The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
...according to some spokeswoman on GMTV about 10 minutes ago.
So, another tragedy has taken place involving guns in America. We all knew it was just a matter of when, due to the nature of their policy on weapons, however, it's still a disgusting waste of human life (among many other things happening around the world)
And without much knowledge (at this point) being known about the Virginian killer, the spokeswoman on GMTV (I didn't catch who she was, sorry) when questioned about the gun laws in Virginia was very quick to blame the shootings on movies and videogames.
Well I've never tried driving the wrong way down a motorway just because it can be done in Burnout...
It's typical American arrogance...we're right, the rest of the world are wrong. Guns are great, videogames are evil.
Which one is a tool for killing and which one is an interactive entertainment experience?
So, another tragedy has taken place involving guns in America. We all knew it was just a matter of when, due to the nature of their policy on weapons, however, it's still a disgusting waste of human life (among many other things happening around the world)
And without much knowledge (at this point) being known about the Virginian killer, the spokeswoman on GMTV (I didn't catch who she was, sorry) when questioned about the gun laws in Virginia was very quick to blame the shootings on movies and videogames.
Well I've never tried driving the wrong way down a motorway just because it can be done in Burnout...
It's typical American arrogance...we're right, the rest of the world are wrong. Guns are great, videogames are evil.
Which one is a tool for killing and which one is an interactive entertainment experience?
Page:
FantasyMeister wrote:
> Videogames, just like other forms of art
That's it. He's broken.
In other news:
"Guns don't kill people.
Bullets kill people.
Guns for all, ban the bullet."
Some NRA retard was on TV crying that if every college student was armed it would never have happened.
As opposed to if every college student was armed, it would happen 15 times a year.
The interviewer was a lazy, dopey manequin (I have no idea how to spell that), so didn't challenge him on it at all.
> Videogames, just like other forms of art
That's it. He's broken.
In other news:
"Guns don't kill people.
Bullets kill people.
Guns for all, ban the bullet."
Some NRA retard was on TV crying that if every college student was armed it would never have happened.
As opposed to if every college student was armed, it would happen 15 times a year.
The interviewer was a lazy, dopey manequin (I have no idea how to spell that), so didn't challenge him on it at all.
Certainly in this case it wasn't the idea of fame, though. The kid was disturbed, as could be seen by his Creative Writing. He was either being bullied in some way or just felt persecuted for being Korean, though his motives seem to be partially driven by the rich kids getting everything.
Why he was disturbed is open to debate. He could have been taking drugs. Even good ol' pot will make you paranoid and too much can lead to suicidal tendencies, however harmless some people make it out to be. He could, however, have simply had that temperament all along. People think in different ways, everyone is individual and some people have mental issues without necessarily being considered insane.
Guns, of course, and gun culture just help this all along and to some extent, however small, the media does have some involvement with how we think as a society. Sometimes it’s a mixture of someone who has mental issues and something they watch or do which triggers them. Could be a game, tv series or film or something else, but does that mean it has the same affect on the majority of society? No.
If these incidents are happening more often, though, perhaps it’s a sign of humanity’s mental state as a whole, or more specifically in those countries like the US where it happens more often. Perhaps pressure from society (the haves and have nots or political correctness and many other issues) or even the food we eat (junk food has been shown to have negative affects on health, and mental health is included) go towards making us less ‘sane’ at the end of the day. If this is the case, it really needs to be looked at. One thing that points to this more than any other is the amount of personal crime involving people who ‘snap’ in America compared to Europe. The lifestyle, diet and society is different. But more than this, the UK is a good mix of the two and if this country has a near enough average number of incidents between the figures of Europe and the US it would certainly point to the way we live and what we eat/do as a contributing cause.
Why he was disturbed is open to debate. He could have been taking drugs. Even good ol' pot will make you paranoid and too much can lead to suicidal tendencies, however harmless some people make it out to be. He could, however, have simply had that temperament all along. People think in different ways, everyone is individual and some people have mental issues without necessarily being considered insane.
Guns, of course, and gun culture just help this all along and to some extent, however small, the media does have some involvement with how we think as a society. Sometimes it’s a mixture of someone who has mental issues and something they watch or do which triggers them. Could be a game, tv series or film or something else, but does that mean it has the same affect on the majority of society? No.
