[Final F8]

Speaking of Power Rangers, I know for a fact that they were a bad influence on kids. I was in primary school when they were 'cool' and I can remember several occasions where kids got hurt because someone was impersonating power rangers.
But you really can't compare Power Rangers to the likes of GTA, Manhunt & all those other realistically violent games.

I still think it's a good idea.

[Final F8]

Sorry for the double post, just wanted to add this:

I don't think violent video games cause people to commit violent acts, at most it probably just gives them ideas, but noone would actually do anything unless they're having some serious issues going on in their life. Playing the games a lot though could have some more serious effects, and it's up to the parents to take away the game(s) if they're playing it way too much.

You're right. But it's a sad fact that there are people out there like that, who play video games. The only problem is, most of the people with problems like that would be old enough to buy the games anyway.
I suppose stopping kids being exposed to that sort of violence at an early age could stop them from getting those ideas when they're older. There's no way to know for sure though, really.

[Kimojuno]

I don't think violent video games cause people to commit violent acts, at most it probably just gives them ideas, but noone would actually do anything unless they're having some serious issues going on in their life. Playing the games a lot though could have some more serious effects, and it's up to the parents to take away the game(s) if they're playing it way too much.

I agree but I'm also thinking that Power Rangers, Megaman, etc etc was violent...do they get the axe too? I assume not but someone NEEDS to say more then just violent games, because to me most games are violent, and like I said that includes megaman -- You attack things, hence they are violent, however unless they mean like higher violent games (Resident Evil, etc). I assume they do but they should still still say more then 'violent videogames'

They must mean "realistic violence", although there could still be some controversy over that.

Aye I suppose you're right, but I do think they need to set a basic example, I mean I can understand if they're saying realistic but the article just said violent -- a large range of things there. Of course we're basically saying the same thing.

Sorry for the double post, just wanted to add this:

I don't think violent video games cause people to commit violent acts, at most it probably just gives them ideas, but noone would actually do anything unless they're having some serious issues going on in their life. Playing the games a lot though could have some more serious effects, and it's up to the parents to take away the game(s) if they're playing it way too much.

You're right. But it's a sad fact that there are people out there like that, who play video games. The only problem is, most of the people with problems like that would be old enough to buy the games anyway.
I suppose stopping kids being exposed to that sort of violence at an early age could stop them from getting those ideas when they're older. There's no way to know for sure though, really.

He's right most people like that could legally buy them, however it's pretty easy to see that if a child wants a game they could get it, for example there are a lot of people who download games and such (to their computer which was supposed to be for other systems).

People can also go and get a grownup to buy it, like I said earlier, but let's not get into that. Anyway, my point is that while I agree with this I just see a lot of holes, because there's always a way around a law and/or rule. But I must say I applaud their courage for trying.

~ Kimojuno

[©allum]

I read an article about this sort of thing, where a gamer asked a politician in his area if politicians when he was young disproved of rock 'n' roll, and he said that they did, so what the guy was trying to say that video games are the new rock 'n' roll, and that in the future people will try and ban holograms or something :$.

[Goto]

My opinion is...

The majority of gamers realise that games are nothing more, in the same way that the majority of those that watch movies aren't affected.

There is the occasional person who is 'influenced' in some way by violent games, but no more than is true of TV or movies. Generally they've either got some problems, or have been neglected in some way by their parents. People who have a fairly close relationship with their parents are usually well adjusted, and unlikely to take any of these things to heart. However the kind of parents who have little involvement with their kids are also the kind of parents who are likely to go out and buy this game for their kids if asked to. They don't pay any attention to what their children are doing, so they won't see the warning signs.

It's true that some games really are quite violent, and as the genre matures further that is likely to continue, as it has with other forms of media. It's fair enough to put some restrictions on excessively violent games as they do on movies, but too many people try to blame videogames for all of societies problems. If a system is going to be introduced, at least make it match the restrictions put on movies.

Oh, and I don't know about over there in America, but over here when a game would get rated R if it was a movie, it's simply banned. There's no R rating for games, which is also something that should probably change. Especially since I'll be 18 in 7 months or so, and so none of this will affect me.

[Res]

OH NOES!!11

I'm a Gamer, and I play violent video games! I'm gonna go murder someone now. BRB.
[/extreme and blatant sarcasm]

This is a good move. Of course, Gamers are not more violent than any other person. because a Gamer is someone that knows the boundaries of a game, and knows when reality begins. Anyone you've heard of that commits a crime because "Gta made me do it" or something like that, are idiots.

I do think that GTA isn't one of the best games out there. It's still very suggestive in every aspect of the game. And I disprove of it greatly. Does that mean I think people who play it are going to kill someone? No. Because I know that they're smart, and won't be influenced by a game of that sort. Secondly, because they're old enough and MATURE enough to understand that you can't do stuff like that in real life.

But children (I know a 7 year old that has it..) who get their hands on a game such as that can be influenced greater by it. I heard stories of how he's becoming more violent in school. When asked why, he said "YOu can do it in Grand theft auto, and it's a game. So that makes it ok."

Which is why this is such a good idea. Parents DO need to be more involved in what their kids do. And not just buy a game that has an M rating for a 10 year old because they -THINK- he'll know better. They don't know that.

I'll never let my kids play a game their not allowed to. Unless I review it and play it first.

A kid shouldn't just be able to walk into a store and buy Manhunt, Killer7, GTA, and whatever else without an adults consent.

That they know what their buying him, and they know what could happen.

[Elvenblader]

It's completely audacious and ridiculous that a person who blames a video game on why they went and shot a cop or something. "Oh I play vice city now I'm going to kill a cop" (Three months later) "I killed that cop because I could do it in the video game Vice City, you cant blame me you have to blame the video game" Completely and unnerving bs. Something else that annoys me is if the parents were warned and knew that the game was violent, why the heck did they buy the game for their kid in the first place and now they want to file a lawsuit against the company that made the game. Come on, it's common sense, the game has the ESRB warning stating that the game has Violence, Strong Language, And Strong Sexual content. If you read all the warnings in the first place, why are you trying to sue the company that made the game.

I admit that companies like take two and Sierra games should try and have some type of regulation policies, but all in all it's entirely up to the person buying and playing that game that are ultimately responsible. We cant hold a game developer company responsible for something that they didnt do. They gave the buyer and player the warnings and the ratings, so in the end its up to you as a person that makes the choice if your going to go out and kill someone.

[Atilla]

seems that in all this hype nobody noticed this was in the wrong forum.

[Elvenblader]

I posted it in this forum because, it was in the news. A lot of people who are gamers are going to be mad at the law that was passed in California. It also might affect how game developers develop games in the future.