Goodbye to unreal tournament?

[Mobius]

Hey!
Anyone who lives in the uk and is a gamer (which i guess is all uk users of this forum) will know that the game manhunt was banned after a murder was inspired by the game.

Well, apparently the gouvernment want to ban more games such as the gta series (which i dont care about 2 be honest) but what gets me is that they want to get rid of practicall all games which have a violent nature to them (i think it is and game with the fist icon by the cetifcate. any person who is a gamer in europe should know what i'm talking about) that would mean, no unreal tournament!!! :cry: if that happens i would go insane.

Note: this might be pure speculation

can some PLEASE shed some light on the situation and say that it is all lies or we should revolt as a nation of gamers.

[m/g]

[infoxicated]

Nah, cant see it happening - the fuss has been caused by a tabloid newspaper, and even the police say they don't regard the game as anything to do with the murder in that particular case.

What pisses me off is that the kids' parents are the ones blaming the game and fueling the fire - the game has an 18 certificate and they probably bought for him. Assclowns!

It's the same deal as happened with horror movies back in the 80's, when stuff like Nightmare on Elm Street was blamed for murders. You get messed up people doing messed up stuff regardless of whether there are violent movies or games on the shelves, it's just that it sells newspapers when they claim they're fighting for the good of society.

They're going after the PlayStation brand, or rather consoles, too, so PC games like Unreal Tournament are probably quite far down the food chain as far as the witch hunt is concerned.

[Hellfire_WZ]

The only "link" the Daily Mail made with the murder was that Manhunt was found in the suspect's bedroom following the event. The usual incontrovertible evidence then... :) I believe a similar thing happened with the GTA series as well, same paper too. Is it just me or does the Daily Mail have some personal vendetta against Rockstar?

It was also revealed that the suspect was 17 years old, which as Rob says, begs the question "what was he doing with an 18-rated game in the first place?" But even so, how many of us have felt the urge to go on a killing spree after playing GTA or the like? If there were a significant link between violent nature and violent games, I think I'd have put several mass murderers to shame by now! :wink:

If the government see fit to ban all violent elements in games on this basis, then they really shouldn't be there. I sincerely doubt they have the guts to do anything like that.

[Shem]

Ever since I was interested in computer gaming, there were these so called "disscussions" (namely raides against violent game developers) about the game violence and ppl who 'took it too serious' ending up killing people. And everytime somebody else than parents of a murder was blamed for the situation, no one wanted to hear what gaming society has to say about it. Though we said the same thing plenty of times before, and what infoxicated just repeated in his post. No one seems to care about what game playing society has to say, or no one wants to hear it. Of course it's easier to blame it on violent games. It's harder to think it over, and as yourself (as a parent) "what went wrong?". Maybe it's easier to blame becouse it draws the attention of the one who is responsible for these situations. Of course there's always the issue of some mentally distorted ones who would have done what they had done one way or another. So, again, who's to blame in that case?
The one thing I demand from the ones who blame, is to hear us, or go through similar cases from the past....it has always been the same, we should have learnt something from it.

[gucci_little_piggy]

Nah, cant see it happening - the fuss has been caused by a tabloid newspaper, and even the police say they don't regard the game as anything to do with the murder in that particular case.

What pisses me off is that the kids' parents are the ones blaming the game and fueling the fire - the game has an 18 certificate and they probably bought for him. Assclowns!

It's the same deal as happened with horror movies back in the 80's, when stuff like Nightmare on Elm Street was blamed for murders. You get messed up people doing messed up stuff regardless of whether there are violent movies or games on the shelves, it's just that it sells newspapers when they claim they're fighting for the good of society.

They're going after the PlayStation brand, or rather consoles, too, so PC games like Unreal Tournament are probably quite far down the food chain as far as the witch hunt is concerned.

the truth, in less than 1,000 words. i can never get all the reasons against banning games/music/films down to that amount, because there are so many. i cannot begin to describe how amazingly stupid it is to blame a murder on a game.

[piranha wiper]

infox and hellfire, i completly agree its the parents fault that their child has a game which they are clearly underage for it, the certificates are there for a reason, but i play games and watch movies that are 18's and at the moment im 17, i watch the first terminator wen i was 13 and that 5 years before i should have done and im not a psycopathical maniac and im sure some of you here watched and played things that you havent been old enough for, but movies and games cant be blamed for the twistings of peoples minds, the incident of the manhunt thing is complete and utter crap he needed an excuse for having a shorter sentance in prison (if he got one)

[xEik]

According to The Register, it was the victim (not the killer) who owned the game (so maybe the parents complaining are the ones who bought it :P).
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/04/manhunt_murder_claim/

[G'Kyl]

Ah, the violence in video games issue again... ;) One can grow real tired of it. Mostly because all sides continue to repeat their arguments and nothing happens. :( I have been playing for something like 15 years now and nothing ever changed in this discussion.

What annoyes me is that gaming is made responsible for almost any kind of violent outbreak among teenagers these days. And I can see were those who argue that way get their point of view. Lets face it: PLAYING to kill people is indeed the closest thing to actually doing it. What is often forgotten, though, is that according to any recent study there is no direct connection between playing computer games and executing violence.

But there is more I think we should consider. Parents ALONE can't be blamed for what happened to their mislead "freaks". Instead I believe one should take a close look at society in general. Which brings me back to games again. Why? Because I think the increasing level of depicted violence in ANY media at least has the effect of sensitizing us to these themes, so we might be far more used to it than we have been before, e.g. violence becomes more "natural" than it has been before. And that's were video games too played their part in.

Anyway, the bottom line is that I find it silly how most of the media and a lot of game playing fanatics in other forums I read go on and on to react to each other.

Ben

[yuusen]

–
i dont think it is either fair nor productive/creative to "blame" anything or anyone. blame is good for one thing and that is causing a strong emotional reaction, most of the time a negative one. this is why we find things, groups and individuals blamed so much by highly-mainstream media. the emotional reaction pulls peoples attention towards the situation in hand in a purely negative sense but the media dont seem to care about what kind of attention it is; attention is attention. in this sense this makes the mainstream media the distorted children of our society, feeding their need for attention with the unfortunate darkness held within many areas of the country. this darkness should not be treated in this way as it only feeds it with more darkness, that of the public's manipulated hatred of whatever the media tells them to fear.

instead, i believe (and this bit is much easier to take seriously if you have an idealistic frame of mind) that the media should focus more on the logical or emotional cause than the event itself. many news mediums already do this to a degree, especially on the radio where people seem to be more selective about what information they take in (due to it stimulating only one primary sense, maybe?). i just wish it were adopted in a more profound sense throughout a wider spectrum of the media.

[EDIT - Ben, I just read your post previous to mine. emotion had inspired me to write before completely reading the thread. it looks like we agree somewhere in there :)]
–
¥