TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Nintendo Game "Manhunt2" Game Banned in UK
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nintendo Game "Manhunt2" Game Banned in UK - Page 2

post #31 of 59
Are we not moving away from the point of this thread- Manhunt2 was banned due to its violence and not due to any addictive nature to the game. I'd blame Solitaire for addiction if that was the case- I see more people playing it at work than anything else

According to the BBC website: In rejecting the game, David Cooke, director of the BBFC, said: "Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone. "There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game."
America banned Battle Royale (great Japanese movie about a bunch of school children being made to kill each other) for similar reasons. I think that decision was wrong but I find this game difficult to defend...
post #32 of 59
Yes, sorry.

I think it is a mature, adult and responsible decision. Too much people talk about nobody taking responsibility, everyone wanting to blame someone else, and this is true. But society also has a responsibility and instead of shirking it, and saying `People can do whatever they want - everyone is responsible for their own actions', they are taking steps to make their community a nicer, safer place. Again, what's the problem?
post #33 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
Do you think schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are genuine illnesses? Or any psychiatric disorder? Am I gonna have to start calling you Mr Cruise??

In addictions such as gaming and gambling, the brain actually ends up re-wiring itself to a different chemical composition. It's not `all in the mind'. The people who study these kinds of illnesses are usually people who spend most of their lives sitting in small dark rooms examining people and poring over case studies. They don't just snap their fingers, make something up and stick it in a medical journal. It takes a great deal of criteria and a large number of cases before something can be classed as an addiction.

Do you think alcohol and drug addictions are as easy to escape? People should just snap out of it and get over it? Because of the change in chemical makeup in people's brains as a result of continued, chronic overexposure to stimuli-and-reward, these addictions can also be classed as physical.

Sure, it's a small number of the population but so is any addiction. And sure, people need to step in and help others they see developing these problems. But life isn't always easy and practical. People aren't always intelligent enough or educated enough to see the end of the path down which they are heading. It's easy to judge when you haven't had this kind of a problem. And you can deny it if you want - that's your prerogative. This doesn't change the fact that it's real and it's happening, and I hope it never ruins your life or the life of anyone you love.
lol of course chizophrenia and bipolar are real. how i also agree that alcohol and drug addictions are real, i think we cut those people way to much slack, and to many people make excuses for them. Coming form a family that had several people that where atticted to alcohol.When going fishing, once the uncle ran out of beer it was time to go home.


This same wiring can be replaced, with real world stuff, all they have to do is fine something fun. Now for MMO, or the online games, its not so much the game people are hooked on, as the soical aspect of it. You can really get wrapped up with a small group of people, and you get that feeling of working together being a part of something. That is where they get you. Cause once you leave the game. You lose contact with those people.

lol and to go along with nate, i think the game is pointless really, and not something i would buy
post #34 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by silentNate View Post
Are we not moving away from the point of this thread- Manhunt2 was banned due to its violence and not due to any addictive nature to the game. I'd blame Solitaire for addiction if that was the case- I see more people playing it at work than anything else

According to the BBC website: In rejecting the game, David Cooke, director of the BBFC, said: "Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone. "There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game."
America banned Battle Royale (great Japanese movie about a bunch of school children being made to kill each other) for similar reasons. I think that decision was wrong but I find this game difficult to defend...
Battle Royale may be banned, but its very easy to get your hands on a copy. Also the menga and the book are in major bookstores and even the library.
post #35 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalie_ca View Post


I'm one that believes that while video games aren't solely responsible for the increase in violence of our youth, it is a factor.

On the other hand, when you ban something, you limit people's creative choices.
.
An interesting point about video games and kids, it makes them inactive, they just sit there and play video games for hours on end. The games are usually very addicting. It gives them something to do (many kids complain about being bored). They have less time to be bored and get into trouble in more creative ways, since they are playing video games indoors all day
I have played violent video games, so have some of my friends; I don't believe they are contributing to an increase in violence. They are games. There is a big difference and most half way intelligent kids are smart enough to understand that. But just like in any normal bell curve standard poplulation, there will be those that aren't normal and respond in ways that aren't typical. That goes with anything though.
Of course it isn't the factor in teen and child violence, as violence in youth has been around for a long time and has been on the rise since before video games were even available or diverse. There are a lot of factors that are contributing to more violence, but I think video games are the least of the problems in the US today for our youth.
post #36 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookingglass View Post

