The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Police in Germany have pointed out that 19 year old gunman Robert Steinhaeuser was an avid player of violent videogames.
The teenage gunman responsible for the deaths of 16 people at his former school in Germany on Friday, reportedly played computer games with "intensive weapons usage" according to Erfurt police. Chief Rainer Grube said that Robert Steinhaesuer regularly enjoyed playing violent videogames, and specific titles like Counter-Strike were were mentioned. Counter-Strike, a game in which you play as an anti-terrorist organisation, is one of the most popular shooting games on the internet.
The 19 year old opened fire on his former classmates after he had been expelled from the school, and killed 13 teachers, 2 students and a police officer, before turning the gun on himself. The finger very quickly came round to violent videogames (as it often does in these situations), although the fact that he was a member of a gun club may have had slightly more to do with it. Bizarrely, a picture of Posh Spice on the killer's wall was also mentioned in The Sun's report, although what relevance this nobody knows.
This claim comes soon after a court ruled that violent games were not the cause of the Columbine shootings in 2000, after a lawsuit was brought against major corporations including Sony, Nintendo and Activision by the families of the victims. Similarly to that case, violent music has also been mentioned, and many newspapers have picked up on the fact that Steinhaeuser listened to rock band Slipknot. A lyric in one Slipknot song reads: "Shoot your naughty teachers with a pump gun." But can inciteful music or videogames really drive someone to acts of violence such as these?
As games get more realistic, the controversy factor gets higher, and while the Daily Mail etc. may rant about violent videogames, the violence content of games has definitely increased over the last few years. Games like Grand Theft Auto 3 and State of Emergency have caused concern among parents due to their violent content, and first-person shooters are now the most popular form of videogame. But haven't we been through all of this before? Doesn't this happen every time a tragic event occurs? If someone has the access to guns and ammo, and has the will to carry out acts like young Steinhaeuser did, surely a mere videogame isn't to blame? The picture of Posh Spice could have equally been the cause. It's blatant finger pointing, drawing away attention to the fact he had access to weapons and ammunition, and yet again, computer games are the first to blamed.
So, do you think violent videogames can really incite people to perform violent acts? Are games like Counter-Strike partly responsible for these tragedies?
The teenage gunman responsible for the deaths of 16 people at his former school in Germany on Friday, reportedly played computer games with "intensive weapons usage" according to Erfurt police. Chief Rainer Grube said that Robert Steinhaesuer regularly enjoyed playing violent videogames, and specific titles like Counter-Strike were were mentioned. Counter-Strike, a game in which you play as an anti-terrorist organisation, is one of the most popular shooting games on the internet.
The 19 year old opened fire on his former classmates after he had been expelled from the school, and killed 13 teachers, 2 students and a police officer, before turning the gun on himself. The finger very quickly came round to violent videogames (as it often does in these situations), although the fact that he was a member of a gun club may have had slightly more to do with it. Bizarrely, a picture of Posh Spice on the killer's wall was also mentioned in The Sun's report, although what relevance this nobody knows.
This claim comes soon after a court ruled that violent games were not the cause of the Columbine shootings in 2000, after a lawsuit was brought against major corporations including Sony, Nintendo and Activision by the families of the victims. Similarly to that case, violent music has also been mentioned, and many newspapers have picked up on the fact that Steinhaeuser listened to rock band Slipknot. A lyric in one Slipknot song reads: "Shoot your naughty teachers with a pump gun." But can inciteful music or videogames really drive someone to acts of violence such as these?
As games get more realistic, the controversy factor gets higher, and while the Daily Mail etc. may rant about violent videogames, the violence content of games has definitely increased over the last few years. Games like Grand Theft Auto 3 and State of Emergency have caused concern among parents due to their violent content, and first-person shooters are now the most popular form of videogame. But haven't we been through all of this before? Doesn't this happen every time a tragic event occurs? If someone has the access to guns and ammo, and has the will to carry out acts like young Steinhaeuser did, surely a mere videogame isn't to blame? The picture of Posh Spice could have equally been the cause. It's blatant finger pointing, drawing away attention to the fact he had access to weapons and ammunition, and yet again, computer games are the first to blamed.