If these incidents are happening more often, though, perhaps it’s a sign of humanity’s mental state as a whole, or more specifically in those countries like the US where it happens more often. Perhaps pressure from society (the haves and have nots or political correctness and many other issues) or even the food we eat (junk food has been shown to have negative affects on health, and mental health is included) go towards making us less ‘sane’ at the end of the day. If this is the case, it really needs to be looked at. One thing that points to this more than any other is the amount of personal crime involving people who ‘snap’ in America compared to Europe. The lifestyle, diet and society is different. But more than this, the UK is a good mix of the two and if this country has a near enough average number of incidents between the figures of Europe and the US it would certainly point to the way we live and what we eat/do as a contributing cause.
Although I've quoted below this is a general post and I am not just replying to you Mr FM. :)
FantasyMeister wrote:
>
> So I think culture AND our media are to blame; they both go hand
> in hand when it comes to desensitising individuals to such an
> extent that they're capable of emulating either real life or
> depicted events with such terrible consquences.
And yet people who work in abbattoirs don't go off on killing sprees...
I think actually human nature is to blame. Yes that's right simply 'US'. Our strain of humanbeing has massacred it's way across large portions of the planet taking out more peaceful strains on the way.
That said something strong like hypnotism seems to be such a powerful thing so I can see the point of people claiming something weaker, like TV, influencing people but to be honest those sort of things really don't wash in the long run. They might give people ideas (see Childsplay 3) but it's up to that person to act on them.
And as I'm so fond of saying in these type of discussions: 'I have it on good authority that >violent game #372< was responsible for the crusades".
Now since we're knocking about catch-all theories, I'd like ot suggest the idea of 'meaningful suicide'. Perhaps these individuals wants to be famous andwant to get back on those people/instituitions that have caused them a lot of pain and appear to have brought about strong feeling of suicide in the perpetrator.
We see it everyday how people die, how there are wars not being reported on because there are simply too many going on and how so many facelss names are gone and forgotten in an instant.
>Stalin Quote<
So next we see some of the more aggressive societies pushing competition down people's throats and holding up the famous as if they were gods. Can you see how people would like to be like that? To leae somesort of impression before they pass? To be somesort of twisted hero against 'the establishment' that destroys and grinds down people's hopes a hell of a lot more than it realises them?
To be honest I think that makes a lot more sense than 'the media is to blame' although the media is the tool that spreads the fame (infamy?) of the event and may give people ideas and hell train them to a certain degree in what to do but to be honest you could say a library network could od the same thing, it's just less accessible.
So there's my catch-all theory for the day: They do it to make an impression before they die, comparedto most people's deaths they are immortalised in the media/history because the event makes them stand out.
Doesn't work though. I couldn't tell you the names of the Columbine kids. A name that springs to mind is Timothy McVeigh, I think he might've been the Omaha Bomber/Una Bomber or something. Meh.
------------------------------
Oh and to go futher in the desensitisation issue. You could claim that religions desensitise people by claiming there's an afterlife. "Who cares about them? If they were good then they're going to heaven and if not they're off to hell". When you look at it, it cheapens humanlife to some degree.
FantasyMeister wrote:
>
> So I think culture AND our media are to blame; they both go hand
> in hand when it comes to desensitising individuals to such an
> extent that they're capable of emulating either real life or
> depicted events with such terrible consquences.
And yet people who work in abbattoirs don't go off on killing sprees...
I think actually human nature is to blame. Yes that's right simply 'US'. Our strain of humanbeing has massacred it's way across large portions of the planet taking out more peaceful strains on the way.
That said something strong like hypnotism seems to be such a powerful thing so I can see the point of people claiming something weaker, like TV, influencing people but to be honest those sort of things really don't wash in the long run. They might give people ideas (see Childsplay 3) but it's up to that person to act on them.
And as I'm so fond of saying in these type of discussions: 'I have it on good authority that >violent game #372< was responsible for the crusades".
