story. There is nothing more we can do really - if parents really want to buy the game for the kid, they'll do it. Parents need to be better educated about videogames perhaps, more familiar with the age ratings and what they mean, and parents should take a greater interest in the culture their kids are exposed to instead of treating the PS2 as a babysitting device.

ian said:

The problem does lay at the parents feet. I don't think anyone is denying this. Parents do use television and game systems as babysitters too often. Many parents are responsible and do moniter what their kids take in as far as movies and games go. However, kids are very smart and will borrow from a friend who's parents aren't as watchful as their own, or they will go to a friend's house to play the games or watch the movies that they can't at home. In the states, we have a parental advisory sticker on the games or music etc, but stores will still sell to kids under age. Perhaps things are different in the UK, but in the states it is a money making system. But to state that only scenes in a movie will stay with you for a greater amount of time is erroneous, all art will make an impression on the mind, whether good or bad, it leaves its mark. I knew a young kid who beat another one up because he saw it in his game and later replayed the game, and the one he had beat up in the game was okay so he thought the kid he beat up in real life would be okay. There is something wrong there. And no, I do not think games are evil or obscene. I play games and am fairly good at them, but if the game is violent in any way, I wait until my kids are in bed asleep before playing them.

My oldest son is almost 17, in a couple of weeks, and he feels I'm overprotective of him, because I make him be home at a certain time, I make him call, I insist on knowing his friends, and I moniter what he watches and plays. But he's never really been in trouble either. I think that parents who aren't aware of those things are doing their children an injustice and are not being responsible, but I also feel that the gaming industry isn't being responsible either. I do think that advertising in a magazine that mostly underage kids read is promoting it to kids.

ian said:

The problem does lay at the parents feet. I don't think anyone is denying this. Parents do use television and game systems as babysitters too often. Many parents are responsible and do moniter what their kids take in as far as movies and games go. However, kids are very smart and will borrow from a friend who's parents aren't as watchful as their own, or they will go to a friend's house to play the games or watch the movies that they can't at home. In the states, we have a parental advisory sticker on the games or music etc, but stores will still sell to kids under age. Perhaps things are different in the UK, but in the states it is a money making system. But to state that only scenes in a movie will stay with you for a greater amount of time is erroneous, all art will make an impression on the mind, whether good or bad, it leaves its mark. I knew a young kid who beat another one up because he saw it in his game and later replayed the game, and the one he had beat up in the game was okay so he thought the kid he beat up in real life would be okay. There is something wrong there. And no, I do not think games are evil or obscene. I play games and am fairly good at them, but if the game is violent in any way, I wait until my kids are in bed asleep before playing them.

My oldest son is almost 17, in a couple of weeks, and he feels I'm overprotective of him, because I make him be home at a certain time, I make him call, I insist on knowing his friends, and I moniter what he watches and plays. But he's never really been in trouble either. I think that parents who aren't aware of those things are doing their children an injustice and are not being responsible, but I also feel that the gaming industry isn't being responsible either. I do think that advertising in a magazine that mostly underage kids read is promoting it to kids.

I remember watching kids at the park mimicing moves from the game on each other right after they play the games...

And the parents unfortunately didn't know to let their child know that what went on in the game wasn't real. It was their first child and as all parents, they were learning as they went along.

*Ahem*

Just thought I'd mention, in addition to my earlier points, that I think Ian will know what he's talking about as he works in the gaming industry.

If he says that games companies aren't just interested in $'s, then I'd believe it.

I mean, c'mon. Who's more likely to know the truth about video games - a person who works in the industry or someone who sees the game and makes up their own idea of the companies agenda?

Finally, can I yet again make the point of anyone who attacks someone/does something bad because they saw it in a video game is a seriously sick individual indeed and would most likely have done it anyway without the video game giving them the idea.

I remember the uproar when the first GTA came out. It was on a news programme (here in the UK) and people were saying it was terrible, shocking etc. The point one of the developers made was "Have you even played the game? I think you'll find it's good fun." Isn't that what games are all about - entertainment? If the games company puts an 18 certificate (a UK law) then I see no problem with the game. If you're over 18 and you don't like the content, then don't buy it. No-one is forcing you to play it.

Finally, kids are always gonna buy video games which are only for adults (who make up a huge portion of the games playing public) just like some'll smoke underage, drink underage and have sex underage. The shops do the best they can to not sell them the games and it's down to bad parenting that these kids get the games.

Good thread - thanks for the responses in agreement npgsmfc, Abrazo, MrTation.

That was a funny post from npgsmfc about kids practising wrestlings moves. I mean, I remember when I was a kid, I'm pretty sure some of my friends were practising being the A-Team at some points, or Knight Rider, and I'm pretty sure I thought I was Batman for a while too. However, I never travelled around in a van full of guys who were framed for a crime they didn't commit. And I never dressed as a bat and leapt from rooftop fighting crime. Not recently anyway.

Kids can be impressionable, and if they are allowed to watch wrestling, or kung fu movies or whatever, sure it will spark their imagination and they might want to role play or imagine they can do that stuff. Most kids of reasonable intelligence however can recognise that it is just a game, and a kid that doesn't is just a bit dim if you ask me. If you have a dim kid or a kid who is very impressionable and not able to discern fantasy from reality, you should monitor the popular culture your kid gets exposed to. It's about responsible parenting.

Kinda reminds of me of that "Reality / Fantasy" diagram Father Ted had show Dougal on regular occasions


Ian

ian said:

I am really only in agreement with you tot the extent that it is the parnets responsibility first what their kids are exposed too. When however you have a situation where the parents can't exercise sufficient control on what their child is exposed to, the question should be asked who is responsible then. It may be clear that the producer's responsibility for reasing the violent video game to the general public gets bigger and that a simple 18 year and older notice won't do the trick when you are talkinga bout kids that are negatively affected in their actions BECAUSE of these games.
The problem tho'is really that proving this CAUSE is very difficult to do and that it is 9and imo should be) the parents responsibility first and foremost. After all parents have a duty of care towards their children. But at the same time that doesn't mean that prooducers don't have any responsibility or a duty of care of their own when it comes down to it. We will see in the future what this will bring.
In my opinion things like violent video games and especially the violence and sex you see more and more on tv at times when kids are watching is not the way it should be and is likely to encite more immoral and illegal behaviour by children. Proof that there is a direct cause remains to be sufficently provided tho'. But therefore I think that some day there will be attempts in court or by legilstaors to limit the freedom producers of this kind amterial have with the damage it can do to people, especially to children in mind.

Damn, i hate to sound off topic on this thread, but can anyone tell me the artists that will be on the soundtrack for Grand theft auto 3 Vice City? I heard it was going to be all 80's music..will it be the popular 80's music that we all heard before?

AbucahX said:

There's a huge list that has been leaked - the game has over 9 and a half hours of music. Everything from Blondie to Grandmaster Flash, from Michael Jackson to Human League. Loads of music. The track list for the 7CD album (being realeased to coincide with the launch of the game) has been leaked but there is far more music in the game itself.

There will be some original content, the usual radio chat shows etc, but it looks like most if not all of the music is licensed classic 80s tracks

Abrazo said:

What a great day that will be, when we have thought police to protect us images, stories and ideas that may be considered "potentially damaging". Just like the beautiful utopia depicted in George Orwell's "1984"