Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Entertainment Games News

Manhunt Violence Story Sees Updates, Threats 115

Thanks to Blue's News for covering the latest developments in a UK videogame violence story, in which the Rockstar North-created game Manhunt was very allegedly implicated in "a grisly murder" - it's revealed: "The game was present in the victim's home, not the killer's... This may present a problem for those looking to turn this case to their own ends." Nonetheless, previously mentioned attorney Jack Thompson is jumping straight on the case, even from an continent away, according to GameDaily, as he rages: "We are going to destroy Rockstar, you can count on that... [ESA head] Doug Lowenstein makes Saddam Hussein look like a post-reformed Pinocchio." Finally, Gamesindustry.biz injects a thoughtful note into the mayhem, arguing: "Rockstar do not emerge from this affair smelling of roses... game makers could help the case a lot by trying to push the boundaries in terms of gameplay, rather than gore."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Manhunt Violence Story Sees Updates, Threats

Comments Filter:
  • by CMiYC ( 6473 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @12:11AM (#9875663) Homepage
    I read the Gamebiz interview and I'm pretty surprised that Thompson is a lawyer. Any decently competent lawyer knows better than to say "we are going to destory the other side" and throw out name calling. Until the last half of the interview, I thought the article was a joke... At least he'll make this whole affair entertaining to follow.
  • by ph4rmb0y ( 711836 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @01:31AM (#9876068)
    I am a parent of an 11 year old boy and a pair of young girls.

    We have an XBOX, and have been playing PC games for years. Personally, I like violent games. My boy is not violent, nor have we had any problems with his Video game playing, so I don't mind if he plays games like halflife, Quake, Doom, etc.

    I draw the line at games like Manhunt, GTA, Carmageddon, etc. I am simply exercising my right as a parent, similar to deciding what movies I want him watching.

    The problem I have is that other parents don't do the same. These are decent parents of decent kids - but I think that they just don't realize what kind of games are out there (they are obviously not supervising their kids video game playing). My boy has played these games at friends houses.

    Its very easy to blame the parents but the truth of the matter is that nowadays parents are very busy, both parents work in most families, and they don't realize that these types of games exist and that their kids are playing them.

    Personally, I was quite surprised at manhunt. It is very violent, and doesn't seem to have much outside of that. Boring ..

    I don't believe that banning violent video games is the answer (censorship is rarely the answer), however parents must be re-educated that the video games of today are very different from the ones that they remember.
  • by JavaRob ( 28971 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @02:13AM (#9876258) Homepage Journal
    First, to clear up a few things -- apparently the fact that the victim owned the game isn't really meaningful, because they (killer and victim) played the game together (so where they played doesn't really make a difference). Second, the police investigating the crime *are* saying the reason for the killing was "robbery", not "videogame induced psychosis" or some such nonsense -- it seems like mostly this lawyer who's demonizing the game.

    Okay, now onto the interesting part of the discussion. It's nuts to say that the game "caused" the murder. But it's also short-sighted to say that it couldn't possibly have been a factor. Yes, the movies you watch and the games you play affect your state of mind, and your thought patterns. Not necessarily permanently... but they affect it. If they didn't, what would be the point? That's what's cool about a good action flick or videogame -- you get involved; you get an adrenaline rush and a feeling of power. After playing a really immersive game you walk around for a few hours seeing the *real* world in such a different light. Now, most of us have a decent enough moral compass that we know how much of that world you can actually recreate. One of my friends went a little far when we were 10 or so, and shot me with his BB gun, which hurt like hell, and he felt bad (and didn't do that again). That's normal, right? Sure, the "shoot the running target" popped into his head mostly because of the videogames we played -- and he had a lightning-quick trigger finger in the games -- but it was still well in the range of kids learning "that will hurt your friend, and we don't want to hurt our friends". He could just as well have carelessly kicked a soccer ball into my face. Our videogame experiences were balanced off with a lot of normal social interaction, with adults around, where we could learn about peaceful conflict resolution and so on. We didn't solve arguments with hammers.

    So the games are not inherently "evil". HOWEVER, if your only role model for living life and resolving conflicts is Manhunt, you're going to be one screwed-up kid.

    Bottom line -- with decent parenting, there's no question that a kid can survive any kind of video game... but I suspect a part of decent parenting would be keeping your kid from playing these kinds of realistically violent games, especially where the game requires acting out behavior that is so totally against the morals you're trying to teach them. Yeah, they're going to have to sort out their own way in a morally relative world when they're older (and choices are more complicated); but they'll have a much easier time if they've got the basics down already by the time they get there.

    Adult gaming... Personally, I don't play modern shooters (since the first DOOM, really). They make me nauseous. The spinning walls, the gore, the unrelenting tension... I just don't find it fun at all, and I do wonder how good it is for one to frequently engage in virtual brutality like that. But adults gaming is a different animal -- most of us already have basic habits for interacting with others that are pretty worn in. But kids who don't have those habits yet (and the worse their parents/peers/teachers are, the older they may be) just don't need that.

    Here's a quasi-parallel situation to think about -- why is it that mothers teach their daughters to be "nice" to their dolls? ("No, honey -- you'll hurt baby's arm if you pull it like that") Because it's practice for dealing with *real* babies, and real other little girls. Pulling hair is bad, soft patting is good, etc.. And in reverse, children of abusive parents often beat up their dolls or toys -- they're just practicing what they've learned (and sadly, they'll frequently abuse their own kids the same way, years later).

    Just my thoughts -- sorry if I started rambling a bit. :)
  • by sni ( 801877 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @02:16AM (#9876269)
    First off, I never had a problem with gore in games and still don't, and I don't think it "hurt" me having seen it as a kid, either. I'm just not "into it" for the sake of it myself.

    I have however seen a fair amount of people who no doubt enjoy the violence first and foremost and to lengths that can get fucking creepy. PERIOD. I just had such an encounter a few days ago, a 25 year old who kept attacking corpses lying on the ground in gta3:vc, making noises with his mouth. (later on I realized he does the same with movies heh!)

    This is not the fault of the games, to the contrary, the game is a harmless way to signal you have issues.. but I'm sure these people would say the same thing, "I don't play it for the gore". If I had to guess at reasons for liking violent media, then this particular person seemed to be fascinated by the fact that others had "such sick ideas" (quoted), he even seemed to daydream of taking revenge on people who hurt him etc. and this stuff made him feel better about having such daydreams. Okay, really creepy extreme example of a person with issues - but those people play these games too, and of just making a buck off them and otherwise sweeping their underlying issues under the rug is what I can't stand. Pointing fingers would be counterproductive, I don't have any real suggestions or solutions - but don't ignore it.
  • Rockstar (Score:2, Interesting)

    by RogueyWon ( 735973 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @04:19AM (#9876744) Journal
    I do have a good bit of sympathy with the main point of the gamesindustry.biz article. I don't believe in outright censorship or banning of games (although I don't object to an age-based classification system), but I do recognise that there is an argument over this which needs to be won and that games like Manhunt really aren't helping the case.

    The Grand Theft Auto games were at least innovative in terms of gameplay (or at least, GTA3 was... Vice City perhaps less so). With Manhunt, by all account, the only selling point are the buckets of gore and the explicitely sadistic objectives. I saw a news article the other day saying that American Magee was intending to make "the most violent game ever"... but why? If you look at the world of movies, you'll find plenty of violence. However, the movies at the Manhunt end of the spectrum tend to be relegated to the straight-to-video category of "video nasties" and you don't normally get well known directors setting out to make "the most violent movie ever" (well... maybe Quentin Tarantino does, but at least his movies have other qualities, a la GTA3).

    Ultimately, the great "videogames are evil" argument still has a couple of years to run. These arguments are inevitably won from the middle-ground. While I would support the right of developers to make whatever games they want, it would be nice if they had the common sense to keep things a little more low key for the time being. Right now, the only good news is that the anti-video-games crowd haven't done a good job of grabbing the middle-ground either.
  • by prentiz ( 565940 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @04:41AM (#9876799)
    Not to flame the US judicial system, but thank god Jack Thompson will find it a lot harder to peddle his nonsense in this country! Firstly British law does not allow a lawyer to take a share of damages recieved, which removes the profit motivation for this sort of ambulance chasing.

    Secondly our judges are appointed, not elected, which reduces the chance that a judge will play this for the crowd, and support this boneheaded action to garner favour with the tabloid press.

    What it does show is how poor the lobbying strength is of the videogames industry in the UK. Given that videogames make more money in this country than the music industry and the film industry times 2, Members of Parliament are still prepared to take cheap shots at it because this hasn't been made clear to them. If videogames don't put more money into schmoozing our policymakers they will continue to be seen as an unimportant minority interest, vulnerable to the vaguries of the tabloid press.
  • stats.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by joper90 ( 669321 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @07:01AM (#9877326)
    Now i read somewhere the other day that the average number of children killed every year in the uk is about 7 (even though people polled thought it was anywhere from 5 to 400) and this has been stable since the 50's. So what does that tell us? Soz for no link.. will have a look.
  • by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @07:27AM (#9877427) Homepage Journal
    I got some impenetrable logic for the 'the game is not to blame' side of the fence.

    the killer was a drug addict and doesn't seem to have ever even touched the game, which was found at the *victims* home.

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday August 04, 2004 @09:40AM (#9878254)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.

Working...