The deal is, and I just KNOW I'm going to get flack for this, these games are an art form, and should be protected as such. The reason they are getting so much attention is because they are new. I hate to remind people what happened to Rock and Roll when that was developing. Parents freaked out and we couldn't see Elvis dance on TV. In 30 years we will look back on this and ask, "Geeze, what was the big deal?" As we are plugging in the new version of our media players waiting to download the latest content of the new game that just came out.
Good analogy!
post #37 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
Sure it is, when it takes something away from the 99% that DO NOT have a problem.
I agree. To ban video violent games since the outliers (extreme deviations) on the standard population bell curve have a problem is ineffective, since the majority of the population doesn't have a problem and those outliers are extreme deviations in and of themselves and will most likely find other violence if that is what they are attracted to or they will just download it or buy it elsewhere.
post #38 of 59
Max and I watched a US documentary last night (the first in a series) on gaming. It scared me so much I couldn't sleep afterwards. I encourage anybody here who thinks that violent video games (particularly first-person shooter games) do not have the potential to lead to violence to think again.

It had studies from a guy who had been playing video games his whole life, who was determined to prove there was no link. He did brain MRIs on people while they were playing violent first-person shooter games, and the results astounded him. Turned him around. It has been clinically proven - conclusively - that these games stimulate `aggression' chemical reactions in the brain - stimulating exactly the same part of the brain that is responsible for aggression. I do have to say, though, that there is no proven correlation between these chemical impulses and behaviour - so that's good so far. But it then went on to outline that in every single case of a school shooting in recent years in America (Columbine was an example they used) the shooters had a history of playing violent first-person shooter video games. One boy, who had only picked up and shot a real gun once in his life - successfully and with pinpoint precision shot at close-range eight students at his highschool, five in the head, using only eight bullets. The authorities were astonished at his marksmanship - and attributed it entirely to his playing of video games.

The US Army is the biggest single partner of the gaming industry, and has been using the game they developed `American Army' as a recruiting tool for new soldiers. It is free to download, and in the two years since its development it has been downloaded worldwide over 7 million times. And in those two years, recruitment to the Army went back to normal numbers from being way too low for a long time. This isn't necessarily a bad thing - they did it deliberately for recruitment. But its purpose also, they stated, `to desensitize and train young men of recruitable age to the loss of human life'. The army said this was their AIM.

It is also known that 800 million people worldwide play video games. So, to all those who think that the 99% shouldn't have to be regulated because of the 1% who are negatively and violently influenced by these games, think about that. 1% of 800 million is 8 million people. Not such a small number anymore, is it? Dozens of humans lives have already been lost as a partial result of overuse of violent video games. It's no longer conjecture, and vast amounts of study have gone into this.

I am amazed (after watching this documentary) that there is anyone who still thinks that this industry should not have some kind of regulation. Note - I said regulation. And if that means banning the very, very violent games, then so be it. Even if it's to help that 1% - I think 8 million people is a pretty convincing statistic.
post #39 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
Max and I watched a US documentary last night (the first in a series) on gaming. It scared me so much I couldn't sleep afterwards. I encourage anybody here who thinks that violent video games (particularly first-person shooter games) do not have the potential to lead to violence to think again.

.

oh sooooo the media says it so it has to be true?
the news sould be saying, Lies at 11. They remind me of my father.
you could have one empty glass on your desk, and your room was not fit for pig to live in. give me a break.

yea i know its not 1% that is true. It more like .001% and i think your anti gun stuff is coming though again. there is nothing alike between shooting a real gun and doing it in a computer game. No game is going to `to desensitize and train young men of recruitable age to the loss of human life'
only seeing it in real life will do that. Since most of the kids will be playing it with there friends.

you are just going to have to accept that fact that humans are killers, and hunters it what we do. ITs what we where made to do. does not mean we cant control it. But to say otherwise goes aganist human natural.
post #40 of 59
Bruce, it wasn't the news. It was an independent documentary. And I already stated, the research in this documentary was conducted by somebody who used to think they way you do.

I do accept the fact that humans CAN BE killers, but it doesn't mean we need to help encourage them. The desensitizing statement was not mine - it was from the Army. The US military, who developed this game for those reasons. You going to argue with them, too?

Now, it was you that said `99% of people', which leaves 1%. You are changing that now? Ok. 0.001 percent of 800 million is still 800,000 people. Nearly a million people. Just think, if all of them kill one person each, well that's nearly a million dead. I guess that's negligible, huh?

You want me to accept things about human nature. Why is it so impossible for you to accept that there might be some credibility in my argument?
post #41 of 59
I think that pigs may be flying today. I agree with Kit.



(That is a joke, BTW)
post #42 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
Bruce, it wasn't the news. It was an independent documentary. And I already stated, the research in this documentary was conducted by somebody who used to think they way you do.

I do accept the fact that humans CAN BE killers, but it doesn't mean we need to help encourage them. The desensitizing statement was not mine - it was from the Army. The US military, who developed this game for those reasons. You going to argue with them, too?

Now, it was you that said `99% of people', which leaves 1%. You are changing that now? Ok. 0.001 percent of 800 million is still 800,000 people. Nearly a million people. Just think, if all of them kill one person each, well that's nearly a million dead. I guess that's negligible, huh?

You want me to accept things about human nature. Why is it so impossible for you to accept that there might be some credibility in my argument?
its the same, news or documentary, or not. They will show you what they want you to see. heck i could make a documentary on the evil of the people of down under. Sad part is some people would start to beleave it.

I do accept that fact that some people will have issues with games. I will not accept that fact that we should change everything for a handful of people that have issues. These same people would then find something else to have a issue with. The only way to protect the human race is hmm not to let them be born. You can take the dumb out of people
post #43 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
Max and I watched a US documentary last night (the first in a series) on gaming.

I am amazed (after watching this documentary) that there is anyone who still thinks that this industry should not have some kind of regulation. Note - I said regulation. And if that means banning the very, very violent games, then so be it. Even if it's to help that 1% - I think 8 million people is a pretty convincing statistic.
I watched that too. But came to a different conclusion (same as my other post above). People can make shows about whatever they want and slant it to support their conclusions. It is done all the time.
post #44 of 59
And you can't take the denial out of people who refuse to believe that dozens of experts in the field might have some knowledge and might know what they're talking about. You don't have to believe it all, and I agree that documentaries are filmed with bias. Of course they are. However, it doesn't change their research and it doesn't change the fact the 800,000 people is not a `handful'. It doesn't change the results, either.

Cindy. Let's have a glass of champagne!!

Coco - were you completely unmoved by the research?
post #45 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post

I do accept that fact that some people will have issues with games. I will not accept that fact that we should change everything for a handful of people that have issues. These same people would then find something else to have a issue with.
Well said theimp98!
post #46 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post

Coco - were you completely unmoved by the research?
Some people can't understand the difference between reality and a pretend (fake in some way, game world, or a fantasy world they create for themselves or with others). These are not the norms, these are deviations. That is a fact in life that there will always be the normal population then those that don't fit, it isn't normal that they become so influenced by these games either as most individuals get that concept, there is a concrete reality and there is a game world. Kids play house, kids play Cowboys and Indians, the child world is all about play and make believe. Some adults do this too with Dungeons and Dragons and other games. For most, they are just that, games. People go in between role playing all the time during life consciously and unconsciously, fitting many different roles in society. Sure they can influence behavior, but not to such a degree that the norm population of people turn into something they are not and turn dangerous to their society.

There is a medium provided (gaming) that will stimulate the deviations from the norm. If you took away the games, they would still be that way and look for another medium.

Some people like to say our society is more violent now than in the past and it is due to video games. However, research has proven that wrong. Gaming has not been around all that long and if you look at our history full of wars, murders, and horrible acts against mankind, you will see violence has unfortunately always been here and always will be - regardless of video games or not. There is a lot more to it than that. A lot more dimensions and issues that involve the reason why people are violent or they are not.
post #47 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
And you can't take the denial out of people who refuse to believe that dozens of experts in the field might have some knowledge and might know what they're talking about. You don't have to believe it all, and I agree that documentaries are filmed with bias. Of course they are. However, it doesn't change their research and it doesn't change the fact the 800,000 people is not a `handful'. It doesn't change the results, either.
and what do you think going outside and playing does? here is fact boy are on avg much more aggressive then girls its the way we are.i would bet you money that if you test these same boys after playing sports you would fined the same result. SO once again these so called experts no nothing of how humans are made. So after they find out that after playing sports,
causes these same areas of brain that go along with aggression we should ban those also?

aggerssion is NORMAL, its how you control and channel that makes the difference.
most peopel are not going to run and kill or rape or anything. But there will always be a
some that will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cococat View Post
Well said theimp98!
thank you
post #48 of 59
My mouse ran out of batteries. Okay, I am back.
Also, about the brain scan, of course the brain is stimulated while playing or watching violent video games. It goes the same way with a sad movie; it doesn’t mean the person stays sad or is always depressed afterwards.
Also, I bet someone who is hunting a deer has that part of their brain stimulated, doesn’t mean they are doing to get all violent on people and are going to hurt someone, a large majority of my father’s family hunts and they are not violent individuals at all.

