The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Well I'm sure by now you've read this article on Special Reserve today:
"Web posted on 15/5/02 Once again the link between video games and violence returns to the spotlight, with a US teenager claiming that playing games made him shoot his friend!
A 13-year old Dallas youth, charged with shooting his friend at point-blank range (twice) is set to stand trial in an American court in the coming weeks. However, while this situation isn't uncommon in the USA, the defensive line taken by the boy's lawyer is rather surprising. The lawyer is arguing that the fatal attack was prompted by violent computer games that the two boys had been playing throughout the day. The two youths had decided to skip school and spend the day playing games back at the suspects' house. After playing for a number of hours the lawyer claims that his client copied the actions of the violent games he had been playing. As he 'acted out' the video game, the suspect took his mother's gun and shot his friend at close range – twice. It was reported that the victim, 13-year-old Jonathan Hogan, was shot in the head and chest, with the gun begin placed against his body for at least one of the fatal shots.
Police maintain that the boy knew perfectly well what he was doing, and that he fully understood the difference between the video game world and that of reality. The police charged the suspect with juvenile murder, and if found guilty, could mean a jail term of up to 40 years.
While pointing the finger at violent video games is nothing new in tragic incidents like this, how anyone can really try and blame a video games for the act of shooting a 'friend' a point blank range is quite baffling to say the least."
So what is this? The umpteenth time a kid has shot someone and blamed it on videogames to try and get out of trouble. Well clearly in this case it was the kid's mother's fault for having a gun in the first place. Anyway, if this carries on, I can see games, American designed anyway, being restricted with the amount of gore and violence they are allowed to include. And Britain being America's greatest allies in virtually everything these days is certain to follow suit with censorship laws.
This is a very serious issue for games companies. Especially those who market their consoles on violent games (e.g. Microsoft and Sony) and those who want to try and improve their image (e.g. Nintendo) as it will effect the way they have to develop their games. Japan will get the lesser-cut games and/or development times for Japanese games to reach US and UK shores will increase.
Quite frankly it's pathetic! Teenagers can get away with anything providing they claim it was due to videogames that caused them to go bad in the states. All they need is a good lawyer, a good psychiatrist and bang goes any case against them (excuse the unintended pun).
By the looks of it, the police have a good enough case against this teenager, but if the Judge takes the kids side, the videogames industry may have to suffer. When this case reaches the courts, developers and publishers will be holding their breath in hope that no censorship laws get changed.
In the above case, there are many questions that should be asked. Why weren't the two kids in school? Surely their parents are responsable for them until they reach legal-adulthood anyway. And how come the school didn't take note of their absense? Why did their mother have a gun? And why keep it in reach of teenagers? Ofcourse the kid knew what he was doing when he pulled the trigger (twice). Surely the games themselves would have shown him what happens when you shoot someone. I knew when I was 4 what shooting someone would do, though not how serious it is, I still knew it was morally wrong. Maybe the parents are to blame. We do not know the kids background, but if the police are sure that this kid was mentally fit, then it's his fault, not games for the fact that he committed a crime.
"Web posted on 15/5/02 Once again the link between video games and violence returns to the spotlight, with a US teenager claiming that playing games made him shoot his friend!
A 13-year old Dallas youth, charged with shooting his friend at point-blank range (twice) is set to stand trial in an American court in the coming weeks. However, while this situation isn't uncommon in the USA, the defensive line taken by the boy's lawyer is rather surprising. The lawyer is arguing that the fatal attack was prompted by violent computer games that the two boys had been playing throughout the day. The two youths had decided to skip school and spend the day playing games back at the suspects' house. After playing for a number of hours the lawyer claims that his client copied the actions of the violent games he had been playing. As he 'acted out' the video game, the suspect took his mother's gun and shot his friend at close range – twice. It was reported that the victim, 13-year-old Jonathan Hogan, was shot in the head and chest, with the gun begin placed against his body for at least one of the fatal shots.
Police maintain that the boy knew perfectly well what he was doing, and that he fully understood the difference between the video game world and that of reality. The police charged the suspect with juvenile murder, and if found guilty, could mean a jail term of up to 40 years.
While pointing the finger at violent video games is nothing new in tragic incidents like this, how anyone can really try and blame a video games for the act of shooting a 'friend' a point blank range is quite baffling to say the least."
So what is this? The umpteenth time a kid has shot someone and blamed it on videogames to try and get out of trouble. Well clearly in this case it was the kid's mother's fault for having a gun in the first place. Anyway, if this carries on, I can see games, American designed anyway, being restricted with the amount of gore and violence they are allowed to include. And Britain being America's greatest allies in virtually everything these days is certain to follow suit with censorship laws.
This is a very serious issue for games companies. Especially those who market their consoles on violent games (e.g. Microsoft and Sony) and those who want to try and improve their image (e.g. Nintendo) as it will effect the way they have to develop their games. Japan will get the lesser-cut games and/or development times for Japanese games to reach US and UK shores will increase.
Quite frankly it's pathetic! Teenagers can get away with anything providing they claim it was due to videogames that caused them to go bad in the states. All they need is a good lawyer, a good psychiatrist and bang goes any case against them (excuse the unintended pun).
By the looks of it, the police have a good enough case against this teenager, but if the Judge takes the kids side, the videogames industry may have to suffer. When this case reaches the courts, developers and publishers will be holding their breath in hope that no censorship laws get changed.
In the above case, there are many questions that should be asked. Why weren't the two kids in school? Surely their parents are responsable for them until they reach legal-adulthood anyway. And how come the school didn't take note of their absense? Why did their mother have a gun? And why keep it in reach of teenagers? Ofcourse the kid knew what he was doing when he pulled the trigger (twice). Surely the games themselves would have shown him what happens when you shoot someone. I knew when I was 4 what shooting someone would do, though not how serious it is, I still knew it was morally wrong. Maybe the parents are to blame. We do not know the kids background, but if the police are sure that this kid was mentally fit, then it's his fault, not games for the fact that he committed a crime.
Nice one edge. Too right though - keeping a gun in reach of a teenager - ts the wrong thing. Anyway, I don't suffer from insanity - I enjoy every minute of it! YEHAA!
Well I'm sure by now you've read this article on Special Reserve today:
"Web posted on 15/5/02 Once again the link between video games and violence returns to the spotlight, with a US teenager claiming that playing games made him shoot his friend!
A 13-year old Dallas youth, charged with shooting his friend at point-blank range (twice) is set to stand trial in an American court in the coming weeks. However, while this situation isn't uncommon in the USA, the defensive line taken by the boy's lawyer is rather surprising. The lawyer is arguing that the fatal attack was prompted by violent computer games that the two boys had been playing throughout the day. The two youths had decided to skip school and spend the day playing games back at the suspects' house. After playing for a number of hours the lawyer claims that his client copied the actions of the violent games he had been playing. As he 'acted out' the video game, the suspect took his mother's gun and shot his friend at close range – twice. It was reported that the victim, 13-year-old Jonathan Hogan, was shot in the head and chest, with the gun begin placed against his body for at least one of the fatal shots.
Police maintain that the boy knew perfectly well what he was doing, and that he fully understood the difference between the video game world and that of reality. The police charged the suspect with juvenile murder, and if found guilty, could mean a jail term of up to 40 years.
While pointing the finger at violent video games is nothing new in tragic incidents like this, how anyone can really try and blame a video games for the act of shooting a 'friend' a point blank range is quite baffling to say the least."
So what is this? The umpteenth time a kid has shot someone and blamed it on videogames to try and get out of trouble. Well clearly in this case it was the kid's mother's fault for having a gun in the first place. Anyway, if this carries on, I can see games, American designed anyway, being restricted with the amount of gore and violence they are allowed to include. And Britain being America's greatest allies in virtually everything these days is certain to follow suit with censorship laws.
This is a very serious issue for games companies. Especially those who market their consoles on violent games (e.g. Microsoft and Sony) and those who want to try and improve their image (e.g. Nintendo) as it will effect the way they have to develop their games. Japan will get the lesser-cut games and/or development times for Japanese games to reach US and UK shores will increase.