Now since we're knocking about catch-all theories, I'd like ot suggest the idea of 'meaningful suicide'. Perhaps these individuals wants to be famous andwant to get back on those people/instituitions that have caused them a lot of pain and appear to have brought about strong feeling of suicide in the perpetrator.
We see it everyday how people die, how there are wars not being reported on because there are simply too many going on and how so many facelss names are gone and forgotten in an instant.
>Stalin Quote<
So next we see some of the more aggressive societies pushing competition down people's throats and holding up the famous as if they were gods. Can you see how people would like to be like that? To leae somesort of impression before they pass? To be somesort of twisted hero against 'the establishment' that destroys and grinds down people's hopes a hell of a lot more than it realises them?
To be honest I think that makes a lot more sense than 'the media is to blame' although the media is the tool that spreads the fame (infamy?) of the event and may give people ideas and hell train them to a certain degree in what to do but to be honest you could say a library network could od the same thing, it's just less accessible.
So there's my catch-all theory for the day: They do it to make an impression before they die, comparedto most people's deaths they are immortalised in the media/history because the event makes them stand out.
Doesn't work though. I couldn't tell you the names of the Columbine kids. A name that springs to mind is Timothy McVeigh, I think he might've been the Omaha Bomber/Una Bomber or something. Meh.
------------------------------
Oh and to go futher in the desensitisation issue. You could claim that religions desensitise people by claiming there's an afterlife. "Who cares about them? If they were good then they're going to heaven and if not they're off to hell". When you look at it, it cheapens humanlife to some degree.
FantasyMeister wrote:
> I personally think there's a link, but not just to videogaming -
> media in general has desensitised us to such an extent that
> these kind of massacres which 20 or 30 years ago would have left
> us all in shock are now just events that we can openly discuss
> and include as 'entertainment' in our various artforms.
Nah, Zulu's older than that. ;)
> I personally think there's a link, but not just to videogaming -
> media in general has desensitised us to such an extent that
> these kind of massacres which 20 or 30 years ago would have left
> us all in shock are now just events that we can openly discuss
> and include as 'entertainment' in our various artforms.
Nah, Zulu's older than that. ;)
I think if you are highly suggestable and the sort of peoson likely do do this then anything could trigger it. Yes it could be video games but it could equally be movies, comics, music, political / religious ideas. I dont think the blame can be put solely on games. Also it now appears that that story has been ignored and they are now talking about some infatuation with a female student who they believe was his first victim. Guess they just jumped to a conclusion
Some guy on GMTV just now said that the gun law does need to be changed to allow students to carry guns on campus...
They're encouraging kids to carry guns...that is extremely worrying...
Sure, I wont deny that videogames and movies show us what can happen. But the difference is videogames aren't real. If people can't tell what's right and wrong because they have played videogames then I'm sure there's more going on with those people...
War, murders, rape, thievery, and various other attrocities have been known occurances in history for thousands of years. I wont turn this into a religious debate but the Bible is a great document of that. I'm not sure how news spread in the world 2000 years ago but I'm sure they didn't have very accurate visual representations to copy then...
Maybe I'm abnormal (which is debateable in any discussion :P) however I have always known the difference between fantasy and real life.
They're encouraging kids to carry guns...that is extremely worrying...
Sure, I wont deny that videogames and movies show us what can happen. But the difference is videogames aren't real. If people can't tell what's right and wrong because they have played videogames then I'm sure there's more going on with those people...
War, murders, rape, thievery, and various other attrocities have been known occurances in history for thousands of years. I wont turn this into a religious debate but the Bible is a great document of that. I'm not sure how news spread in the world 2000 years ago but I'm sure they didn't have very accurate visual representations to copy then...
Maybe I'm abnormal (which is debateable in any discussion :P) however I have always known the difference between fantasy and real life.
Good post FM, definitely GAD worthy. :)
Totally agree with it as well. I think in a wider context theres cause to believe videogames may help lead someone to violence. Images/videos are capable of desensitising people. So I think its a bit naive to believe that video games arent capable of the same thing.
Totally agree with it as well. I think in a wider context theres cause to believe videogames may help lead someone to violence. Images/videos are capable of desensitising people. So I think its a bit naive to believe that video games arent capable of the same thing.
