LostInSpace Posted September 25, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 25, 2003 quote:Originally posted by conker424: the people who say violent games make people violent are the same idiots that sue mcdonalds for "making" them fat Yup and then the government nannies step in forcing everyone to try to eat veggie burgers. Blah!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wody Posted September 25, 2003 Report Share Posted September 25, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: uhm, wow? When I play these games, I like the violence. Afterwards, I feel relieved, and relaxed, and got rid of my agression. So, my theory is probably that we would not see this kind of news, if we didn't have games, because people would be so violent, and agressive, that these things would happen daily. *checks crime statistics* Oops, sorry, I guess it happened before games too. Scratch that theory. So, what's next? Greetings, Wouter Dijkslag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XOR Posted September 25, 2003 Report Share Posted September 25, 2003 isnt it unconstitutional to punish game companies for the content of their games? FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION !!!!! problem solved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostInSpace Posted September 25, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 25, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: uhm, wow? Hmmm, I wonder why the retail store who sold the game isn't being named in this lawsuit either. Isn't it more their responsibility to make sure the game is not sold to minors? I know the stores here in NYC have clamped down real tight long ago about selling games based on the ratings. My nephew who is 14 complains about it all the time that he can't buy all the good games he wants without a parent based on the rating on game. I'm talking about GameStop and Compusa. And again where were the parents of these kids that did this crime. Ah, this whole thing just makes me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr Nova Posted September 25, 2003 Report Share Posted September 25, 2003 I believe everyone here is thinking on the same page. That means there isn't a debate here, although I see many long ranting posts. Too much general banter that no one appears to be reading through anymore, because it's all just the same opinion. What I'd like to see discussed, if you choose to rant, is what you believe is the most feasible course of action to take regarding this. You believe it's incorrect. How do you correct this legal battle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XOR Posted September 25, 2003 Report Share Posted September 25, 2003 the only logical solution to this problem and almost every other problem in the world is to quarentine all the stupid people in the world/and or kill them... until ppl stop being stupid about things(it is not the games fault its the idiot who commits the crimes fault) then thers is always going to be someone to try to sue a game company for their loss, and even if they win, the taste of victory will turn to ash in their mouth when they realise the money didnt make them less sad. but seriously... I like to think of games as art because well they are art, art is for the most part entertainment point 1 video game companies create this entertainment and sell it to you... YOU BUY IT... IT IS YOURS NOW!!! what does this mean? you are now responsible for what you do with it. When was the last time someone sued a gun makeing company because someone got killed with one of the gus they made? point 2 If you copy the killing in a video game, that doesnt make it the game company's fault point 3 if you are dumb enough to sue someone in spite of the fact that there is already a parental guidance lable on it then you deserve to be shot It should be against the law to file an "angry mom" suit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr Nova Posted September 26, 2003 Report Share Posted September 26, 2003 See, that's the problem. That line of thinking can't fix the problem--that line of thinking is just out of rage and spite. I wish the morons of the world would just disappear sometimes, but that isn't happening any time soon. You have to find a way to deal with it. My thoughts are that sometime in the near future, we're gonna have some groundbreaking case where someone speaks of the current precedents of games, movies, books, music, and etc. with violence, and some psychologist will draw some sort of line. That line is obviously gonna be flawed without some sort of comparison to influences by other media. Universities will publish some lengthy reports about games, but without comparing the game-violence relationship to other medias and their relationships to violence, the modern day precedents against violent games will remain. (I mean, research like this has already been going on, but they appear very subjective, IMO.) People and companies do get sued for very oddballed things. The purpose of the court in new kinds of cases, is to make a precedent, and make sure it's not a hassle after that point. At this point, I believe in situations where a game had an influence, it is the firm responsibility of the player (or guardian, if minor). Even if the game was re-encated in full. If it were a movie scene re-encated, the person would still be responsible. The only thing I see mixing this up a bit is pleading insanity, but then again if you do acts like this, your mental/emotional state is already really f***ed up. Summary: Even if influenced by media, a killer is a killer. Like that guns and killing people quote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Grayfox Posted September 26, 2003 Report Share Posted September 26, 2003 next thing you know we'll be filling out waivers when we buy games saying all companies involved with the creation/distribution of the game are not responsible for any violent behavior brought on by said video game... either that or itll be in the EULA on the game itself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Light Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 Probably wont say anything because for the longest time their idea of a violent game was doom. Would take lots of publicity for them to notice anything else now that they are fixated upon GTA. If you think about it worse things than GTA or Doom have come and gone with little to no notice...like Soldier of Fortune 1&2, Hitman 1&2, even Half-Life would fall under their classification of a ultra violent game. (Half-Life would be likely due to the violence against american soldiers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XOR Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 quote: either that or itll be in the EULA on the game itself you know thats a damn good idea! there is your legal solution... "We the company will not be held responible if anyone is influenced to kill another human because of what they have seen in this game." not bad, not bad at all hey when they click "accept" they should know what they are doing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostInSpace Posted September 27, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 I have already suggested a disclaimer for a game box in another thread scroll down to the fifth post http://www.3000ad.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cg...ic;f=7;t=002742 Another consideration would be for gamers to start their own lobbist group so we have a voice in all of this insanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hades Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Dambreville: "Guns do not kill people, people kill people."Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Grayfox Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 quote:If you think about it worse things than GTA or Doom have come and gone with little to no notice...like Soldier of Fortune 1&2, Hitman 1&2, even Half-Life would fall under their classification of a ultra violent game. one of the most violent ones IMO(both action and dialogue wise) was kingpin: life of crime. whoah nelly talk about f this and f that and blowing peoples limbs off... i actually enjoyed the game. however it was a relatively light blip on the scope. and you didnt see me in the paper blowing a dozen people away afterwards... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostInSpace Posted September 27, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Grayfox: quote:If you think about it worse things than GTA or Doom have come and gone with little to no notice...like Soldier of Fortune 1&2, Hitman 1&2, even Half-Life would fall under their classification of a ultra violent game. one of the most violent ones IMO(both action and dialogue wise) was kingpin: life of crime. whoah nelly talk about f this and f that and blowing peoples limbs off... i actually enjoyed the game. however it was a relatively light blip on the scope. and you didnt see me in the paper blowing a dozen people away afterwards... Oh yeah, how could I forget about that one. Like "I'm gunna blow a cap in yo A$$" phrases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now