Quite frankly it's pathetic! Teenagers can get away with anything providing they claim it was due to videogames that caused them to go bad in the states. All they need is a good lawyer, a good psychiatrist and bang goes any case against them (excuse the unintended pun).
By the looks of it, the police have a good enough case against this teenager, but if the Judge takes the kids side, the videogames industry may have to suffer. When this case reaches the courts, developers and publishers will be holding their breath in hope that no censorship laws get changed.
In the above case, there are many questions that should be asked. Why weren't the two kids in school? Surely their parents are responsable for them until they reach legal-adulthood anyway. And how come the school didn't take note of their absense? Why did their mother have a gun? And why keep it in reach of teenagers? Ofcourse the kid knew what he was doing when he pulled the trigger (twice). Surely the games themselves would have shown him what happens when you shoot someone. I knew when I was 4 what shooting someone would do, though not how serious it is, I still knew it was morally wrong. Maybe the parents are to blame. We do not know the kids background, but if the police are sure that this kid was mentally fit, then it's his fault, not games for the fact that he committed a crime.
"Web posted on 15/5/02 Once again the link between video games and violence returns to the spotlight, with a US teenager claiming that playing games made him shoot his friend!
A 13-year old Dallas youth, charged with shooting his friend at point-blank range (twice) is set to stand trial in an American court in the coming weeks. However, while this situation isn't uncommon in the USA, the defensive line taken by the boy's lawyer is rather surprising. The lawyer is arguing that the fatal attack was prompted by violent computer games that the two boys had been playing throughout the day. The two youths had decided to skip school and spend the day playing games back at the suspects' house. After playing for a number of hours the lawyer claims that his client copied the actions of the violent games he had been playing. As he 'acted out' the video game, the suspect took his mother's gun and shot his friend at close range – twice. It was reported that the victim, 13-year-old Jonathan Hogan, was shot in the head and chest, with the gun begin placed against his body for at least one of the fatal shots.
Police maintain that the boy knew perfectly well what he was doing, and that he fully understood the difference between the video game world and that of reality. The police charged the suspect with juvenile murder, and if found guilty, could mean a jail term of up to 40 years.
While pointing the finger at violent video games is nothing new in tragic incidents like this, how anyone can really try and blame a video games for the act of shooting a 'friend' a point blank range is quite baffling to say the least."
So what is this? The umpteenth time a kid has shot someone and blamed it on videogames to try and get out of trouble. Well clearly in this case it was the kid's mother's fault for having a gun in the first place. Anyway, if this carries on, I can see games, American designed anyway, being restricted with the amount of gore and violence they are allowed to include. And Britain being America's greatest allies in virtually everything these days is certain to follow suit with censorship laws.
This is a very serious issue for games companies. Especially those who market their consoles on violent games (e.g. Microsoft and Sony) and those who want to try and improve their image (e.g. Nintendo) as it will effect the way they have to develop their games. Japan will get the lesser-cut games and/or development times for Japanese games to reach US and UK shores will increase.
Quite frankly it's pathetic! Teenagers can get away with anything providing they claim it was due to videogames that caused them to go bad in the states. All they need is a good lawyer, a good psychiatrist and bang goes any case against them (excuse the unintended pun).
By the looks of it, the police have a good enough case against this teenager, but if the Judge takes the kids side, the videogames industry may have to suffer. When this case reaches the courts, developers and publishers will be holding their breath in hope that no censorship laws get changed.
In the above case, there are many questions that should be asked. Why weren't the two kids in school? Surely their parents are responsable for them until they reach legal-adulthood anyway. And how come the school didn't take note of their absense? Why did their mother have a gun? And why keep it in reach of teenagers? Ofcourse the kid knew what he was doing when he pulled the trigger (twice). Surely the games themselves would have shown him what happens when you shoot someone. I knew when I was 4 what shooting someone would do, though not how serious it is, I still knew it was morally wrong. Maybe the parents are to blame. We do not know the kids background, but if the police are sure that this kid was mentally fit, then it's his fault, not games for the fact that he committed a crime.