So, do you think violent videogames can really incite people to perform violent acts? Are games like Counter-Strike partly responsible for these tragedies?
Page:
Police in Germany have pointed out that 19 year old gunman Robert Steinhaeuser was an avid player of violent videogames.
The teenage gunman responsible for the deaths of 16 people at his former school in Germany on Friday, reportedly played computer games with "intensive weapons usage" according to Erfurt police. Chief Rainer Grube said that Robert Steinhaesuer regularly enjoyed playing violent videogames, and specific titles like Counter-Strike were were mentioned. Counter-Strike, a game in which you play as an anti-terrorist organisation, is one of the most popular shooting games on the internet.
The 19 year old opened fire on his former classmates after he had been expelled from the school, and killed 13 teachers, 2 students and a police officer, before turning the gun on himself. The finger very quickly came round to violent videogames (as it often does in these situations), although the fact that he was a member of a gun club may have had slightly more to do with it. Bizarrely, a picture of Posh Spice on the killer's wall was also mentioned in The Sun's report, although what relevance this nobody knows.
This claim comes soon after a court ruled that violent games were not the cause of the Columbine shootings in 2000, after a lawsuit was brought against major corporations including Sony, Nintendo and Activision by the families of the victims. Similarly to that case, violent music has also been mentioned, and many newspapers have picked up on the fact that Steinhaeuser listened to rock band Slipknot. A lyric in one Slipknot song reads: "Shoot your naughty teachers with a pump gun." But can inciteful music or videogames really drive someone to acts of violence such as these?
As games get more realistic, the controversy factor gets higher, and while the Daily Mail etc. may rant about violent videogames, the violence content of games has definitely increased over the last few years. Games like Grand Theft Auto 3 and State of Emergency have caused concern among parents due to their violent content, and first-person shooters are now the most popular form of videogame. But haven't we been through all of this before? Doesn't this happen every time a tragic event occurs? If someone has the access to guns and ammo, and has the will to carry out acts like young Steinhaeuser did, surely a mere videogame isn't to blame? The picture of Posh Spice could have equally been the cause. It's blatant finger pointing, drawing away attention to the fact he had access to weapons and ammunition, and yet again, computer games are the first to blamed.
So, do you think violent videogames can really incite people to perform violent acts? Are games like Counter-Strike partly responsible for these tragedies?
The teenage gunman responsible for the deaths of 16 people at his former school in Germany on Friday, reportedly played computer games with "intensive weapons usage" according to Erfurt police. Chief Rainer Grube said that Robert Steinhaesuer regularly enjoyed playing violent videogames, and specific titles like Counter-Strike were were mentioned. Counter-Strike, a game in which you play as an anti-terrorist organisation, is one of the most popular shooting games on the internet.
The 19 year old opened fire on his former classmates after he had been expelled from the school, and killed 13 teachers, 2 students and a police officer, before turning the gun on himself. The finger very quickly came round to violent videogames (as it often does in these situations), although the fact that he was a member of a gun club may have had slightly more to do with it. Bizarrely, a picture of Posh Spice on the killer's wall was also mentioned in The Sun's report, although what relevance this nobody knows.
This claim comes soon after a court ruled that violent games were not the cause of the Columbine shootings in 2000, after a lawsuit was brought against major corporations including Sony, Nintendo and Activision by the families of the victims. Similarly to that case, violent music has also been mentioned, and many newspapers have picked up on the fact that Steinhaeuser listened to rock band Slipknot. A lyric in one Slipknot song reads: "Shoot your naughty teachers with a pump gun." But can inciteful music or videogames really drive someone to acts of violence such as these?
As games get more realistic, the controversy factor gets higher, and while the Daily Mail etc. may rant about violent videogames, the violence content of games has definitely increased over the last few years. Games like Grand Theft Auto 3 and State of Emergency have caused concern among parents due to their violent content, and first-person shooters are now the most popular form of videogame. But haven't we been through all of this before? Doesn't this happen every time a tragic event occurs? If someone has the access to guns and ammo, and has the will to carry out acts like young Steinhaeuser did, surely a mere videogame isn't to blame? The picture of Posh Spice could have equally been the cause. It's blatant finger pointing, drawing away attention to the fact he had access to weapons and ammunition, and yet again, computer games are the first to blamed.
