Manhunt withdrawn from sale by concerned retailers whilst others take advantage
> News Comments > SPOnG Comments Index
Topic started: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 14:41
Click here to view the news article this topic refers to.
Click here to view the news article this topic refers to.
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 08:30
That's my point in the other Manhunt thread.
Parents just don't seem to be aware that video games can be just as violent, prehaps more so, than films.
As I said in the other thread as well, I was surprised that Gamestars gave GTA an award where most of the audience and all their master gamers were under 18. They were advertising an adult game in the prime time children slot!
Regulations on videogame advertising should be put in place to stop Rockstar targeting kids with their games in the first place.
Parents just don't seem to be aware that video games can be just as violent, prehaps more so, than films.
As I said in the other thread as well, I was surprised that Gamestars gave GTA an award where most of the audience and all their master gamers were under 18. They were advertising an adult game in the prime time children slot!
Regulations on videogame advertising should be put in place to stop Rockstar targeting kids with their games in the first place.
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 08:39
MrCoggy wrote:
>If anything was to change socially, I would hope
>it is just the perception of games being just for
>children. They have top shelves in newsagents.
>There should be top shelves for mature games(or
>preferably shops) that are high enough so only
>those of voting age can browse. When Pokemon
>resides next to GTA something is just wrong with
>the system used by game stores (and I don't just
>mean they mix Nintendo and PS2 games up).
Yes this may be an answer to stop people such as 9-13 year old getting them but im 16 and could quite easily reach there.
Anyway on a general note this thread seems to be refering to the guy as a kid whereas he was 17 and that in my book comes close enought to 18 so you can complain about the its not marketed right but the chances are whith him being 17 he would have looked close enought to 18 anyway. I also know this is abit hipocritical of what i have said abouve but iv just thought about this now so meh
>If anything was to change socially, I would hope
>it is just the perception of games being just for
>children. They have top shelves in newsagents.
>There should be top shelves for mature games(or
>preferably shops) that are high enough so only
>those of voting age can browse. When Pokemon
>resides next to GTA something is just wrong with
>the system used by game stores (and I don't just
>mean they mix Nintendo and PS2 games up).
Yes this may be an answer to stop people such as 9-13 year old getting them but im 16 and could quite easily reach there.
Anyway on a general note this thread seems to be refering to the guy as a kid whereas he was 17 and that in my book comes close enought to 18 so you can complain about the its not marketed right but the chances are whith him being 17 he would have looked close enought to 18 anyway. I also know this is abit hipocritical of what i have said abouve but iv just thought about this now so meh
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 10:00
Just to let everyone know. Virgin have taken it off the shelves now but you can still ask for it at the counter. Man this sucks ass!
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 10:28
claudioalex wrote:
>>I only saw blame being levelled at the parents
>in Nik's post. Not the "child". Try reading it
>again<
OK, I`ll try to be more clear, i can
>see you dont understand my idea, i can see its a
>little abstract for you,
The only thing that is abstract about your idea is its execution in writing.
The full stop key is right next to the comma key. Hope this helps. :p
>>I only saw blame being levelled at the parents
>in Nik's post. Not the "child". Try reading it
>again<
OK, I`ll try to be more clear, i can
>see you dont understand my idea, i can see its a
>little abstract for you,
The only thing that is abstract about your idea is its execution in writing.
The full stop key is right next to the comma key. Hope this helps. :p
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:36
Mecha Ghandi wrote:
>It does seem like a tricky issue, but I'm always
>pleased to see large businesses put integrity
>before profit.
That will never happen. What you are seeing is damage limitation. If a shop continues to sell Manhunt, they risk losing even more sales as outraged Daily Mail reading parents refuse to shop there.
It's profit before integrity, as usual. Just some companies did the math and came to different conclusions to others.
>It does seem like a tricky issue, but I'm always
>pleased to see large businesses put integrity
>before profit.
That will never happen. What you are seeing is damage limitation. If a shop continues to sell Manhunt, they risk losing even more sales as outraged Daily Mail reading parents refuse to shop there.
