Yeah - in this day and age how long will it be until games cutscenes are watched backwards in case there is satanic (satanists have freedom of religion, too) or even something that sounds remotely like "do it" which causes people to commit suicide.
At the end of the day people need something to blame other than the fact that someone can hate someone else enough to kill them - or, more worringly, hate society to kill a whole bunch of innocent people - take Columbine, rather than look at what wierd sort ideology they were trying to spread, or how they got the chance to arm up like a small militia in the first place, they blame Rammstein (The Christian Church has stated that Rammstein, the German rock band is responsible - inherently without getting a single lyric as none of Rammsteins suggest doing anything like this!) & Doom, a game in which you kill monsters, not people - they planned their actions and had a reason for doing it, i don't see how killing a few monsters spurred them on - and if it did, surely something like "Dawn Of The Dead" could do the same thing?
This is stupid, we need to stop blaming the media for peoples choices and start looking at why they are doing it.
The other thing banned in the UK was the film "A Clockwork Orange" which is now unbanned, and pretty tame by standards of the day actually.
It sort of had a justification, the main character was saving his wife from the evil sadist or something... can't remember too well, it's been like 1½ years since I played Manhunt 1 through.
Since they banned Manhunt in UK, why the hell they still allow Saw trilogy and Cannibal Holocaust etc sick movies?
I got involved in a bit of a heated debate about this yesterday, I'll try to avoid doing the same again today.
I'm very anti-censorship anyway, so things like this really hit a nerve.
Basically it's some old guys in suits telling us that we are too stupid and irresponsible to handle the game, because we are incapable of distinguishing game from reality.
Bear in mind this decision was made by the head of the BBFS, Sir Quentin Thomas, Lord Taylor of Warwick and Janet Lewis-Jones - those names sound like a valid cross-section of British population, right? They must be, because this is a democratic society, isn't it? And obviously 4 people is more than enough of a sample demographic to consider our 60 million population.
Children need to be protected, this is a fact. I wouldn't want a child to grow up thinking it's alright to hack someone in half with a chainsaw. But as adults we should be entitled to make this decision for ourselves. In which case, all it needs is a 18+ certificate.
The problem is irresponsible parents, and stores who don't pay attention to certificates. If you ask me, it's them who should be banned from buying the products again, not the rest of us.
About that marksmanship, when I go to the carnival, and play the shooting game, my aim is pretty damn good too. Is it because I played america's army training, or is it because every time I go to the carnaval I play the game?
They just go down on one possible path, and that must be it, but they forget about other possibilities.
The truth is that games, films etc are not banned because the censors think they cause school shootings, violent crime etc.
They are banned because they are judged as being highly offensive to many people while also having no additional social, cultural or artistic value !
Video games are still seen by the majority in the UK as being for kids !
So many folk would be shocked and surprised to see just how explicit and horrific some of the content is.
If video games were seen by society as a whole as a pass-time for adults with a small niche market for children (like movies books etc.) then you can be sure the censorship would be more lenient!
I'm not denying that some folks believe that games cause violent crime - I'm sure that some still believe the world is flat, moons made of cream cheese etc.
What I'm getting at is that some here seem to be using the fact that games do NOT cause murder as an argument against censorship.... I'm saying that there are valid reasons for censorship, and that bringing the 'games cause school shootings' line in to the discussion is just a big ol' straw man.
Maybe niche is the wrong word - I mean that childrens books are just a small section of the total books market. People don't think of books as 'kids stuff'
No, I meant what I said - maybe could have put it clearer, I'll try again
Right now the majority still see video games as primarily 'for kids'
For this reason it is unlikely that said people would expect the type and level of obscenely violent content in many games - so would not be as careful about little johnny getting access to big brothers game collection as they would about... say... his porno collection...
If on the other hand the majority perceived games as adult entertainment, they would be much more aware and careful about who gets access and therefor exposure to the games with extreme content.
The censors must take these things into consideration - if they didn't, they would be failing in their duty to society !
..............
Of course, there's also the fact that we just don't know what - if any - effect violence in video games has on peoples behavior - games with remotely 'realistic' first person graphics have not been available for long enough to find out.
At most it could help to tip the borderline psychos over the edge when otherwise they might have stayed 'normal'... who knows for sure ?