So, do you think violent videogames can really incite people to perform violent acts? Are games like Counter-Strike partly responsible for these tragedies?
I'm already arguing with people over the media's knee-jerk reaction to this particular topic. Daily Mail, for example. Headline reads "Boy who killed obsessed with sick video games" or something along those lines. When you read the article, the quote reads "He played brutal video games through the night".
Brutal is not neccesarrily(sp) sick. People need to realise this. Computer games do not teach you how to go round killing people. Movies do a far better job of it. There are books available telling you how to shoot your teacher and get away with it.
The media blames computer games automatically, and this makes me angry enough to go round and shoot each one of those reporters individually.
Brutal is not neccesarrily(sp) sick. People need to realise this. Computer games do not teach you how to go round killing people. Movies do a far better job of it. There are books available telling you how to shoot your teacher and get away with it.
The media blames computer games automatically, and this makes me angry enough to go round and shoot each one of those reporters individually.
In the seventies, in texas a bloke hid himself on a college tower and shoot dead 17 people. This was before computer games. It's just the media looking for a scape goat.
humans have aways been violent and always will be.
humans have aways been violent and always will be.
Counterstrike, a game you play by clicking a mouse, and pressing buttons on a keyboard. Likely relevance to case in question: Probably cause.
Being a member of a gun club, and owning a rifle (or whatever) oh, that's a harmless pursuit, and could in no way be related to the shootings.
Eh?
I'm not sure which school of logic these people go to, but I don't understand it.
Playing Counterstrike could not have taught him how to load and fire real fire-arms, it's completely ridiculous.
Hey, maybe when he turned the gun on himself he expected to find himself back at the school gates, ready to start the 'level' again. Or maybe, just maybe, something other than games have caused him to do this. Life, perhaps?
Being a member of a gun club, and owning a rifle (or whatever) oh, that's a harmless pursuit, and could in no way be related to the shootings.
Eh?
I'm not sure which school of logic these people go to, but I don't understand it.
Playing Counterstrike could not have taught him how to load and fire real fire-arms, it's completely ridiculous.
Hey, maybe when he turned the gun on himself he expected to find himself back at the school gates, ready to start the 'level' again. Or maybe, just maybe, something other than games have caused him to do this. Life, perhaps?
It is proven that the people that do these kind of shootings tend to be highly clever middle class children. Perhaps there more of a connection there, than there is with computer games.
I read the story in the Telegraph, and in there, there wasn't any reference to videogames, but it just sed he wanted revenge for being expelled and not being able to do the A-Level equivalent. I don't understand the logic though. Take MGS. There, to kill a bloke you grab him round the neck and squeeze it ten times. Reloading a weapon requires you to only use up the ammo and wait half a second, or tapping R1 twice. I've been playing computer games for a large amount of my life and probably couldn't just pick up a gun and kill 17 people at school with no practice!
We had topics like this after the Columbian High School masacre, and September 11th. The truth is, video games will always be used as societys scapegoat. Sad that we have to blame inanimate objects for the flaws of animate ones!
These incidents being blamed on computer games is just SSSSSOOOOOOOOOO stupid!
The games industry is something like the market leader in the media business now. BILLIONS of people play video games! And incidents like this happen once or twice a year. hmmmm..... doesn't look to me like violent video games have that much of an influence of people then!
:)
The games industry is something like the market leader in the media business now. BILLIONS of people play video games! And incidents like this happen once or twice a year. hmmmm..... doesn't look to me like violent video games have that much of an influence of people then!
:)
Well, although my own knee jerk reaction whenever something like this occours is to come to the defence of videogames as a whole, i've had to question myself here.
The arguments against blaming video games that usually come up are usually seem to be predominantly from a few lines of thought:
1. Video games aren't real, and people should be able to seperate the two.
2. Video games are just one of several media that depict violence particularly graphically, and are no more responsible for such tragedies that tv, films and the likes.
3. Violent acts happen in such frequency when video games aren't envolved, and always have throughout hisotry, that it is inevitable that sometimes they will be linked, but this is usually only coincidental.
