The parents blame Rockstar, but the game clearly had an R18 rating! :huh:
VG get blamed for everything these days. Like someone said, somewhere... "If Pacman had affected us as kids we'd be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music."

Then this happened: :rolleyes:

Uhh hello, parents. You see your kid obsessed with a truly disturbing game, and you continue to let him play it!!

Put them in jail says I.

God! I'm sick of this kind of thing. No-one complained when Rockstar North aka DMA design released Lemmings, and how violent was that game?

I always thought 'Snuff' meant porno.

I don't think there were enough masses jumping off cliffs for them to link it to the game.

Seriously though, Manhunt is a sick and twisted game, and if you notice your young child obsessed with it, something has gotta be done.

I own Manhunt. I bought itof curiosity and some pretty decent reviews it got. Plus its a R* game! The stealth elements are good/decent, but the violence is over the top. But it was never meant to be a G game. It was seriously an adult only game!
One thing I know, is that I am definitely not obsessed with such a game. I like the whole gritty dark feel of the game but I'm not a fan of Thrill Kill type games...

But still, blaming vg is not the solution. I mean, why not blame movies too?! Harry Potter makes black magic and sorcery look okay. LotR was pretty voilent. Jet Li, Jackie Chan movies were voilent. Hell, The 3 Ninjas was exetreme violence!! Kids kicking adults in the groin and smacking other kids at the mall... Pfft! :rolleyes:

I personally think it's a mix of both sides. Parents shouldn't be letting their kids play this crap. But on the other hands, a lot of games (eg. Manhunt) don't need to be so violent and bloody. You can have the exact same gameplay and fun factor without the gore and extreme violence.

Don't deny it, you know it's true. :P

a snuff movie is a movie in which someone is actually killed.

I agree that game classification should be taken much more seriously and the ideas about having the same kind of restrictions on advertising games as other substances that have been deemed inappropriate for children is excellent.

I fully support the classification of video games and I believe that there needs to be the possibility to allow games that are grossly inappropriate to be banned. Whether Manhunt is such a game would be a matter for debate and as I haven't played the game or know much about it, I don't feel able to comment.

This pisses me off so much, stupid parents, and lazy/greedy retailers are the main problem. They need to enforce the R rating more(Put R rated games in cabnets behind the counters. etc.), and introduce one here.

If its rated R, and a kid goes crazy, then you can blame the person who provided the game. An adult can tell the difference between reality and fantasy, some teenagers can't, and that's why we have the ratings.

That was a Nintendo sales rep in the early 90's I believe. (in refrence to violent NES games)

Isn't that what a rave is?

Almost Raves have crazy disco lights.

Absolutely. Video games and movies can be blamed as much as each other. Obviously if a young teenager plays/watches something graphically violent they may think it is wise to carry out the same action in real life. This is why the classification system for each media is so important.

But on the other hand if someone is depraved enough to actually carry out such a violent act, the tendency was in them their whole life and anything could bring that tendency out. Violent video game or not.

If it wasn't a video game, it would be a heavy metal band, say Marilyn Manson. If it wasn't them/him, it would be a violent movie, if not that, a violent comic book. Every type of escape for teenagers is a scapegoat for when they snap, not thier shitty upbringing and stupid, incompetant parents.

I think that's the conclusion you're meant to reach...

There's definetly alot of correlational data suggesting that violent children may play violent games (I doubt anyone would dispute that), but that doesn't suggest a causal relationship. That is; kids who commit acts of violence may like violent video games, but the video games don't necessarily cause that violence. There's not really any proof to suggest they do, at least.

I agree with pretty much everything else said. The parents are at fault, ratings need to be adhered to more strictly, enforced more strictly, ecetera.

What I cannot understand is where the connection between violent games and violent behaviour comes from. Sure, after watching something you feel like reenacting it for a few minutes. After watching the Mask at the cinema I thought I was Jim Carry for hours. After watching Terminator 2, I walk around my flat like him, aiming one way and firing in another! And I have broken my bed doing pedigrees to a pillow after watching wrestling. :lol:

What I haven't done after watching Terminator 2 is try to get hold of a gun and kill people. I haven't tried do wrestling moves on any real person. The person that does that has quite major mental problems in the first place. You are dealing with people who don't have violence inhibitors in their personality.

Psychopaths will always kill, the method might be determined by what they see, but it is only the method, not the reason. I could view violent images all day and never even consider committing a crime.

It is people on the outside, people that don't play games that don't understand this. These people that make these types of comments are usually of low IQ and their views on a how range of topics would be questionable, not just on this issue. Well maybe that is going too far.

Don't forget though that the parents have lost their son in a horrific manner and are not thinking correctly. Try to understand what they are going through but always argue your case.

In any event, the games industry is worth so much money, in all likelihood nothing will happen.

True, but it can also be argued that a game as gruesome as Manhunt should not be allowed on shelves, as it can "trigger" these effects in people.

Trust me, if you've played the game, you'd know what I was talking about. Manhunt takes a game beyond just killing someone else, it glorifies the gruesome way in which someone can be killed, which is a whole different ballpark.

I'm not for this whole "violence against videogames" spiel, but I do think that sometimes companies need to take a little bit of responsibility and actually LOOK at what they are creating. Videogames are a very involving medium, so what is in one can have more of an effect on someone.

Conclusion:

1. The parents are COMPLETELY responsible in monitoring what their kids do.

2. The kid probably already had an "undiscovered" case of psychosis anyway, due to him actually carrying out the act. Which further backs up point 1.

3. Game developers really do need to watch what they are doing. Manhunt didn't NEED the gruesome killing, but it relished in it. Running people over in GTA and seeing their body fly is one thing, but seeing a character shove a piece of glass in someone's eye, or smack them with a golf club, and then smack their brains out while they're on the floor is just too much.

:lol:


This is certaintly one of those endless arguments that goes nowhere, as games become more mainstream and more of these types of games like Manhunt are released, they will continue to be blamed for these horrible acts of violence.

If anything I think this controversy is great for Rockstar (in an economic sense), people respond to incentives, all this extra publicity on Rockstar's games is essenially free advertising for Rockstar. People that hadn't heard about the game, will suddenly want to play it because of the controversy, there is now an incentive to try this out and see if you survive!
If the controversy on these products does anything, it gives them more attention! And eventually the stories die off.
Look at the film The Passion of the Christ, so many people saw that film due to the controversy created from its graphic violence, there were many people against it (both religous and non-religious), as the film came and went so too did the controversy.

:lol:

As you stated though it is those who are social outcasts, have a violent background, or just value videogames as the be all and end all of life itself that would follow suit. You also have to consider extremely young children and how they attempt to replicate the majority of what they see via media advenues.

Spag, your so completly right. But do they have to be just for teenagers? But yeah media has been blamed for ever, think about it if your child killed someone who are you likely to blame? The video games movies etc, or yourself? Me, I'd blame my self cause lets face it you should be keeping an eye one them.

I prefer to think of him as Alternative Rock :P
And anyway, MM is Little Miss Muffet compared to a band like Gorgoroth.
But that is neither here nor there.

I gave Manhunt a go on the PC. Found the concept pretty disturbing, but nothing out of the ordinary from Rockstar. I played it while a couple of my friends watched on. When I split some bum's melon with the baseball bat, one of the chicks let out this weird shriek, then said that is coz of shit like this that kids are killing each other in school.
I ain't got no allusions about it. There are fucked up games coming out, and young kids with ignorant parents are getting hold of them. They play them and it alters their perception of reality. Not in all, but i believe some become too attached to the game world (Look at all those damn MMORPG players. One US student spent 3 full days in his closed room playing Everquest, at my college). Just like music, art and books have influenced the way I have grown up, video games are influencing this latest generation.
If the game is adult then I believe it shouldn't be marketed in a publication who's reader base dips below that of the games restriction. It is in this department that Rockstar should have been more responsible.
However in the end the game, nor its producers can be blamed. It is just an unfortunately tragic event, caused by a confused teen and some ignorant parents.

I did find the game entirely boring, by the way. How anyone could stick with it long enough to become obsessed is beyond me.

..I'm yet to break mine :P

well, I'm 14 and I own Manhunt (I have a 17 year old brother!). needless to say any rage that you might have pent up can easily be released using this game, but that doesn't mean I go around with a metal bat choking people until they're on their knees and then whacking their head so hard that that part of their head literally flies off! I don't even bring it up in conversation unless someone asks. And if I do I usually stab them in the neck with a piece of glass :P Just kidding, I tell them it's incredibly violent, so much so in fact that it's good for a laugh. I really don't see how the game and not the child's mental health could be to blame for this terrible occurence.

It's been said before me, but clearly anyone willing to mimmick a violent act seen on TV, read about in a book, experienced in a game, heard about in a song etc. is bound to have problems mentally to ever consider behaving in such a way.

Rockstar should have no blame placed on it for creating a violent game, however, as has been said, advertisements for such games should not be appearing where they could easily be viewed by those not of a suitable age.

As for stores being to blame, it's obvious here that children who are not of suitable age are managing to buy games like Manhunt and GTA and it's something that should be changed. I don't know if the case is similar in the UK but I'd assume it would be. It's something that needs to be looked into.

However, to be placing blame on stores is to be assuming that this 17 year old did buy the game, we all know how easy it is to obtain a pirated copy of a game, assuming that if he had his mind set on obtaining the game I'm sure he would've easily obtained it from elsewhere if denied it in stores.

However the above isn't entirely relevent to this issue.

As Manny so validly pointed out, these Parents should have paid attention to what their offspring was playing and to the extent he was playing it.

All i want to know is, where were the bloody parents? Why did they let their son buy an 18+ game? It's funny that the general public never see that.

The worst thing is the parents knowing he was obsessed with such a violent game, but didn't do anything to stop him playing it, or so it seems.

Most parents are ignorant, not really taking notice of what their children are doing, they assume that all videogames are for children because they are toys, unaware the games have classifications, mature content and are essentially a form of medium just like movies.

Can you back that statement up?

I think that can be backed up by the increasing behavioural problems facing children these days.

But really, he should have said, some parents are ignorant.

Why are todays parents refraining from giving the kids the good ol' wacking? It straightens them up! Look at me, I turned out okay... :unsure:

It has been proven to have more of a negative impact rather than issuing another form of punishment, such as taking something away from the child for a period of time. Also a violent upbringing for a children more often then not leads to irrational behaviour and criminal activity.

[SIZE=1][SIZE=1][SIZE=1]

Well not with a statistic or anything, if that's what you mean <_< but from my experience a lot of parents think that all videogames are for children. I get rants from adults a lot because I play videogames, they say to me, "arent you a little old to be playing silly computer games".
It's the same with cartoons; there is the assumption that all cartoons are for children, when it is quite obvious that they are not, especially Japanese Anmie.

Essentially that's what I meant, when I said most parents are ignorant, I probably shouldnt have used the word most though, but from my experience the word most is justified.

Yes, just show them something like Perfect Blue or Spriggan to show how "childish" Anime is :P

I was more questioning the

line. (slightly off topic, but I imagine that happens a lot more amoung hetrosexual parents than homosexual parents).

Well no one is talking about beating the living shit out of them, but a smack doesn't do much damage, but inflicts enough pain for the kid to know that what they did was wrong. Like for instance if a kid touches a lit candle. the fire will hurt them, and they'll learn not to touch that again.

Let's save that for a seperate topic yeah?

Well since a lot of parents assume (in my experience) games, cartoons and the like are all for children this would suggest that they are:

because if they were, they probably wouldnt allow their children to be exposed to such content, but due to the assumption that I have highlighted, they essentially take those forms of medium for granted, assuming they are appropriate for kids.

Well, well, well:

:lol: It was bound to happen! :P When are they gonna learn? The same thing happened to the GTA games. Sheesh!

The difference was that the GTA games were good enough to stand in the charts for a long period of time with or without controvesy.

In my experience parents are very aware of what their children are playing and often place restrictions on what games are sutible. Just recently my cousin was pestering his mother (my aunt) to buy him GTA and she (rightly) refused (he's about 9). My parents certainly had limits on what I could play when I was younger. I don't think that's a problem.

Obviously some parents will restrict what their children watch/play etc, but there are still many that dont. My parents were restrictive of what I was exposed to when I was younger, but many of cousins for example were not, as my Uncles/Aunts didnt really care what films their kids watched. Now my cousins arent "damaged" or anything like that, but they were still exposed to unappropriate medium for their age.

So while its not the problem everywhere, it's certainly a contributing factor.

Yeah but from the point of view of the people who make the game, earning a reputation for it through using violence sold a few copies to people posting in this thread alone!

Sometimes violence and gore can really add towards the playing experience - make it scarier and more atmospheric. But yes enforcing ratings good idea.

I also thought it was a good idea how in some games you can turn off the blood if you wanted, a good option to have.