Same with the people that play paintball, they get very stimulated and feel like they are finding and shooting people. It is a game. I have played paintball and violent video games, I bet my brain looked the same as those they saw during that time and I never once felt violent due to that, ( I can’t even bring myself to kill bugs, I even pick up spiders and take them outside rather than kill them!) same goes with all of the individuals (mostly male) that I have seen play video games of that nature. Just because I played a game that steals cars and they did too, doesn’t mean we are stupid enough to attempt that in real life.

Also the advertising to go into the ads for the armed forces is just that - ads. A lot of marketing research goes into them. Ads need to find the best medium to reach their target market, gaming was a natural solution and it worked. It is a current trend with many of their target audience. It worked because it was smart marketing.
post #49 of 59
I really don't buy the research that violent games causes violent acts. It seems like a very easy scapegoat.

I'll walk you through how things work in my house, and you can draw any conclusions that you will.

DH and I have played games like Grand Theft Auto (by the makers of Manhunt) and we really don't get upset or angry when our character commits a violent act. It's far more of a release than a build up. However, the times where my husband has been red in the face, screaming, throwing things around the living room, stomping his feet upset is when we've played Mario Kart. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Kart

I'd also like to address this as well. There IS a rating system when it comes to these games. It's not hard to understand, all it takes is for a parent to READ THE SIDE OF THE BOX. I'm also going to run you through a cost everything. One game system: $300.00 (roughly), one video game $50.00, one TV to play the video game and system on $300.00. We haven't even got into the add ons. That a $650.00 basic investment in a TOY. I'm not spending $650.00 on anything that my child may or may not do with out reading something about what goes into it.
post #50 of 59
But not all parents are that responsible and what about when it's not kids playing these games but people who are perfectly legally able to, who are adversely affected?

I'm not disagreeing with anything anyone here has said. But I don't see anyone even willing to consider that 800,000 or so people who could be and are affected in a way that the other 99.9% of the population aren't, is a significant number to worry about. It's almost like you're denying they exist or if not, not caring that they do, brushing them off and dismissing them when these people present a real and definite danger.

Everybody keeps saying `but that's not everyone' and `that's not the norm' and `but people should be responsible' when the FACT is that NOT everyone is responsible, for some people psychotic breaks ARE the norm, for a small percentage of the population this DOES present a real risk with real consequences - but nobody cares? Why doesn't anyone actually address this very valid anomaly instead of all the dismissal and denial?

And just as an aside, and this is purely my personal experience, the small amount of the very violent games shown in this documentary made me sick to my stomach. I have to question, honestly, the inner workings of people who actually enjoy such simulation - and thinks that excessive violence is a form of `escape'.
post #51 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post

Everybody keeps saying `but that's not everyone' and `that's not the norm' and `but people should be responsible' when the FACT is that NOT everyone is responsible, for some people psychotic breaks ARE the norm, for a small percentage of the population this DOES present a real risk with real consequences - but nobody cares? Why doesn't anyone actually address this very valid anomaly instead of all the dismissal and denial?

it has been the study is flawed, there facts are wrong,
really what more do you need?
post #52 of 59
And who has proved that the study is flawed? Sorry? How are their facts wrong? Because you don't believe them? Why don't you provide some research - as I have done - that supports your theory that nobody on earth is adversely affected by video games? Your number has gone from 1% to 0.01% to nobody at all, so for now I feel that I should stick with the scientists, doctors and researchers who have devoted years to the extensive study of this issue.

So far nobody here has provided an answer to my question. And by answer I mean a specific answer to my specific question, or something to credibly refute that question.
post #53 of 59
lol lol because saying after playing a game the aggressive part of the brian is active? haha, no joke. what do you expect? you cant change the human brain.

ok ok lets ban all sports all types of compatetion, no more football, no baseball, no more anything, sorry your not allowed to have any type of aggresive thoughts. lol

ok lets all go out and hug trees and plant flowers,,, now that would cause me to hurt people lol you may as well tell your dogs not to play fight with each other, do you put to sleep all dogs cause there is a chance one dog will be mean?

these peple are finding issues where there is none
oh yea, these experts wasted there life in this study, oh well hey i guess if you can make money by not really doing anything, then its cool
post #54 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
lol lol because saying after playing a game the aggressive part of the brian is active? haha, no joke. what do you expect? you cant change the human brain.

ok ok lets ban all sports all types of compatetion, no more football, no baseball, no more anything, sorry your not allowed to have any type of aggresive thoughts. lol

ok lets all go out and hug trees and plant flowers,,, now that would cause me to hurt people lol you may as well tell your dogs not to play fight with each other, do you put to sleep all dogs cause there is a chance one dog will be mean?

these peple are finding issues where there is none
oh yea, these experts wasted there life in this study, oh well hey i guess if you can make money by not really doing anything, then its cool
The same things have been said about other forms of media. Stephen King has been blamed for school shootings and Rock and Roll has been blamed for sex and drug use.

