h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

A quote today from the victim's mother: "The content of this game is contemptible. It's a societal hazard and my concern is to get it off the shelves as there's enough violence in society already."

Well, she's certainly succeeded in getting it off the shelves.

"HMV, one of the only major high street retailers currently selling Manhunt,"

- hang on. "One of the only"??? Is it the only one? OR is it one of several? How can anything be "one of the only"???

"said demand for the game had "significantly increased" at its 200 stores."

Duh.

"Manhunt has sold out at the chain's branches in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool and Belfast. And HMV stores in London's Leicester Square and Oxford Circus and Aberdeen have recently restocked after running out of copies last week."

Yup. Certainly are getting the game off the shelves. Rockstar must be over the moon.

H.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/3538066.stm


And now the police say there is NO connection between the game and the murder.

The copy of the game in fact was not found at the home of the murderer but in fact in the home of the poor chap who got killed.

I note the mother still thinks they should be banned, I also wonder if given the recent sales of the game and the police announcement if Game and the rest will start stocking the game again...

similar story here
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/04/manhunt_murder_claim/
which also means that the question is not how a 17yr old got hold of an 18 cert game, but how a 14 yr old did.
(which is me completely ignoring the major issues here since they have been covered).

And hands up who thinks that tomorrows Daily Mail will have a front page article on the Demon of drugs and why the parents of 14 year olds do not know what the children are dealing in.

Any? Though not.

It's not at all difficult for people to acquire media that's been rated above their ages. I could pass for eighteen at fifteen; for those who can't, there may well be someone who's prepared to do the honours for them. (Like a teacher: 'Schindler's List a 15? Never mind, show it to Year 8 anyway.' We weren't damaged.) Then of course there's the Internet (another scapegoat, albeit on less dubious grounds as regards some sites).

Meanwhile, we now seem to have found a genuine potential danger as far as justice is concerned: Mrs. Pekeerah's approach to logic:

"There are obvious similarities between the game and how Stefan died."



Odd how it was the gaming press, not the popular press, that flagged up a genuine point of ethical dubiousness in a game: the way in which Soldier of Fortune penalised players for killing U.S. civilians, but not Iraqi ones. (This was some time before the recent war.) Questions about this actually led to the game's being patched (to my knowledge the only 'racism fix' in history) -- which is perhaps evidence of what reasonable questioning by people who know what they're talking about can achieve.

I'm not sure it will remain generally true that games require emotional detachment, at least not at all times; I've been emotionally involved with game events before (I play RPGs), and there's been a fair amount of industry buzz about the potential for involvement, even if one leaves out Sony's 'Emotion Engine' overhype (remember that?). Of course, my ability to get sentimental over Koholint Island's disappearance from a tiny monochrome screen probably won't interest the popular press unless they can claim it'll make me a murderer (or it turns out to have freak show appeal).

I recall seeing one of the defence lawyers at the post-Carneal-shootings hearings quoted as suggesting that, instead of looking solely at what the media is doing to children, we should also look at what children are doing with the media. This view appears to remain unfashionable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/08/06/do0603.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/08/06/ixop.html

For Sam Leith's take on the matter.

He raises a practical point- under what law would you ban a game, anyway, and for being what? Again, as he points out, being 'sick' is not grounds under English law, if it was, we'd never have got to see Driller Killer

Having looked at todays Daily Mail briefly I see no up-roar about drugs being sold to 14year olds but Manhunt is still on the front page and on page 7. The main banner on boths pages is "MANHUNT" referring to search for terrorist suspects re: the Heathrow terrorists plans found recently.

Even more free advertising for Rockstar - excellent - even if it is a subliminal connection to the game.

Aye, it never was, and never is, difficult to obtain stuff which has a high age rating. Is the computer game stuff actual official like films? Only I know it never used to be, just a voluntary scheme (read: cheap advertising gimmic).
On a vaguely related note I saw something the other day where some supposed expert was going on about how kids don't get to learn about social interaction properly 'like they used to' because they sit in front of the computer all day. And this was a serious point (well, to her anyway).
Ah, for the good old days when kids sat in front of the TV all day watching educational programmes with the family and interacting in a real social world with their peers.