It's profit before integrity, as usual. Just some companies did the math and came to different conclusions to others.
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:30
Okay then, after a little reading into the Daily Mail's article on Warren Leblanc's background, it emerges that Warren Leblanc was:
- From a poor background with divorced parents
- Thrown out of home more than once
- A regular drug user (cannabis)
- A fan of Al Pacino's "Scarface"
- A thief (used to steal mobile phones and sell them)
- A member of a local gang
- A regular truant (would skip lessons to do drugs)
- A person who would regularly "lose the plot" simply over losing at games.
So really, whilst everybody is singling Manhunt out, it would appear that the kid had a multitude of problems - including being at a disadvantage in terms of parental issues (no offence to anybody here with divorced parents, mine have been for over 13 years). However, whilst the game is clearly not the only issue here, the questions of how he got the game still stand. It's still a good time for adjustments to be made to how tightly those age ratings are enforced, and a good time to try to clue parents in about gaming.
- From a poor background with divorced parents
- Thrown out of home more than once
- A regular drug user (cannabis)
- A fan of Al Pacino's "Scarface"
- A thief (used to steal mobile phones and sell them)
- A member of a local gang
- A regular truant (would skip lessons to do drugs)
- A person who would regularly "lose the plot" simply over losing at games.
So really, whilst everybody is singling Manhunt out, it would appear that the kid had a multitude of problems - including being at a disadvantage in terms of parental issues (no offence to anybody here with divorced parents, mine have been for over 13 years). However, whilst the game is clearly not the only issue here, the questions of how he got the game still stand. It's still a good time for adjustments to be made to how tightly those age ratings are enforced, and a good time to try to clue parents in about gaming.
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:24
I think people find it hard to accept their is actually bad people in the world who will kill. Be it a child or an adult, anyone and everyone has that seed of darkness in them. For the majority of us the good and blessed light prevails within us, but with some people that light will go out, possibly only for a short time letting the seed grow. Dark thoughts and acts then follow. I'm no religious nut but you understand what I mean. I too have lost a close relative to the violent actions of a bad person, so I can relate to the victims anger. In my experience what influenced my killers motivations doesn't come into it. My relative is dead and won't come back, the killer is doing hard time as a result, and though I mourn life must go on.
When we see footage of conflicts on tv news we ask ourselves why, because we are used to seeing the best in everyone, and also seeing bad things on tv from a pleasant distance. It's so easy to forget that there is evil in the world because we rarely experience it, be it a mugging, thieves in our home or whatever.
The thing about that kids death is that it was premeditated, and half the school knew about it but did not do much to prevent it. A spontaneous act of violence would possibly place a different angle on things in the eyes of the law, but a child is still dead, so that's something for another day. I don't recall reading anything about the killer kid saying that he practiced or was influenced by Manhunt etc, it was the victims parents that said this. Now whoever said it it, sounds to me like they have been advised by lawyers to say something like this. Lawyers know that the blame the games angle has been done before, and so know how to exploit it to the full, hence the coverage. Everyone has forgotten the killer and focusing on people who make entertainment. This is clear targeting, and banning the game makes it more desired for historic and novelty value. Import and online shopping then make it impossible to enforce such a ban fully. To do this to games you'd then have to focus on books (like Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer) films and music etc.
We are never told if the victim, or anyone else in school owned a PS2 or a copy of Manhunt, but because the killer does, it's immediately to blame for his act. Now I agree that Manhunt is a poor game, but to blame the game and the game developers is a little unfair. Next they'll be blaming Syphon Filter and Biohazard for influencing bio weapons research and terrorist activities. And why not blame the knife manufacturer instead? Because games are easy game, sometimes with huge settlements. Rockstar or Sony especially, have to make a point that games are not just for kids anymore. The public and some media circles still have this perception, and it needs to be changed.
I also notice that nothing positive is ever said about positive and original gaming that does not promote violence. We've had SF2, Carmageddon, Doom, Thrill Kill and now Manhunt, most of which are aimed at on older audience. I do believe that the PS generation does have a problem, Manhunt being passed by Sony says a lot about their quality control or lack there of, because I know that game would have never passed Nintendo quality control, because it's a poor game and a poor subject matter. Sony passed it because they like to sell stuff via hype and violence. It's a joke to think they passed Manhunt, and not Metal Slug which is more acceptable to all parties, but again says a lot about their quality control. Also how come Thrill Kill wasn't accepted, but Manhunt was? That's just wrong.
Parents are never to blame as usual, they like their offspring can apparently do no wrong. That is a myth of society. Parents spend less time seeing what their kids are up to, because of work and career commitments. They get home and are too tired to be bothered, and as a child gets old enough to take care of themselves perhaps they let go more like they are supposed to, while still always having that mix of hope and worry. I suppose as a parent you can only do so much to guide them once they get older, the point will come when they don't want to listen to you much anymore. Like they say, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. The same is true of kids, adults and everyone in the world. Now if more parents sat and played games with their kids they'd have a better idea of what they are playing. Ofcourse parents don't want to do this because they are ADULTS and gaming is BELOW them, and for kids isn't it? This is at the core of the problem, and could be tackled over night, if only parents could switch of the soaps etc and give their kids some attention. I do this with my niece and it seems to work.
Other strange things related. The government is up in arms over child obesity, underage sex, teenage pregnancy, child drug, alcohol use and teenage crime. Their answers to these problems are potential curfews for kids (which again puts kids at home and in front of the TV/PS2 etc, and makes them more obese), selling off and building over playing fields and greens (which then give kids nowhere to play and result in them loitering in groups, at home with PS2 again getting more obese or maybe getting up to no good joy ridding in stolen cars, drugs and underage sexual activity etc). What a joke our government are, so everything they do is counter productive creating more problems. Kids feel lost bored and unwanted which results them going to stupid extremes to get their kicks, with the law not far behind. No ability to work leaves them with no money and increases the angst and boredom, usually resulting in something negative. This is what it's like for kids in the u.k today, and I feel sorry for them. Avenues for release a limited to almost none, which results in frustation and violence. They need more stuff, but MPs and the government don't seem to care, adding more fuel to teenage fire.
How can the problems be solved? In my view let kids work more part time hours to give them self worth and some money and get them off the streets (this requires a change in law). Free after school martial arts classes to again get them motivated, disciplined and off the streets, teachers would be partly paid by the government. More free access to sporting facilities would also help to keep them occupied.
As for sales of games if I.D cards become law it might make things easier for retailers, but just incase perhaps stores that sell games should make purchasers of adult (or maybe all) games sign a legally binding contract. A contract declaring upon sale that places all repsponsibility for any actions of a similar respect to the adult titles' content upon the purchaser, and not the retailer or developer of the said game. No signature, no game (this might result in them going online to shop for games, but online it's much harder to point the finger when you can shop round the planet). Also change their silly reward cards to include the age and picture of the purchaser, this part would be piss easy to do but still hasn't been done by Game etc. Keeping adult titles under the counter, or on a high shelf or cabinet display would also help.
We'll that's my essay view of the whole situation over. Hope you found some of my views interesting.
When we see footage of conflicts on tv news we ask ourselves why, because we are used to seeing the best in everyone, and also seeing bad things on tv from a pleasant distance. It's so easy to forget that there is evil in the world because we rarely experience it, be it a mugging, thieves in our home or whatever.
The thing about that kids death is that it was premeditated, and half the school knew about it but did not do much to prevent it. A spontaneous act of violence would possibly place a different angle on things in the eyes of the law, but a child is still dead, so that's something for another day. I don't recall reading anything about the killer kid saying that he practiced or was influenced by Manhunt etc, it was the victims parents that said this. Now whoever said it it, sounds to me like they have been advised by lawyers to say something like this. Lawyers know that the blame the games angle has been done before, and so know how to exploit it to the full, hence the coverage. Everyone has forgotten the killer and focusing on people who make entertainment. This is clear targeting, and banning the game makes it more desired for historic and novelty value. Import and online shopping then make it impossible to enforce such a ban fully. To do this to games you'd then have to focus on books (like Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer) films and music etc.
We are never told if the victim, or anyone else in school owned a PS2 or a copy of Manhunt, but because the killer does, it's immediately to blame for his act. Now I agree that Manhunt is a poor game, but to blame the game and the game developers is a little unfair. Next they'll be blaming Syphon Filter and Biohazard for influencing bio weapons research and terrorist activities. And why not blame the knife manufacturer instead? Because games are easy game, sometimes with huge settlements. Rockstar or Sony especially, have to make a point that games are not just for kids anymore. The public and some media circles still have this perception, and it needs to be changed.
I also notice that nothing positive is ever said about positive and original gaming that does not promote violence. We've had SF2, Carmageddon, Doom, Thrill Kill and now Manhunt, most of which are aimed at on older audience. I do believe that the PS generation does have a problem, Manhunt being passed by Sony says a lot about their quality control or lack there of, because I know that game would have never passed Nintendo quality control, because it's a poor game and a poor subject matter. Sony passed it because they like to sell stuff via hype and violence. It's a joke to think they passed Manhunt, and not Metal Slug which is more acceptable to all parties, but again says a lot about their quality control. Also how come Thrill Kill wasn't accepted, but Manhunt was? That's just wrong.
Parents are never to blame as usual, they like their offspring can apparently do no wrong. That is a myth of society. Parents spend less time seeing what their kids are up to, because of work and career commitments. They get home and are too tired to be bothered, and as a child gets old enough to take care of themselves perhaps they let go more like they are supposed to, while still always having that mix of hope and worry. I suppose as a parent you can only do so much to guide them once they get older, the point will come when they don't want to listen to you much anymore. Like they say, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. The same is true of kids, adults and everyone in the world. Now if more parents sat and played games with their kids they'd have a better idea of what they are playing. Ofcourse parents don't want to do this because they are ADULTS and gaming is BELOW them, and for kids isn't it? This is at the core of the problem, and could be tackled over night, if only parents could switch of the soaps etc and give their kids some attention. I do this with my niece and it seems to work.
Other strange things related. The government is up in arms over child obesity, underage sex, teenage pregnancy, child drug, alcohol use and teenage crime. Their answers to these problems are potential curfews for kids (which again puts kids at home and in front of the TV/PS2 etc, and makes them more obese), selling off and building over playing fields and greens (which then give kids nowhere to play and result in them loitering in groups, at home with PS2 again getting more obese or maybe getting up to no good joy ridding in stolen cars, drugs and underage sexual activity etc). What a joke our government are, so everything they do is counter productive creating more problems. Kids feel lost bored and unwanted which results them going to stupid extremes to get their kicks, with the law not far behind. No ability to work leaves them with no money and increases the angst and boredom, usually resulting in something negative. This is what it's like for kids in the u.k today, and I feel sorry for them. Avenues for release a limited to almost none, which results in frustation and violence. They need more stuff, but MPs and the government don't seem to care, adding more fuel to teenage fire.
How can the problems be solved? In my view let kids work more part time hours to give them self worth and some money and get them off the streets (this requires a change in law). Free after school martial arts classes to again get them motivated, disciplined and off the streets, teachers would be partly paid by the government. More free access to sporting facilities would also help to keep them occupied.
As for sales of games if I.D cards become law it might make things easier for retailers, but just incase perhaps stores that sell games should make purchasers of adult (or maybe all) games sign a legally binding contract. A contract declaring upon sale that places all repsponsibility for any actions of a similar respect to the adult titles' content upon the purchaser, and not the retailer or developer of the said game. No signature, no game (this might result in them going online to shop for games, but online it's much harder to point the finger when you can shop round the planet). Also change their silly reward cards to include the age and picture of the purchaser, this part would be piss easy to do but still hasn't been done by Game etc. Keeping adult titles under the counter, or on a high shelf or cabinet display would also help.