If the argument is that not everyone is going to be responsible so "someone" should do something about it reminds me of throwing the baby out with the bath water. If it's not video games it will be a book, if it's not a book it will be a TV show. It will always be something.

I see where your argument is going, but lets back up just a second. Why aren't we looking at catching potentially psychotic people before they go off the deep end? It seems like we want a very simple answer for the reasons why these people end up being violent, and the reality is the answer is never just one thing.
post #55 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
lol lol because saying after playing a game the aggressive part of the brian is active? haha, no joke. what do you expect? you cant change the human brain.

ok ok lets ban all sports all types of compatetion, no more football, no baseball, no more anything, sorry your not allowed to have any type of aggresive thoughts. lol

ok lets all go out and hug trees and plant flowers,,, now that would cause me to hurt people lol you may as well tell your dogs not to play fight with each other, do you put to sleep all dogs cause there is a chance one dog will be mean?

these peple are finding issues where there is none
oh yea, these experts wasted there life in this study, oh well hey i guess if you can make money by not really doing anything, then its cool
Yep, I said ALL of those things. That's EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Thanks for making it so much clearer for everyone. Hey - I'm against the war in Iraq, too. That must make me a terrorist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lookingglass
I see where your argument is going, but lets back up just a second. Why aren't we looking at catching potentially psychotic people before they go off the deep end? It seems like we want a very simple answer for the reasons why these people end up being violent, and the reality is the answer is never just one thing.
That's very true - and in a sense, by saying this, you and I are on the same page. I am all for trying to prevent violence before it happens. Which is my whole point here.

And really, to be honest, if Manhunt 2 never existed, would people miss it? No. So who cares if it's banned? It's not like there's no other incredibly bloodthirsty and brutal games out there for people to have fun playing.
post #56 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookingglass View Post

DH and I have played games like Grand Theft Auto (by the makers of Manhunt) and we really don't get upset or angry when our character commits a violent act. It's far more of a release than a build up. However, the times where my husband has been red in the face, screaming, throwing things around the living room, stomping his feet upset is when we've played Mario Kart...
You could be talking about us! I've noticed the exact same thing.

My husband loves racing games. He played Flatout (where you try to wreck your car and other's cars) http://www.flatoutgame.com/ for several nights before he drove us on a five-hour trip to Tofino.
post #57 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
And really, to be honest, if Manhunt 2 never existed, would people miss it? No. So who cares if it's banned? It's not like there's no other incredibly bloodthirsty and brutal games out there for people to have fun playing.
i am shocked they made a second one.

i only know 1 person that finished theh first one. there are games that i think are much better in game play and story line(which is what i want),
post #58 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookingglass View Post
The same things have been said about other forms of media. Stephen King has been blamed for school shootings and Rock and Roll has been blamed for sex and drug use.

If the argument is that not everyone is going to be responsible so "someone" should do something about it reminds me of throwing the baby out with the bath water. If it's not video games it will be a book, if it's not a book it will be a TV show. It will always be something.

I see where your argument is going, but lets back up just a second. Why aren't we looking at catching potentially psychotic people before they go off the deep end? It seems like we want a very simple answer for the reasons why these people end up being violent, and the reality is the answer is never just one thing.
Exactly! The violent and/or unstable and/or overly impressionable people will find something else and blame on their violence. And theimp has a very good point, there is a lot of violence in society in our popular culture and in our sports games and the sport culture. I believe the games are just another thing to "blame" for problems that have always been here and unfortunately it seems will always be - regardless of books, movies, or video games.

I believe Elvis (like another poster said - good point) was blamed for bad things. Music is blamed for bad things. Stephen King has been blamed for things, and the blaming will always go on and on.
post #59 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
And really, to be honest, if Manhunt 2 never existed, would people miss it? No. So who cares if it's banned? It's not like there's no other incredibly bloodthirsty and brutal games out there for people to have fun playing.
Seriously, I don't think anyone would care, there is more than enough games like that out there. And just a note, for some reason I am like that poster's husband who gets frustrated more at stupid games (haven’t played them in years, that was very back in the day!). I got more into mario brothers vs. the other (and some violent) games I have played. LOL
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Nintendo Game "Manhunt2" Game Banned in UK