But i've had to take a fresh look at these things:
1. Well, while there are now age restrictions on certain video games to bring them into line with, for example, films, in practical effect they really aren'ttaken as seriously, and people below a restricted age can still get access to the game in question even more easily than, for example, an 18 rated film.
But of course, the recent german tragedy centred around the actions of a 19 year old, so age restrictions, at least for a year of his life, could never have been relevant. Maybe some 'damage' was done playing unsuitable games when he was much younger, but it still points to the possibility that age is not a suitable immunity from games' psychological effects.
Then again, maybe he was just a plain nut. What should be done for/to/about people like that? I really don't know.
2. Yes, violence is evident in other media, but in video games, there seems a pretty heafty distinction that the player atually carries out the violent acts themselves. The effects of this? I don't know, but surely the difference really is significant between viewer of simulated violence and participant in simulated violence.
3. Well, when some mass killing takes place, people look for a reason, a motive in the mind of the killer. Sometimes it's religion, sometimes it's mental disfunction, sometimes racial hatred, maybe just plain hatred. And sometimes video games are envolved.
But it seems to me that in recent years, virtually all high school shootings have had one of these factors, video games, as a common presence. Is this coincidence, because video games are played by so many, that anyone is likely to have been exposed to them? Well, from claims of how intensively the games are played by most perpitrators of these acts, i'd have to say no. It seems to trend for these killers to have been exceptionally 'into' violent games.
So here's where i make the controversial bit:
Are video games in some way the cause? I say yes.
So what do we do about it? If people started to take age restrictions more seriously, it'd be a start. Maybe if the criteria for classifications were tightened up too. Of course, it won't solve everything, but i think it will definitely help. And if a classroom of children have their life spared because you and i don't get to shoot people without showing our ID, and everyone has to wait until their 18th to get that new blood frenzied game, tell me that isn't a price worth paying.
DD
The arguments against blaming video games that usually come up are usually seem to be predominantly from a few lines of thought:
1. Video games aren't real, and people should be able to seperate the two.
2. Video games are just one of several media that depict violence particularly graphically, and are no more responsible for such tragedies that tv, films and the likes.
3. Violent acts happen in such frequency when video games aren't envolved, and always have throughout hisotry, that it is inevitable that sometimes they will be linked, but this is usually only coincidental.
But i've had to take a fresh look at these things:
1. Well, while there are now age restrictions on certain video games to bring them into line with, for example, films, in practical effect they really aren'ttaken as seriously, and people below a restricted age can still get access to the game in question even more easily than, for example, an 18 rated film.
But of course, the recent german tragedy centred around the actions of a 19 year old, so age restrictions, at least for a year of his life, could never have been relevant. Maybe some 'damage' was done playing unsuitable games when he was much younger, but it still points to the possibility that age is not a suitable immunity from games' psychological effects.
Then again, maybe he was just a plain nut. What should be done for/to/about people like that? I really don't know.
2. Yes, violence is evident in other media, but in video games, there seems a pretty heafty distinction that the player atually carries out the violent acts themselves. The effects of this? I don't know, but surely the difference really is significant between viewer of simulated violence and participant in simulated violence.
3. Well, when some mass killing takes place, people look for a reason, a motive in the mind of the killer. Sometimes it's religion, sometimes it's mental disfunction, sometimes racial hatred, maybe just plain hatred. And sometimes video games are envolved.
But it seems to me that in recent years, virtually all high school shootings have had one of these factors, video games, as a common presence. Is this coincidence, because video games are played by so many, that anyone is likely to have been exposed to them? Well, from claims of how intensively the games are played by most perpitrators of these acts, i'd have to say no. It seems to trend for these killers to have been exceptionally 'into' violent games.
So here's where i make the controversial bit:
Are video games in some way the cause? I say yes.
So what do we do about it? If people started to take age restrictions more seriously, it'd be a start. Maybe if the criteria for classifications were tightened up too. Of course, it won't solve everything, but i think it will definitely help. And if a classroom of children have their life spared because you and i don't get to shoot people without showing our ID, and everyone has to wait until their 18th to get that new blood frenzied game, tell me that isn't a price worth paying.
DD
I heard the Police were looking into a claim that SLipkont were to blame. They found a Slipknot CD in the boys room which had lyrics chattin about killing teacher.
Page: