Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Games Government Entertainment Politics

Senator Clinton Slams GTA 1493

Joining the ranks of such luminaries as Jack Thompson and Governor Blagojevich, GamesIndustry.biz has the word that Senator Hillary Clinton has joined right wing advocates in decrying the gaming industry as a paragon of loose morals and corrupting influences. From the article: "Children are playing a game that encourages them to have sex with prostitutes and then murder them...This is a silent epidemic of media desensitisation that teaches kids it's OK to diss people because they are a woman, they're a different colour or they're from a different place." Commentary available at The Australian. Update: 03/30 02:22 GMT by T : Thanks to reader mantle_etching, here is a link to the entire speech as delivered, so you can judge its content for yourself.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Senator Clinton Slams GTA

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:40PM (#12079504)
    it's the fucking parents'.
  • by prell ( 584580 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:43PM (#12079577) Homepage
    Are there any studies that link games to real life violence, discrimination, or any altered behavior at all?
  • don't diss me! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by dlZ ( 798734 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:43PM (#12079603) Journal
    "...that teaches kids it's OK to diss people..."

    I hope that's a misquote.
  • by goldspider ( 445116 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:44PM (#12079632) Homepage
    Hmmm, and all this time I was under the impression that Sen. Clinton represented the people of New York. Who knew?
  • sure, right here (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:48PM (#12079744)

    goverment sponsored no less
    clicky [americasarmy.com]

    unless you are saying they have wasted 200+ million dollars and games do not influence you at all

  • Re:Young Republicans (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sjwaste ( 780063 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:54PM (#12079877)
    At the same time I get my Republican Party back from the New Aged GOP that has started supporting Big Government, Business, and Big Spending.

    I'm wondering the same thing. Where'd all the real republicans go? The ones who don't pay subsidies to big business (and would've let some of the major airlines fold, to be replaced by more competitive ones) and don't spend needlessly on programs that aren't working or entire departments (the IRS could be mostly cut out in favor of a VAT, for example). Oh well, on the other hand, at least we're not as bad as most of the european countries in terms of the tax rate, spending, or unemployment (this isn't a swipe at europeans, many of your nations DO tax and spend more and have higher rates of unemployment).
  • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:54PM (#12079884) Homepage Journal
    maybe i'm gittin' old... but GTA is pretty fvcking twisted for a 18 y.o. to be playing... sorry, but it really, really is morally vapid. game or no game, there's no need to plant those seeds.

    First off, this game isn't free, it's for profit. It's simply an escallation of a genre of game which probably are the merger of FPS, 1on1 combat and racing with a little RPG sprinkled over it to give it some place to go. What's probably a good exercise is trying to guess what the next iteration will be like.

    It really is pretty sorry when you realize you don't mind sitting at a screen and wiping out a bunch of lives. The thing of it is, you never realized yourself becoming less sensitive about life.

    When I came out of cancer treatment, something I wouldn't wish on anyone, I experienced a twinge at watching the Deathstar blow apart in Star Wars. You know that thing is full of people, many would not actually have been evil. Yet that's OK because it's fiction and they were serving the Empire, right?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:54PM (#12079902)
    Seriously? At least you had the guts most lack. Too often kiddies come along screaming and yelling without knowing anything at all about which they yap.

    There are many, many of them. I read a couple when I was a psych major many moons ago. Even more so, there have been other behavioral studies that can be paralleled to gaming.

    As far as 'creating killers' or even 'enticing' kids to enact violence, a few have some interesting but not very compelling results.

    The one result that has been shown over and over and over, and the one which concerns me the most as a parent of rabid gamers (man, I thought I was bad, my kids got the refined version of my geek-game gene I guess) is the concept that electronic game has a direct correlation to retarded social skills. Now, some are already looking at the chicken and the egg of it (are gamers more anti-social or do those who are anti-social tend to game) but few real doctors (read: not 15 year old GTA freaks who have more opinion than intelligence) dispute the fundamental findings.

    Just Google man. There should be tons of stuff. May have to look for scientific and academic journals for the 'real' stuff.

  • by frikazoyd ( 845667 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:57PM (#12079961)
    I actually did some research on this for a paper a while back. The one study that I saw that was of any interest goes as follows:

    Two sets of children, same age, same geographical area, same school, kept separate as much as possible to prevent "polluting".

    Set A: Given video games to play for X hours a day.

    Set B: No video games.

    I can't remember for sure, I'd have to dig it up again, but I believe that Set B also was limited on their television intake.

    Results: Set A children angered more easily and were more prone to hitting each other in play. Set B children were more patient, hit each other less, and had calmer attitudes.

    At best though, this is only one study, so it was careful to point out that this drew a "correlation" between more violent play, quick tempers, and Video Games. They didn't list what games were played, or any details on the children, so results are dubious at best.

    When I find a link, I'll paste it.
  • by MalaclypseTheYounger ( 726934 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @03:58PM (#12079972) Journal
    Oh please. Alcohol in small quantities causes cancer, death, etc? Most of Europe allows their kids to drink wine with dinner. I'd let my kids drink wine with dinner too if I wasn't so afraid they'd tell a nosy neighbor and have the State come and take my kids away for child endangerment.

    My only point is PARENTS need to be held liable for their child's actions. Let's go back to the old days where everyone had a wood shed in the backyard that was used frequently when children did things they weren't suppose to.
  • Re:Some Perspective (Score:3, Interesting)

    by stonedonkey ( 416096 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:00PM (#12080019)
    Regardless of the "context", the fact that she even uttered that string of words should scare the hell out of anybody who values their freedom.

    Respectfully, Pres. Bush has her beat on that score, and he's already in the White House.
  • by leoboiko ( 462141 ) <leoboikoNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:00PM (#12080021) Homepage
    Short answer: there are some, but the methodology and conclusions are controversial. For some (biased but good) criticism favouring games, take a look at this book [amazon.com] if you can. From the studies cited in the book, it seems that people who are violent are likely to enjoy violent games, if they like games at all (which is seldom the case; in general they'd rather have the real thing). But people who are not violent do not become violent due to games.
  • by Humorously_Inept ( 777630 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:00PM (#12080024) Homepage
    It depends on who you ask. There are volumes of studies to both support and deny the assertion that video game violence trickles out into real life.

    Whereas private money used to fund research, it has now become research. Scientists and researchers, being that they are still human beings, are typically as close-minded as any fundies out there and they are as easily influenced by money, power, prestige and the need to protect that which they have achieved as the most corrupt politician.

    The scientific method is high school fodder. The new scienfitic method is as easily purchased as a loaf of bread.
  • Is it that simple? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by downward dog ( 634625 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:03PM (#12080117) Homepage

    I don't think that the government should try to legislate morality (after all, before you legislate morality, you have the more difficult task of deciding which morality to legislate). But I don't think it is so simple as you put it. The idea is that government has authority in the public sphere, but no authority in the private sphere. This sounds reasonable and may be a great goal, but doesn't work in practice. What happens in public affects people's private lives, and what happens in private affects the public. If Clinton can determine that GTA is damaging to the public welfare of the US, then the government will try to censor it.

    I'm not defending censorship or Clinton (or her husband), and I see the irony as clearly as you do. I just don't trust the public/private dichotomy to protect individual rights or civic wellbeing. Rather than just telling government to stay out of our private lives, we need to change the way we think about government and the state. Otherwise, every time it is in the public interest to suspend private rights (e.g. the Patriot Act), individuals will lose out.

  • Re:Young Republicans (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sjwaste ( 780063 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:04PM (#12080143)
    Yeah, there's no real libertarian party, though. I'd consider myself to be one, but I would've never voted for the idiots they put up in elections recently. I mean, I happen to agree with a lot of the religious conservative morality, but I also don't think its the role of government to force you to abide by those just as long as you're not harming anyone else in the process (aka, I'm still against people shooting other people and believe the law can stipulate this, but I also dont think we should teach abstinence-only in schools because its unrealistic, and the law shouldn't interfere with that based on a moral interpretation).

    To be fair and disclose fully, I might be a Catholic, but I also like gun rights, contraception, and evolution.
  • by wiredlogic ( 135348 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:11PM (#12080291)

    Hillary is starting on the groundwork for her 2008 campaign. The first step in running for president is to work a few years ahead establishing a "record" that the media will latch onto and later spew out to the sheeple who vote based on short term memory. In these harrowing times, it's the religious right/moral majority who have the the voting power so it is important to appeal to them and swing some of the fence sitters (those upset with the Bush cabal) over to her side.

    Kerry's biggest mistake was not maintaining a high public profile in the years leading up to 2004. Bush didn't either but he had the assistance of daddy's insider machinery to win his office. Notice how McCain and Hillary are frequent guests on Sunday morning talk shows and other photo-ops. This is all part of the next campaign.

  • by killjoe ( 766577 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:12PM (#12080320)
    He is a republican, he is not interested in presenting the whole truth and then having a rational discussion about it. He just wants to make sure "Hitlery" as they like to call her never becomes president.
  • by Striikerr ( 798526 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:12PM (#12080322)
    Games are just another form of electronic entertainment, similar to movies, TV shows and even the news broadcasts.
    It is the responsibility of the parents to monitor what their children play, view and do during their formative years. The issue is that adults are not involved enough in the lives of their children and so, are oblivious to what may be affecting them. (and this does not stop at video games). I am not aware of any cases involving kids and violent crimes where there were the usual warning signs and/or uninvolved/out of touch parents.
    My 13 year old son has been hounding me for months to be allowed to buy/play the various GTA games (because his friends have it). I've explained to him why we're not allowing him to play them. This extends to movies as well. I'm pretty laid back when it comes to restricting what my kids watch/do but I DO have limits to what I'll allow and I ALWAYS discuss my decisions with my kids. I allow my son to play some games involving shooting America's Army for example) but draw the line when the theme is a little too mature.
    The biggest thing I do is I ensure that I try to be aware of what he is doing (and remember that I'll not always know everything), communicate with him and show that I trust him (aware that mistakes will be made).
  • by Cryofan ( 194126 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:14PM (#12080357) Journal
    A zionist and a free trader. That is pretty rightwing.

    Hilary is just another Politically correct, neoliberal, faux-progressive, rightwing Democrat. Bill Clinton was as rightwing as Nixon, probably more so. That rightwing bastard sold our jobs to the globalist corporations overseas.

    This Rich Rightwing Bitch wife of his is as powerMAD and as powerHungry as Bill ever was. She is running for Prez in 2008.

    Count on it!

    Our job is to get a real Progressive nominated in 2008.
  • by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:17PM (#12080420) Journal
    Why is it that the instant you sit a politician down with a copy of Grand Theft Auto, the first thing they do is seek out a prostitute, have sex with them, and then murder them for money?

    I mean, I had my copy for months before I knew you could do that. (I like to avoid FAQ-style sites until I either really need them or I've finished the game.) Not these politicians, though; wham, within five minutes apparently they've nailed a whore and then run her down.

    Missions? Cruising the town and admiring the graphics? Committing a crime and noticing that you actually get caught (unlike many games where it's just oblivious)? OK, I won't try to claim that GTA teaches you anything serious about consequences (though I'd point out the lack of Pay & Sprays in the Real World (TM)), but still, there's more to the game then blowing away women of the night after they service you.

    I mean, come on, this is Grand Theft Auto, and that's all you can find to complain about? Yeesh, try a couple of missions or something. What about flying around the city without filing a flight plan and illegally littering on a grand scale by dumping out explicit pornographic fliers which flutter around for the remainder of the game? Just look at all those crimes!
  • by x0n ( 120596 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:17PM (#12080422) Homepage Journal
    pfff, someone should rape that Clinton hoe and murder her. Now, on to more important matters: does anyone know if the Jumbo Jet in GTA can destroy the large skyscraper towers downdown by crashing into them? Seriously though, after 9/11, some cheap-ass tabloid newspapers in London printed sensational articles explaining that MS flight sim let you pilot planes into buildings.

    When does it ever end? Who draws the line? are we going to let the government ru(i)n our entertainment industry? Perhaps they should be more looking into why every single non-reality TV show is a f***ing cop show -- CSI here, CSI there, Law & Order, Cold Case, Medium, etc etc. Every time I turn on the TV I see someone being stabbed, shot, strangled or some other grisley death. That's where they should start first, the line between reality and fiction is a lot thinner on TV than it is with a animated character.

    - Oisin

  • Oh holy hell (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ChaosCube ( 862389 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:21PM (#12080496) Homepage
    That little quote just proves that Hillary is a total retard. What a bunch of "look at me, I'm taking a stand" political mumbo jumbo. Since when is GTA about being mean to women, as she suggested? Unless I am mistaken, don't players of that _video game_ "kill" more male 3D models than female 3D models? I swear, every time Sen. Hillary opens her mouth to speak, she's asking us to eat a big crap sandwich and believe it's a yummy London Broil steak.
  • by Skye16 ( 685048 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:24PM (#12080576)
    Do you at least know what age these children were? I could easily see a 5 or 6 year old being more violent after excessively violent video games and tv shows, but I'm not so sure about a 16 year old, unless they had completely horrible parenting.

    Parents really need to be more in tune with violence in video games. My step brother was about 11 and was very prone to violence (not against people, but he was all about breaking things and punching holes in the wall). My dad had just married to his mom, so he didn't feel he was exactly in a position to put this brat in his place, but the point is, the kid was violent and got angry entirely too easily. For Christmas, he got a PlayStation 2. I talked to my Dad at some point before hand and told him "no matter what you do, do NOT get Matt any games that are rated M, it's probably not in his best interests". Then I find out a few weeks later, my dad or stepmom went out and bought him GTA3.

    I do take exception to people saying video games are the root of all evil. But I completely agree when people say they could - in conjunction with other factors - cause a child with many more social problems (ie: violence and the like, or, at the least, improper anger management). I was infuriated that my father had bought this kid GTA3. Frankly, if you wouldn't trust them with a gun, they shouldn't be playing that type of video game. I honestly think it was the only time in my adult life I ever yelled at my father. I yelled so much my voice turned hoarse over it. Even aside from the problems Matt had with anger management and violent disposition, 11 year olds don't need to be playing video games where the purpose of the game is to drive around, steal cars, shoot people, kill cops and screw hookers. When you're mature enough, fine, but the kid wouldn't even brush his teeth or take a shower if you didn't make him do it.
  • by Some_Llama ( 763766 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:30PM (#12080694) Homepage Journal
    "You think killing prostitutes are bad? Wait until you see soldiers team-killing each other in CounterStrike."

    No that is perfectly acceptable because it is "war/Anti terrorist". Like Americas Army... don't hear much about that game when the politicians start decrying video games do ya?
  • Re:Or... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Some_Llama ( 763766 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:34PM (#12080780) Homepage Journal
    "My brother would never let his daughter play a game like Grand Theft Auto."

    I let my 9 year old daughter play it, guess what she did?

    She drove around in the taxi giving people rides or the fire truck/ambulence helping people...

    When she watched me play it she kept telling me "No don't shoot the people!!! Don't drive on the sidewalk!!! You're not supposed to be the bad guy!!"

    Maybe this can be taken as one of the "its a tool and depends on how you use it" arguements?

    Not everything is inherently bad or evil...
  • by stinerman ( 812158 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:43PM (#12080939)
    Here, here!

    I'm thinking Jon Stewart / Lewis Black in '08. Methinks that will look appealing to the Jeb Bush vs Hillary Clinton match-up that might just occur.
  • by CommieOverlord ( 234015 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:50PM (#12081088)
    So while you contend that the OT doesn't apply to modern people (care to back that up? not saying it can't be, just want to see fi you can)

    The idea is that Jesus being born and dying for our sins makes a new covenant with God that invalidates any old covenants, rules, or requirements.

    Basically it's just the priesthood realizing that the old testament was too barbaric/strict/loose (depending on your view) and creating the new covenant stuff so they could start fresh whilst still using the established mythos and familiarity of the old religion.

  • Re:Or... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Golias ( 176380 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:53PM (#12081126)
    Heh... Henti tapes on the shelves the children's video section? What a sick prank. Sounds like Tyler Durden was working at your local video store.
  • by HockeyPuck ( 141947 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:54PM (#12081155)
    [Hillary Clinton] wants a $90 million investigation to be launched

    Who are they paying with this money? Do you really need $90million worth of research on this topic? Classrooms are overcrowded, people are going hungry, teachers are underpaid... the deficit is going up...

    Isn't there something more important to go after than this? This is EXACTLY what Bush did during the election by making gay marriage the issue of the election instead of the economy...

    All she's doing is grandstanding to get elected by the rightwing while calling herself a leftwing democrat.

  • Not That Simple (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Cyris12 ( 871741 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:57PM (#12081200)
    From the article:

    "Researchers from the University of Oklahoma recently found that two-thirds of school fights were instigated by regular video game players, but in the study of 607 students only four fights were started by children who had never played such games."

    The article doesn't say how many of the total number of kids played video games. If 95 % did, then their two-thirds statistic isn't very meaningful.

    Also, what if violent video games served as an outlet for aggression, actually helping to prevent violence?

    Finally, a correlation doesn't imply causality. Do video games turn people violent, or are violent people attracted to video games? Nick Yee [nickyee.com] wrote a great article on this. He gave the following example: Suppose you stood by the exit gate of Disneyworld and noticed that many of the people coming out were six years old. Would it be more reasonable to assume that Disneyland transforms people into six-year-olds, or that six-year-olds like going to Disneyland?

  • by astar ( 203020 ) <max.stalnaker@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:58PM (#12081210) Homepage
    I do not think I am right-wing, but assuming that people are often suggestible to their detriment seems like a good bet. Whole industries are based on this assumption. The US military, which is probably predominately right wing, has had a historical concern with the following statistic: during world war II, 40% of the soldiers in their first combat did not fire their weapon. This is after some training designed, to among other things, desensitize the troops to killing. One of the US military's new tools to deal with this problem is ... video games. Indeed, I have read claims that some of the names in video games got their start working on such projects on military contracts.

    So, on the level of scientific evidence, the above is just suggestive. But I would bet $10 that the military has some studies that show video games work for them in desensitizing troops to killing. But I suspect they do not freely publish such studies.
  • by Lucke ( 852027 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @04:59PM (#12081232)
    I can't remember the exact details for the quote, but I do remember the context of it. Someone at Nintendo in the '80s said that it's ridiculous to think that video games influence kids. I think it was along the lines of, 'kids listening to repetitive music in dark rooms munching on pills.'

    Out of the millions and millions of people who played Pac-Man, there may be a minute number of kids who where influenced. The majority, however, did not pursue all night pill popping raves.

    But if GTA is pulled from the shelves, that pill popping raver Pac-Man has got to go too. Hell, while we're at it, why not take Command & Conquer as well. We don't want our kids to take control of the country by using battle techniques gathered from that game. And don't get me started on Flight Simulator training terrorists on how to fly commercial airplanes.

  • by Anonymous Custard ( 587661 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @05:07PM (#12081373) Homepage Journal
    As an adult, I should have the perfect right to ingest PCP. If I infringe on someone else's rights (creating a victim) while high on PCP, then I should be punished for that crime.

    PCP is a poor choice for a legalization argument... it makes people "agitated, delusional, and irrational [nih.gov]", according to the NIH. Those qualities in a person can greatly increase their likelihood to harm others, and it'd be irresponsible to let people walk around town high on PCP and only stop them once they've attacked someone. Though I still don't agree with it the "it doesn't hurt anyone except myself" argument could easily applied to marijuana, but PCP? :-)

    And in regards to the victimless crime argument...

    There are different lines drawn for different situations:
    - How close to your throat does someone have to get when running at you with a knife in order for it to be considered attempted murder?
    - When do you start taking a stalker seriously enough to warrant a restraining order?
    - When do you stop someone for carrying a gun - when you notice it nearly concealed in his coat pocket, or do you wait until he draws it on someone?

    You have to be able to act somewhat pre-emptively, or else people will get hurt. If someone's aiming a gun at someone, you knock their hand away BEFORE they shoot, not after! You can't always wait for the crime to be committed.

    There just has to be a balance in that gray area where your rights end and mine begin.
  • Not unreasonable (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @05:27PM (#12081660)
    According to the article, Clinton notes that the game has content most parents would consider inappropriate for children, and calls for a study to determine whether this kind of content has an effect on children's development.

    I consider the alternative, highly reactionary options of either

    a) censoring everything in sight (supposedly a part of the left/right wing authoritarian agenda) or
    b) insisting that parents only recourse if they don't trust the entertainment industries to support their values is to monitor everything their kids see and do (standard on slashdot)

    pretty unhelpful to anyone actually trying to raise a kid.

    Clinton isn't even at the point of helping parents be in charge of their kids' cultural heritage (which I think would be a fair role of an elected government), just asking to study whether these things might pose some kind of health risk. Until we get conclusive, scientific evidence that there's nothing to be concerned about, I think that's at least as sensible as monitoring what comes out of our taps or gets put in our food.
  • by Shakrai ( 717556 ) * on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @05:30PM (#12081701) Journal

    I'm thinking Jon Stewart / Lewis Black in '08. Methinks that will look appealing to the Jeb Bush vs Hillary Clinton match-up that might just occur.

    As much as I like Jon Stewart and agree with his opinion of modern day politics and media (and Crossfire) he is about as qualified to be President as my pet goldfish. Rooting for Jon Stewart is as bad as the Republicans that think they should run the terminator.

    Let's consider reality. Are there any Democrats (centrist/right or left) that can actually win? I highly doubt Hillary will run (you heard it here first) in 2008 and I don't think she could win anyway. Unless something as bad as Vietnam happens to us then Kerry and Gore are done (only modern candidate to lose... then go on to win was Nixon... and it took the Vietnam War for that to happen). Who else has the name recognition and the experience? Obama won't be ready to run on his own.

    What the country needs to see is a split bi-partisan centrist ticket. Let's say Giuliani and Obama, or Giuliani and Edwards. Of course it won't happen but I can dream.

  • Re:Come on... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by SoCalEd ( 842421 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @05:33PM (#12081746)

    This is exactly what I was ranting about. Proof be damned. There may not be any proof that these games or TV or whatever definitively lead to criminal behavior, but common sense screams that they can't be doing anything to help kids grow up with reasonable values, respect for law, etc.

    How much unequivocal proof is out there that porn is bad for kids? How many studies have statistically proven that children who play with guns end up shooting other kids? How many studies tracked 6 year old heavy drinkers to see if it harmed them in the "long-term?" Shall we repeal all laws until statistics prove their necessity?

    Of course politicians have their agendas. I trust the lot of them as far as I can throw Capitol Hill. But I don't need a formal study to understand that games like GTA aren't good for kids.

  • by agraupe ( 769778 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @05:34PM (#12081758) Journal
    Exactly... my dad trusted me with firearms (under supervision, of course) at the age of 12 or so, because I am responsible and I can handle them. This is the same reason that I convinced my parents to buy me the GTA games. I'm not an idiot, and, even at 14, I can clearly tell the difference between a game and reality.
  • by Phoenix666 ( 184391 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @05:56PM (#12082092)
    H.C. is among those mistaken Democrats who think that "triangulation" is a viable strategy for anyone but Bill Clinton in the two presidential elections he won. The DNC has run that same strategy three times in a row now and lost every time. I say let her do that--she's not fooling anyone. No Republican will ever, ever, ever vote for her and Democrats are mighty sick of the same losing message being recycled over and over.

    At the same time, if the electorate is really so darn morally conservative nowadays, then why the heck is GTA SA selling so well? Maybe it's because it's one of the best video games ever made and people understand that the violence, etc., is NOT REAL and not any more reflective of what they actually think, feel, and do in the real world than going to see Alien vs Predator is.
  • AGAIN? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by El_Froggo ( 566773 ) <El_Froggo.Crackdealer@com> on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:07PM (#12082234)
    How many time do I have to see the same thing?
    I thought when you came to a conclusion, that was it. I thought this was America. I thought it was the people's choice, not the most popular political figure...
    We're going to see this over and over and over and over again, until we have nothing to think but what they've been telling us. Even if it is a lie.
  • by CrazyJim1 ( 809850 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:11PM (#12082273) Journal
    Demeaning towards women, cursing, drugs, and racial profiling blacks.
  • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:14PM (#12082318) Homepage Journal
    but if the game is rated Mature and the stores are required to card people who are buying it then either there are some terribly impressionable 18+ year olds out there who haven't found their cult yet...

    Sadly 18 isn't a magic number, where people suddenly become more mature. Look at G. W. Bush, he said he grew up at 40! (after doing considerable drugs, alcohol and foolin' around in the very best tradition of families with political power and wealth.)

    or some parents need to do a better job of screening what they buy their kids. Neither scenario means that we need the government involved.

    Without government getting involved, or threatening to do so, you wouldn't have that rating. Believing in self-regulating industy is like the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus.

  • Yawn (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:17PM (#12082338)
    GTA dosent teach you to have sex with prostitutes and kill them... it does however teach you that having sex with prostitutes is a great alternative to going to the gym, especially if your low on health.

    I guess she's ran out of crap to talk about and decided to try the "Video games screw up our children" campaign even though its been done atleast 5 times a year.

  • by madopal ( 308394 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:23PM (#12082431) Homepage
    Ok, so when it first came out that you could a) have sex with a prostitute to get health back, and b) kill her to get your money back, netting you a health gain for nothing. I had to try it in GTA.

    So, I drove up to what looked like a prostitute. Nothing. She wouldn't get in the car. I tried this with a bunch of different women in the game to see if maybe a "prostitute" looked different than I thought. No dice.

    I talk to a friend of mine. He clarified. Now, here's what you have to do.

    A) Beat up your car (prostitutes apparently won't get into cars that look too nice).
    B) *Find* a prostitute (which isn't as easy as it sounds, as many tartily dressed women in the game aren't, in fact, hookers)
    C) Drive to a secluded area (not any alley will do...it has to be off the beaten path)

    When this happens, the car will rock back and forth. If you move the camera around and look in the car, you do in fact see that the two people are doing NOTHING but sitting there. During this time, your health will go up slightly.

    After the prostitute gets out of the car, you can kill her, run her over, whatever. She will drop money.

    It is also noted, that MOST pedestrians will drop money when killed, so I never bothered to check that if I just ran her over before anything, would she drop the cash.

    Now...why did I walk through this? Because, IT'S A REAL P.I.T.A. TO DO! It takes WAY too long to get your health back this way! There are free health boosts sitting around at any hospital!

    So, can you *DO* this in the game? Yes, yes you can. Is it CLEAR that it's REWARDED to do this? No! It's a freakin' WASTE OF TIME, that was clearly put in there as a detail. I don't even THINK the killing of the prostitute is connected, as I said...I believe you can get token amounts of cash from MOST pedestrians you kill, as well as deal with the possible risk from cops for such a petty amount of money ($200 at most...which is PENNIES after you play for about 5 minutes).

    And yet, TOO MANY POLITICIANS have parroted the "teaching/rewarding you for sleeping with and killing prostitutes" line. Yet NONE of them clearly understand it for what it is...an aside, a bit of color...a way to immerse you in the world...if you can even figure it out how to do it!

    This random demonizing of games has gone so far that the following quote was from the Chicago Tribune about the impending state law to restrict sales to minors:

    (I found a copy of the article on GameCritics [gamecritics.com])

    "They're watching police officers getting their heads blown off. They're defecating on people," she said. "They get extra points for sleeping with prostitutes."

    Once again the reference again to getting "extra points for sleeping with prostitutes." The lack of clarity on "points" shows that this person has NO clue about what they are talking.

    (I also want this person to SHOW me the game where "They're defecating on people.")

    When will games/music/movies stop being the scapegoat for bad parenting? Does this just happen every time something new and scary comes along?
  • by Anne Honime ( 828246 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:25PM (#12082460)
    I don't know for your question, but historicaly, you can find morality treaties of the XIIIth century blaming the - at the time new technology in glass making - mirrors for corrupting the women, and favorizing the sin of pride in the youths.

    Sounds pretty modern, save the medium.

    Same BS all over again, I guess.

  • Expressed agression (Score:3, Interesting)

    by xgamer04 ( 248962 ) <xgamer04NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:30PM (#12082543)
    A few years ago, when I was in high school, I was talking with my principal about school violence. She was talking about how in the past, before the whole "zero-tolerance" stuff came about, kids would get in fights and beat the crap out of each other. Then, dudes A and B that had fought earlier in the day, would be joking and talking with each other after school.

    I think that getting agression out of people is a good thing, and maybe sparring/sports/video games help kids do that. I think that this link is at least as plausable as one that says videogames turn innocent Timmy into a murdering psychopath.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @06:34PM (#12082592)
    And it's just this sort of hypocrisy that will ensure he grows up to be wonderfully maladjusted.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @08:28PM (#12083818)
    "Needless to say, we shut off the game. Asked him where he heard about that (at school) and dad sent him to his room."

    And how did that benefit anyone? He was CENSORED because the ADULT GROUP was uncomfortable with what he said, FORCED to stop playing the game which depicts elements of urban society, forced to retreat into his cell(room) by an unsubstantiated authority, and now, he wont ever be comfortable sharing anything that might be questionable with his parents or family.

    Maybe next time, ask the adolescent why he thinks that is right, why what he said might make you uncomfortable, who prostitutes are and why they do what they do, why money exists, why games exist, and have a CONVERSATION with that PERSON. DO NOT FORCE YOURSELF UP ANYONE NO MATTER WHAT DILUTED IDEA OF AUTHORITY YOU THINK YOU HAVE.
  • Re:Campaign Tactic (Score:3, Interesting)

    by StikyPad ( 445176 ) on Tuesday March 29, 2005 @08:50PM (#12084078) Homepage
    Fantasy is OK, to what point?

    Fantasy is okay to any point, as long as it remains fantasy. Once it becomes reality through action, then those actions are subject to review, by a jury of peers if necessary.

    I'm reminded of a joke by Chris Rock where he says something to the effect of, "If you've never thought about killing someone, you ain't never been in love.. If you never thought about how you'd dispose of the body.. you ain't been in love." It's funny (when he says it), because he's vocalizing something we don't like to admit -- we all have thoughts that are completely inappropriate. It's the extent to which we induldge those thoughts that's the real issue.

    I do think it's possible that video games can heighten someone's desire for something.. for example, flight sim's make me want to fly, racing games make me want to drive fast, but GTA doesn't make me want to go out and do drivebys. But even if it did, the game itself isn't responsible for creating that desire -- I'm responsible for my own actions.

    Although, the next time I get a speeding ticket, I think I'll try that. "Well you see, Your Honor, I was playing NFSU2 earlier that day, and you know how it is, sir.. I just needed the real thing. This is clearly EA's fault."
  • by the_ed_dawg ( 596318 ) on Wednesday March 30, 2005 @03:13AM (#12086587) Journal
    Similar experience. We were playing GTA3 in a dorm room when one of the girls we knew came by. This girl was in Chi Alpha (Christian "Fraternity") and very active in youth ministry. She was appalled that we were driving on the sidewalks (and over people), running from the cops with a 4 star wanted level. Then we told her to play it for five minutes. Twenty minutes later, we had to pry the controller from her fingers because she was enjoying it so much. We couldn't get her off the sidewalks. :) She didn't play it after that because she felt guilty, but she could understand why people would play it. It's just fun.

    What those who scapegoat video games (and movies, music, etc.) fail to understand is that the game is a safe and healthy way to release your aggressive urges without having to hurt real people.
    I agree 100%. Nothing better to get over being picked on all day in high school and going home to play multiplayer Quake. :) ...but then again, I could always tell fantasy from reality as a kid. As an adult gamer, sometimes you've just have to take your workday frustration out on a computer game by beating a digitized hooker with a double-ended dildo.

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Working...