We'll that's my essay view of the whole situation over. Hope you found some of my views interesting.
Fri, 30 Jul 2004 20:45
http://chat.dailymail.co.uk/dailymail/threadnonInd.jsp?forum=105&thread=9649652&message=10523033
This thread on the Daily Mail message board is interesting. It states that the thread debating violent goes has been "removed, pending review". The forum members then say about the lawyers checking it over, but the interesting point is a member saying that "Comments similar to CJ's were already being debated, and most of them agreed that blaming video games was wrong".
The CJ in question said "Personally, I think it a little irresponsible to blame this appalling crime on a video game. What does this say? Are we now a society that makes excuses for criminals and their behaviour? That's what blaming this hideous act on a video game does - it takes culpability away from the perpetrator and portrays him as a 'victim'. Utterly idiotic and downright insulting to the memory of the real victim."
Has the Daily Mail taken a leaf out of Future Publishing's book and removed a battle that they weren't winning?
EDIT: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/denise.thorpe1/mailloses.png
The Daily Mail has no problems condemning stores that sell the game, rather like it has no problems in accepting revenue generated by their sponsored links.
This thread on the Daily Mail message board is interesting. It states that the thread debating violent goes has been "removed, pending review". The forum members then say about the lawyers checking it over, but the interesting point is a member saying that "Comments similar to CJ's were already being debated, and most of them agreed that blaming video games was wrong".
The CJ in question said "Personally, I think it a little irresponsible to blame this appalling crime on a video game. What does this say? Are we now a society that makes excuses for criminals and their behaviour? That's what blaming this hideous act on a video game does - it takes culpability away from the perpetrator and portrays him as a 'victim'. Utterly idiotic and downright insulting to the memory of the real victim."
Has the Daily Mail taken a leaf out of Future Publishing's book and removed a battle that they weren't winning?
EDIT: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/denise.thorpe1/mailloses.png
The Daily Mail has no problems condemning stores that sell the game, rather like it has no problems in accepting revenue generated by their sponsored links.
Sat, 31 Jul 2004 09:14
I work for the Daily Mail, (before you jump on me - I DONT WRITE FOR THEM! They just pay my bills), anyway - the coverage that they've given this 'story' typifies everything that the paper stands for.
I completely agree with whats been said - its a JOKE that a GAME is being blamed for this murder.
Not only that - it really doesnt go into detail about the killer had a history of burglary and drug taking.. or that he was 17 and had an 18-cert game.. I wonder who bought him that.
I say stop blaming the games and clampdown more on either the retailers or making the parent smroe aware of the birthday gifts they're buying their kids.
Grrr...
I completely agree with whats been said - its a JOKE that a GAME is being blamed for this murder.
Not only that - it really doesnt go into detail about the killer had a history of burglary and drug taking.. or that he was 17 and had an 18-cert game.. I wonder who bought him that.
I say stop blaming the games and clampdown more on either the retailers or making the parent smroe aware of the birthday gifts they're buying their kids.
Grrr...
Sun, 1 Aug 2004 15:43
I made a website about smacktards who try to ban games, http://www.locopuyo.com/videogamepolitics.html
Log-in or register to permanently change your layout setting.
2088 comments
> THESE CHILDREN ARE NOT BLAME OF NOT
> HAVING GOOD PARENTS
You're right. The parents, be they sgenetic parent, guardians or foster parents, are to blame for not being good parent. I didn't suggest otherwise.
As for many children not having genetic parents, then somebody will be responsible for raising them. If there isn't, then the blame lies with the government.
My point, in this instance, is that parents (or guardians) should vet the games their kids are playing. If thye don't, they are shirking their responsibilities as a parent.
I know parents who've let their offspring play GTA. When I've told them about the game's content, they were visibily shocked. These people wouldn't let their kids watch Texas Chainsaw Massacre - they must think all games are fluffy clouds with Mario leaping from one to another.