<>



oops, sorry.

well, not really.


az

I have heard of research a few years ago that indicated benefits in violent computer games (they were probably not so realistic then) in that children who played successfully felt good about themselves & were actually less violent in real life.

My two sons have both played some (to me) fairly nasty games without apparent impact on their behaviour - but then they are pretty gentle characters. I am aware from playing myself, how engrossed one can become & can see how MAYBE susceptible individuals might be even more aggressive subsequently.

On the other hand, do any of these violent games replicate the sort of situations youngsters encounter in their daily lives? Whereas some TV entertainment is far in more natural surroundings. I know that cartoon violence has been criticised, but I am more concerned about the enjoyment of TV & film violence such as Spooks (death by hot fat fryer) & The Long Firm (red hot poker down the throat). Yet news programmes sometimes say that they cannot show certain pictures because they would be too shocking.

Are we just back to a lack of respect for other people & poor discipline?

I think we are back to the stage of each generation blaming the new technology / activity.
Today it is computers and the internet, prior to that it was (and still is) TV. Then the classic through the ages has been whatever the new music is. I dunno about prior to that as I was born in the early seventies.
But I wouldn't be surprised if centuries ago returning soldiers and their stories of the violence of war were blamed for similar reasons.
Fact is, it can be a trigger. Remember the kid in America who, before going on a shooting spree went into the gents and shot the mirror? Thats a bit out of a computer game. But to translate that into RL requires, I would have thought, either existing or latent problems.
I would contend that someone with mental health problems or a particularly violent streak, are likely to do something sooner or later anyway. Removing the game, removing the programmes, stopping the music are not going to solve that individuals problems, merely postpone them.

Of course, banning the programmes, games, whatever for reasons of taste and decency is another issue not applicable here. But then, as much as a marketer can increase an audience, there has to be an audience already for the material.

So rather than blame the producers of the material, it would be better to look at ourselves as a society and how we can help those individuals so that they can deal with their problems.

" (to my knowledge the only 'racism fix' in history)"

Hitman 2 had several whole LEVELS removed, well after its release, because there were complaints (justified ones, I think, having played those levels myself) from Sikhs that the action in the game too closely mirrored actual events at the massacre at the Golden Temple at Amritsar. In fairness, they did not accuse the writers of the game of doing so *deliberately*. But the complaint was lodged, and the levels were removed.

H.

GTA: VC has a racism patch.

"""""
Vice City Gets Censored

Rockstar is believed to have bowed to political pressure in the United States and agreed to remove any reference to Haitian gangs from future copies of Vice City.

There was concern amongst Haitian-American groups and prominent politicians that instructing players to kill Haitian crime lords in the game would lead to real-life hatred or violence toward America's Haitians.
"""""
- from index page of http://www.vice-city.com/

>Is the computer game stuff actual official like films?
Yes. The BBFC rates games in the same way as it rates films.

I do think that blaming a computer game for a seventeen year olds actions, is an insult to all teenagers.

It turns them into merely passive creatures so fragile that they can't be trusted not to kill people themselves. It's an insult to the strength character of all teenagers.

Z (and btw I'm 22)

I'd forgotten about the Hitman 2 and Vice City alterations; thanks for reminding me.

'The BBFC rates games in the same way as it rates films.'

Not entirely the same way; games are only susceptible to having 15 and 18 certificates applied, not the lower ones. (I don't know whether R18 could theoretically apply or not.)

There are also the voluntary ELPSA ratings.


We're now being invited to consider whether we 'really need' games like Manhunt:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=pub&aid=3916

I'm not sure how many games, works of art, etc. we could be said really to 'need', but I hope people aren't going to have their creativity blocked because the industry doesn't 'need' their ideas.

Of course, we see pre-censorship already. 'Sex 'n' Drugs 'n' Rock 'n' Roll' died because publishers thought it was too controversial to publish. It never got finished, let alone as far as the BBFC.

i saw sword & the sorceror on vhs when i was 14 ( it was an 18 certificate) and i saw it at school as part of a prize for class attendance, we were allowed to choose any video we wanted.
it didnt make me want to crucify anyone or put their heads into a grindstone or rip someones heart out.
effing top film though.
not as scary now i'm 35

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=ticket_to_hell

The Pixels of Depravity.

Good isn't it!