I personally think there's a link, but not just to videogaming - media in general has desensitised us to such an extent that these kind of massacres which 20 or 30 years ago would have left us all in shock are now just events that we can openly discuss and include as 'entertainment' in our various artforms.
Which came first, the rampage in Grand Theft Auto or the rampage in the real world?
Videogames, just like other forms of art, simply reflect modern culture and events. It's not really surprising to see people just shrug when you point out that just as many people die just as violently on a daily basis in Iraq because we're all used to the frequent body counts.
My 14 year old niece was home from a sleepover at one of her friend's today. When this came up on the news she just glanced up then went back to reading her magazine. She's used to this kind of news. In her world, this is an everyday occurrence.
Shortly after she was born the IRA devastated the City of London with a bombing and the bodies of US soldiers were being paraded through the streets of Somalia, the following year 30 Palestines were massacred in Hebron by a lone gunman, the following year 168 people die in the Oklahoma bombing, 1996 saw the Dunblane Massacre, 1998 saw 4000 killed in an earthquake, the Omagh bombing, Islamic extremists killed hundreds in Algeria, 1999 saw Columbine... it goes on and on and on, and the atrocities have been scaled up in recent years.
So I think culture AND our media are to blame; they both go hand in hand when it comes to desensitising individuals to such an extent that they're capable of emulating either real life or depicted events with such terrible consquences.
I don't think society is aware just how desensitised it has become, hence the overseas reaction of slight surprise and a raised eyebrow at the shootings at Virgina Tech rather than outright shock.
But what's the answer? I'm no expert so I can't even hazard a guess, but I really don't think the problem lies with videogaming, which simply reflects our culture. As hinted at below regarding the availability of weapons, I think the culture needs to change first.
Which came first, the rampage in Grand Theft Auto or the rampage in the real world?
Videogames, just like other forms of art, simply reflect modern culture and events. It's not really surprising to see people just shrug when you point out that just as many people die just as violently on a daily basis in Iraq because we're all used to the frequent body counts.
My 14 year old niece was home from a sleepover at one of her friend's today. When this came up on the news she just glanced up then went back to reading her magazine. She's used to this kind of news. In her world, this is an everyday occurrence.
Shortly after she was born the IRA devastated the City of London with a bombing and the bodies of US soldiers were being paraded through the streets of Somalia, the following year 30 Palestines were massacred in Hebron by a lone gunman, the following year 168 people die in the Oklahoma bombing, 1996 saw the Dunblane Massacre, 1998 saw 4000 killed in an earthquake, the Omagh bombing, Islamic extremists killed hundreds in Algeria, 1999 saw Columbine... it goes on and on and on, and the atrocities have been scaled up in recent years.
So I think culture AND our media are to blame; they both go hand in hand when it comes to desensitising individuals to such an extent that they're capable of emulating either real life or depicted events with such terrible consquences.
I don't think society is aware just how desensitised it has become, hence the overseas reaction of slight surprise and a raised eyebrow at the shootings at Virgina Tech rather than outright shock.
But what's the answer? I'm no expert so I can't even hazard a guess, but I really don't think the problem lies with videogaming, which simply reflects our culture. As hinted at below regarding the availability of weapons, I think the culture needs to change first.
Bottom line is If you have a country where guns come free with bank accounts and the total number of guns to people is somthing like 2:1 (not including the armed forces) and these things are going to happen. They cant just blame video games, or any one thing for that matter, as the current gun stance in the US, is the result of 200 years of fear of anything not as "American as apple pie"..... which is actually English. The same reason that this boy went out and shot all those people is the same reason the US government seems to prefere "direct action" over diplomatic negotiations. The same reason the pilots shot at that convoy in Iraq killing Matty Hayes before getting real visual confirmation. Its all fear. Whats the bets this South Korean boy was being bullied and snapped. Not that any of this is an excuse for what has happened which is a terrable event. Guns dont kill people..... Americans do!
Edgy wrote:
>
> Which one is a tool for killing and which one is an interactive
> entertainment experience?
Depends on your state of mind and what drugs you've taken. ;D
>
> Which one is a tool for killing and which one is an interactive
> entertainment experience?
Depends on your state of mind and what drugs you've taken. ;D
Page: