Warren Spector critizes Rockstar with GTA Series

[mckmas8808]

Shifty thanks for proving my point. *hears clapping from thousands of people*
The fact that the media only catches and reports the negative things basically means that the people are not getting a true representation of what's the true reality. For instance if a news program reported that 50 people dropped out of a certain high school and gave the impression that the high school is bad and didn't care about it's students people would be shocked and mad.

Yet being that the news media didn't report that 500 people graduated that same year and are going to college the people aren't getting the full represention of the high school. Point blank if the media is allowed to focus only on the violent games then of course videogames today would seem only violent to ill-informed people like Scott_Arm.

That to me is the problem. If they are giving us a story they should give us all the facts, so that the everyday person should form their own opinion.

Why would the media talk about 'safe' games?

To give parents a good idea of what games to buy their kids, grandchildren, neices, and nephews for Christmas. It's the big holiday season right? Like 50% or something like that of games is sold during this time right? Shouldn't the news programs and newspapers have a show, article, or segment about what non-violent games to buy for underaged kids?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Well unless they want to give shopping advice for everything else too, I wouldn't have thought it's their responsibility. There'll be specialist press for prents wanting to look up games. If the news were to cover 'nice things' they'd have to give recipe suggestions and book suggestions and fashion tips, and News24 would become a non-stop daytime TV magazine programme

 

[mckmas8808]

Well unless they want to give shopping advice for everything else too, I wouldn't have thought it's their responsibility. There'll be specialist press for prents wanting to look up games. If the news were to cover 'nice things' they'd have to give recipe suggestions and book suggestions and fashion tips, and News24 would become a non-stop daytime TV magazine programme

So why is it their responsibility to tell parents that GTA is super violent? Shouldn't the parent know that when they pick up the freaking box and see the 'M' Mature rating? Then if these stupid parents where to flip the little thin box over they would notice it says

Blood and Gore
Intense Violence
Strong Language
Strong Sexual Content
Use of Drugs

They ESRB has already told them what's in the game so why should the media feel it's their responsibility to do what the ESRB has already done?

According to your theory shouldn't the media also talk negatively about movies like Saw II and Bad Boys II?

 

[Scott_Arm]

Don't take this analogy the wrong way Scott but you are like a White person that is racist toward black people, yet that didn't even met one before. Meaning that you really can't speak apon something that you don't have enough knowledge of.

Well, it's not really the same because I've been playing games for 20 years on everything from Atari and Commodore64 all the way up until recent consoles like the Gamecube, PS2 and Xbox. So, I do have knowledge of games on pretty much just about every single gaming system that's been available since the early 80s. I'm just not a hardcore gamer in that I don't know every single title that's being released on every single system because there are more systems than I care to keep track of. I know about games like DDR and Nintendogs and sports games and racing games. There are just heaps of violent games and those are the ones that get the big splash pages on IGN and Gamespy and whatever other game sites I check out. I'm in no way scared of violent games. I play them all the time. I just got through playing FEAR for a couple hours. I just think the majority of quality titles I see in the shops and written up on gaming websites are the violent games. The only news I watch is the CBC and the BCC, and they don't bother talking about video games at all, unless it's in the tech business reporting. If there is a balance of non-violent games available, it's the industries fault for not promoting them or supporting them equally. You can't blame the media for anything.

 

[mckmas8808]

If there is a balance of non-violent games available, it's the industries fault for not promoting them or supporting them equally. You can't blame the media for anything.

See that's the problem. There is a balance of non-violent games available. Sony has proved that everyday platform games like the Jak and Daxter series can sell great and have big promotion. Nintendo has already proved that every game doesn't have to big about blood, guts, and cursing. Why Scott do you act as if Nintendo doesn't exist?

Disclaimer: I know I may come off as hard and harsh but the question above is entirely honest and respectable. Please do not take it in any other way. Thanks.

 

[Scott_Arm]

See that's the problem. There is a balance of non-violent games available. Sony has proved that everyday platform games like the Jak and Daxter series can sell great and have big promotion. Nintendo has already proved that every game doesn't have to big about blood, guts, and cursing. Why Scott do you act as if Nintendo doesn't exist?

Disclaimer: I know I may come off as hard and harsh but the question above is entirely honest and respectable. Please do not take it in any other way. Thanks.

I know Nintendo still exists. I own a Gamecube. I bought it for Zelda, RE4, Fight Night Round 2 and Metroid.

When I walk into a store, Nintendo always has the smallest shelf space of every system, and they seem to be the only seem that offers more family oriented gaming. And a game does not have to have blood, guts or cursing to be violent.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

According to your theory shouldn't the media also talk negatively about movies like Saw II and Bad Boys II?

They have done. Each time there's a new murder or whatever and there seems to be a link with media influence, the media revists the question of whether these entertainments really are suitable or not. And no answer is found, no agreement reached, and the considerations are forgotten when the next breaking news item questions other facets of society, until such time as these issues resurface.

They ESRB has already told them what's in the game so why should the media feel it's their responsibility to do what the ESRB has already done?

The media's not telling parent's what's in a game. It's addressing the issues at large. A label is stuck on the front of the box, yet the game still finds it's way into the hands of kids, say. Hence the media asks the questions (which is what investigative journalism is all about) 'how has this happened, is it bad, what can be done to stop it?' Which is right and proper I think, if there's a public concern over a matter (though the public are concerned over whatever the media feeds them more often then not), for journalists to ask questions. Like phone mast and children with mobile phones, every once in a while a news report breaks over new evidence for/against these being harmful. The ESRB labels and the news coverage are two different things entirely. One's informing people of content and the others questioning the rights and wrong of content and accessibility and responsibility.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

aren't violent/bloody/gory games usualy toned down for european release?

I think that's mainly in Germany, sometimes it works otherway around for example Indigo Prophecy US-version is censored.

 

[Gubbi]

Violent crime involving firearms has plummeted since 1993, the year the original Doom was released.

Coincidence?

I THINK NOT

Cheers

 

[Gubbi]

Sean Baby sums up my feelings on this topic in this gem from 2001.

Cheers
Gubbi

 

[Brodda Thep]

i'm a parent. my daughter is young (just turned 2) so i won't be letting he play "M" rated games any time soon. but when the time, i'm sure she'll besome a violent sociopath because of the mind poisoning powers of videogames. check out how violent we've become, as a nation...

source: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/index.html

keep in mind that GTAIII was released in october of 2001. it's mind poisoning effects are apparent just one year later! look at violent crime shoot through the roof, spiraling out of control like an unmaned unicycle on a stunt course.

videogames are such a violent media that 17% of games in 2004 had to be rated "M" by the ESRB. the MPAA found it fit to rate only 54% of movies in 2004 "R".

You realize that this is showing a decrease in violent crimes since 2000, don't you?

 

[mckmas8808]

You realize that this is showing a decrease in violent crimes since 2000, don't you?

And don't you see a bigger drop since 2001?

 

[mckmas8808]

Guitar Hero has recieved 9s and 10s from darn near every review site on the internet. This games proves exactly my point that there are more great games out there that are not violent. Check it out at IGN below.

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/663/663674p1.html

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Violent crime involving firearms has plummeted since 1993, the year the original Doom was released.

Except in many other countries. Is the Edinburgh that's now the gun-crime captial of Europe? With gang culture appearing in many other cities.

I've already explained why a change in crime rate can't be attributed solely to the games being released as there's other factors involved. The question is, even with violent crimes dropping in some area, what impact has gaming had? If violent games hadn't been around, would the crime-rate have dropped more, less, or had no change?

 

[StefanS]

Violent crime involving firearms has plummeted since 1993, the year the original Doom was released.

Coincidence?

I THINK NOT

Cheers

That has a lot more to do with Wade vs. Roe than Doom. There's even a study on it by Steven D. Levitt. The more popular scientific version can be found in his book "Freakonomics".

 

[Blade]

This debate has gotten out of control.

I think the bottom line is that Spector feels that it's sad that one of the most innovative and most imitated series of the past 8 years (GTA1 to now) is not really accessible to the entire gaming world. The only way that younger gamers can get any of that great gameplay without eroding their impressionable minds is to play an E/T-rated GTA knock-off.. that's obviously not going to be of the same quality as San Andreas.

He feels that it's sad that the most popular game series of the past 4 years (GTA3-) is popular because of the countless crimes it allows you to commit.

The utter moral void of what the games allow you to do and what is contained within. Mr.Spector himself is somewhat guilty of this, having fostered the "violent" Deus Ex.. another of the best games this side of 1999. Then again, his game can be completed without killing anybody.

I guess he's been spoiled by companies like Nintendo (yes, here we go.. ) that know how to produce brilliant gameplay experiences with minimal humanoid violence. Yes, you might slash an evil flower in Zelda or trounce a mushroom in Super Mario Bros.. but whenever a humanoid character is slain.. he/she just takes a bouncy beating and then returns for the sequel. They don't take a dirt nap, covered in shit, inside a port-a-potty covered in concrete cement.

Games like Pikmin, Katimari Damacy, and Guitar Hero bring forth innovation without resorting to cheap thrills like sex, violence, drugs, and.. flatulence.

I own every GTA save Liberty City Stories and the GTA:London mission pack.. but I see what he means.

 

[mckmas8808]

He feels that it's sad that the most popular game series of the past 4 years (GTA3-) is popular because of the countless crimes it allows you to commit.

I see what he means too and even I have 4 GTA games. But that statement above if that is what he really meant is horribly wrong. The game is great due to more factors than just countless crimes. It has a great storyline, presentation, music, sense of scale, voice-overs, and livelyness to it. Other knock offs can't get it right because they miss most of those great things I just named. They just add the countless crimes and think it's going to sell.

 

[Blade]

True, I agree.

It's just that.. a lot of other games have those things too. All of those aspects, even. They haven't been as commercially successful (and thus haven't spawned as many imitators) however, because let's be frank: the "mature" aspects of GTA are what have propelled it to where it is.

WS isn't bashing the game, he just wishes that it didn't stew in amoral/immoral juices.

 

[fearsomepirate]

True, I agree.

It's just that.. a lot of other games have those things too. All of those aspects, even. They haven't been as commercially successful (and thus haven't spawned as many imitators) however, because let's be frank: the "mature" aspects of GTA are what have propelled it to where it is.

WS isn't bashing the game, he just wishes that it didn't stew in amoral/immoral juices.

And on that note, I felt like the first Deus Ex (never played IW) really brought out some interesting moral issues (like bioethics) and made you think about "what-if" type future scenarios as well as your actions. I've only played GTA: VC, but I never got anything remotely like that from those games. Some games encourage you to think about all facets of your actions and the story. Most games don't. Can anyone else think of any games that are more than just some sort of twitch-fest or wanton, mindless destruction? Deus Ex, Torment, Fallout, and Shadow of the Colossus are some of the games I'm thinking of that really make your actions feel meaningful. The Zelda and Metroid series come to mind as games that are more about exploration and interaction than killing. And then of course, you have story-driven Japanese RPGs as well.

 

[Powderkeg]

This whole "violence in video gaming is bad and out of control" sure sounds a lot like "rock and roll is the devil's music" rhetoric to me.