Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Monday Morning Rundown: Are Americans Taking Sex, Violence and Religion Too Seri

Last response: in Video Games
Share
June 12, 2006 4:27:08 PM

Every rose has its thorn, or so the saying goes. Rule of Rose, a psychological thriller from Sony and game developer Punchline, became a hit earlier this year in Japan, but it's a source of controversy here in North America.
June 12, 2006 4:48:25 PM

Fundamentalist Christians believe that the end time prophecies begin when Israel reconstructs the Temple of Solomon (on which currently rests a mosque). Once that is done, then the end times can begin. As such, Fundamentalist Chrisitians (an overused terminology, I admit) are -strong- supporters of Israel, even through direct American military intervention.

They also believe Jews are going to Hell. On the other hand, Catholics don't... And the Catholic Church apologized for, well, 2ky of antisemitism, as well as said that all Jews, as God's Chosen, are basically bee lined for heaven.

As for the game having jewish backers...

>That seems like an odd marriage, since the Left Behind series has been accused of anti-Semitism,

Well, no, it's not an odd marriage at all. At all. It's extremely normal, in fact. You'll find that the most secular elements of American political culture (Green Party) actually borders on antisemitic, where as the most religious (Rove, Delay, Bush, and so on) are the most vehement supporters. This is also the primary reason that Lieberman, and many other Jewish Americans, are leaning towards the red.

(Edit begins here)
>while many Christians themselves feel that the books are a gross misinterpretation of the Bible's teachings.

This is technically true. SBC, Mormons, Pentacostals, and so on, only represent about 10% of the American population, ranging up to about 20%. In terms of Christians, they represent about 1.5% of the total Christian populace, but this, from their view, is an -extremely- accurate representation of what would happen. The said groups also represent the majority of power in the Republican party, who in turn control All three wings of the American Government. More information on this can be located in American Theocracy, by Kevin Phillips (an Ex nixon strategist).
June 12, 2006 7:16:03 PM

First off, let's kill Jack Thompson. Damn, must have said that because I play games. :roll:

Second, I love it how people will sue for anything to get money. Whos fault is it that little billy was exposed to violence in a video game? The parents, not Rockstar's or any other games company. The parent has to buy the damn game for them if they're under a certain age. Even then, its ok for the kid to run around and shoot people, run them down with cars, and have sex with hookers in the back of a car, but its not ok if he sees a little badly animated sex? I really hate the hypocrasy of the typical American consumer (mind you I'm from Texas and a moderate conservative).

Parents and other people in general are always quick to place the blame elsewhere on their own faults. "My child shot a kid. It couldn't be my fault that I bought him/her a video game to make him go away so I could enjoy myself elsewhere." Or "My child went on a homicidal rampage ending in him/her committing suicide. But it couldn't be from me never listening to him/her and dismissing his problems as typical teenage exaggeration."

Let me tell you if video games made people kill people, nearly every person at my high school would have died by my hand. Video games games don't make people violent. Violent people just play violent video games. Sure, maybe someone committed a crime they did in video game. Would they have done it if they hadn't played the video game? Yes. Just maybe differently or a different crime.

Bad parenting makes people violent. Tell your kid no. Pay attention to them. Tell them when to be home and find out where they're going. Take responsibility for your kids mistakes. If your child fails as a person, its because you failed as a parent.

I love it how its ok to take your kid to see a rated R movie, or to let them listen to ghetto rap which talks of nothing but pimping hoes, doing drugs, and being violent, but when they commit a crime, its the video games fault.
June 12, 2006 7:54:59 PM

It's typical. No one wants to take responsibility for what their children do. In the '40s and '50s parents blamed comic books and pulp fiction novels. In the '60 and '70s it was the "vast wasteland" of television. In the '80s it was the new ultra-violent action movies (who remembers a man named John Rambo?) Nowadays, it's video games. It's just a natural evolution of the all-consuming desire to displace blame from the innocent and well-meaning parent to the greedy and amoral entertainment industry.

The thing is, who's buying their children these games? Who's allowing them to watch Kill Bill at the age of eight? I mean, the nightly news has more tales of death and destruction than most games out today, so why aren't people blaming the "First at Five" news crew and suing their a$$e$ off?
June 13, 2006 1:21:32 AM

If your child fails as a person, its because you failed as a parent.



Now that is a very borad statment to make and is not always true. In my opinion video games, movies, society, your parents, friends, neighbors, etc, etc, etc, contributes to some of the problems in society. There is no easy answer and no one can point to one thing but many things combine together to create problems. Yes I agree that video games do not cause people to kill but you take a kid in a home with domestic violence, gets picked on in school, experiments in drugs.......see where I am going with this. Just like some people can't drink or they will become alcoholics some people can't play a violent video game and not some how be affected by it in a negative way. Our society has become more and more permissive. Is that a good thing? Im not sure. It makes being a parent that much harder. There is no easy answer. The more outrageous these games get the more people want them and what it comes down to is the allmighty $$$$$. I hate to sterotype but the kids these vices affect the most are kids from lower income families. They are usually the ones with less supervision and have too much free acccess to these vices. Yes poor people can afford these things. I have seen it for myself. I have worked in child welfare and I have gone into homes that have all of these video games, movies, big screen tv and all kinds of inapporpriate things and the 6 year old has access to all of this. You can't blame it all on the parents society holds some responsibility as well, not as much as the parents but it still holds some.
June 13, 2006 1:40:22 AM

I agree. Note that in my post I stated that parents blame the video games and that was the basis of my diatribe. I know that there are other forces at work but I was defending video games in particular, not trying to get to the root of all evil in our society.
June 13, 2006 1:45:08 AM

LOL you must be feeling guilty about something sdrawkcaBgoD I pulled that quote from FITCamaro. ;-) It's all good!
June 13, 2006 8:41:46 AM

That controversy crap is the thing that will make this game more popular. So what if it involves sex, violence and religion as if we don't watch enough of it on tv and movies.

I don't believe in such thing, but this should be a rated R and should only be avialable or sell to 17 years olds and older.
June 13, 2006 11:52:43 AM

i dont understand why some people are effected so much by the contents of video games.to be honest im 15 years old and i've played a lot of games that were not rated for my age(like RE,silent hill,doom.......) but none of them had anything that much bad that would cause me to go kill someone or get suicidel.in my terms games like GTA arent completly bad infact they show what nearly 40% of the world has changed into,a world of corruption,voilence and hatred.
June 13, 2006 7:27:15 PM

you said it sdrawkcaBgoD

Our society is changing because of human nature. Evidently we don't learn from history.

A person's character is developed solely by expercience (nurture vs nature) and the little ones are being (not necessarily allowed) but exposed to experiences that cause them to be the way they are. A lot of little ones do not play video games but fall into this category. . .this means that corruption is in many parts of a child's life and restricting video games won't fix a thing.

We, generation by generation, have been falling more into this category since the 1700s. There are lots of reasons for this. A keyword here would be easier
June 14, 2006 5:08:09 AM

I'm with you buddy to a certain extent, it's just games but for some parents it's not and would fight for it. Remember Doom and the "Colombine High School Shooting" which at the ends resulted in 12 students dead and two shooter commiting suicide. Well, there's a controversy on it about the game Doom and that it helped the "two shooter in Colombine" about the sucied killing. True, games the are very violent have some sort of impact especially to kids but it's not the whole thing to blame about. Hey, when I was like 10 I was playing Mortal Kombat like it's cool with all the brutal and grahics fatalities in every match's ending. I have played just about every violent and brutal games as it is my favorites to inclued Doom. Now I'm 25, and I seem to be fine and not violent at all.
June 14, 2006 7:21:11 AM

Let's have some perspective:

How many millions of children around the world each day play video games?

How many crimes are "caused" by video games.

How many of these are in the U.S.?

Using the great powers of logic, I have come to the conclusion that video games are a scapegoat because the middle class "I love Jesus pro-life etc" family groups have failed to realise that there is one constant throughout the gestation and maturity of video gaming, and that is America's violent, irresponsible media who seek only to offload violent (and often graphic) news bulletins, long before you were born, under the context of "information".

Americans can watch any news bulletin and can almost guarantee that there will be a story about murder or war. Hey guys, maybe you didn't realise this but if all you keep showing is negative news stories then people will begin to think negatively, which tends create criminals.

The only reason as to why America's television networks are allowed to show the results of such depraved acts against humainty is because fear breeds consumerism. I know I sound like a conspiracy theorist but when you view the next news bulletin try to analyze why the report is so extreme, and why what is supposed to be an information service is treated like a drama (accompanying music and all).

If violent video games are/were the cause of society's ills then damn, Adolf Hitler must have been playing some pretty violent games. (What's that? There weren't any video games in 1939? Cool, I guess that's inconclusive proof that video games don't create homicidal psychopaths).

By the way, for all the yanks in the forum, yes I am Australian but don't think it's impossible for us in technologically retarded Australia to draw parallels with you. Judging by our foreign policies and the extreme arse-kissing our Prime Minister gives to Bush we are virtually the 51st American state. (51st? Someone please correct this if this is wrong).
June 14, 2006 12:12:49 PM

I agree with you, but I wouldn't want my kids (one day) to play this violent games, well not until they are old enough. And no Hitler is not a gamer, I am. And Australia is not a 51st U.S. state but an oversea extension to Texas. hehe.

And also be patient with your pc and don't hit the "Submit" button repeatedly after writing a forum thinking that it will make it faster and so you hit it 3 times and got 3 posts.


Anyways, that game Rule of Rose is kind of Resident Evil/Silent Hill game. It's pretty creepy from what I've seen in the trailer and I would definitely get this one ones it comes out or hopefully there would be a pc version. :) 
June 14, 2006 1:29:48 PM

This topic goes right along with the another one based on this article - http://www.twitchguru.com/2006/06/08/a_multiplayer_melee_on_politically_sensitive_games/index.html

First thing first... Video games, music, moives, or any other media DO NOT MAKE PEOPLE commit crimes or act in a violent nature! People make a concious decision to act upon thoughts and ideas. I've never seen an inanimate object force anyone to do anything.

If society is so worried about the effects video games and other medias have on them and their children DON'T ALLOW THEM TO VIEW/PLAY them!!!

Chuckshissle said it
Quote:
I wouldn't want my kids (one day) to play this violent games, well not until they are old enough.


Yes, any type of media will leave some sort of impression in the mind of a child but that's where parenting comes in. Parents need to actually censor what they show or give thir children. Education is the key. If you never educate your child on the difference between right and wrong and what's socially acceptable it it leaves the door wide open for the child to pick up socially unacceptable behaviors. Parents so quick to blame inanimate objects for their children's faults instead of taking responsibility for their childern and their actions! If you as a parent don't agree with a video game DON'T BUY IT! I enjoy the ability to think freely and make my own decisions about what I should and shouldn't be viewing or what is too grapic/sexual/criminal for me. There's a reason that we have ratings on movies, TV, and video games these days. It makes it easy for an adult to make a decision as to what kind of content is enclosed. Obviously people are too lazy to turn the box over but yet they seem to have an extreme amount of energy/time to expend on pissing and moaning about how violent/sexual video games are these days. :x
June 28, 2006 1:31:16 PM

Quote:

By the way, for all the yanks in the forum, yes I am Australian but don't think it's impossible for us in technologically retarded Australia to draw parallels with you. Judging by our foreign policies and the extreme arse-kissing our Prime Minister gives to Bush we are virtually the 51st American state. (51st? Someone please correct this if this is wrong).


Nope the UK is the 51st state :tongue:

BTW I heard that you guys have the hardest time when it comes to censorship (banning of games in particular). Any truth in that? And if so how do you get around it? (Besides bittorrent or other downloading scheme)
July 3, 2006 3:04:49 AM

Quote:

By the way, for all the yanks in the forum, yes I am Australian but don't think it's impossible for us in technologically retarded Australia to draw parallels with you. Judging by our foreign policies and the extreme arse-kissing our Prime Minister gives to Bush we are virtually the 51st American state. (51st? Someone please correct this if this is wrong).


Nope the UK is the 51st state :tongue:

BTW I heard that you guys have the hardest time when it comes to censorship (banning of games in particular). Any truth in that? And if so how do you get around it? (Besides bittorrent or other downloading scheme)

In my opinion I don't believe that Australia has the rough end of the censorship stick (unless you live in Queensland). We have 5 main ratings here: G (General), PG (Parental Guidance recommended), M15+ (Mature 15+), MA15+ (Mature Adults 15+), and R18+ (Restricted 18+). We don't have an R18+ rating for games; not through lack of effort though; nearly every games mag in Oz has been campaining for a R18+ category for a few years now but there has to be a unanimous vote when the new law gets passed through the senate.

The last time there was a push I think there was only one negative for the law to be passed, and the senator (no, Australia isn't a republic...yet), who passed a no vote represents my home state! Then again, my home state of South Australia is virtually a retirement village.

The games that have been banned here that I can tell you from the top of my head are:
- Postal 1 and 2
- Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude
- Meck Ecko's Getting Up: Contents under Pressure

Any Aussie's in the forum care to add any more?

Anyway, as you can see, we don't miss out on much, so at the moment I don't care for it much; there's no reason a G-rated game can't be fun. However, if something like, say, ICO was banned then I'd be pissed.

I think that the R18+ bill will pass in the next few years because:
a) The majority of gamers aren't small children anymore and
b) Video games are worth a lot of money.

It's not only the aforementioned points that the Australian government has to consider, it also must consider that virtually anything, especially digital content, can be purchased overseas on the internet, which robs Australian businesses of sales.
July 3, 2006 12:59:25 PM

at least your country has content rating programs.im iranian and in my country anybody can buy any videogame he wants,you see 5 year olds playing games such GTA:San Andreas.
July 5, 2006 12:17:27 AM

Quote:
at least your country has content rating programs.im iranian and in my country anybody can buy any videogame he wants,you see 5 year olds playing games such GTA:San Andreas.


Same as here. It's not uncommon for game retailers to sell games to under-age children. I've heard that there's bigger fines and whatnot for store retailers who sell M and MA games to underage kids now but I haven't heard of any stores being fined.

That happens a lot in this country; we say we're going to do something and then nothing happens. Australia has a reputation for being laid-back and there's no way that's going to change!

P.S. choknuti, you're from the motherlan- erm, U.K., right? You guys have page 3... There's something you'll never see in Australia.

P.P.S. I hate it when I miss a mistake. There's no such game as "Meck Ecko's Getting Up: Contents under Pressure"
July 5, 2006 1:04:22 PM

Quote:


P.S. choknuti, you're from the motherlan- erm, U.K., right? You guys have page 3... There's something you'll never see in Australia.



Nope I am from Russia and fortunately don’t know what page 3 is :D  . While I consider a rating system to be good I hate it when governments start to dictate what their adult population should see, read or play :evil:  . Like the 3 examples you gave for Australia (and GTA too if I remember correctly). Even if I think a certain film (book, game) is total blasphemy I respect the right of consenting adults to watch it and make their own decision.


p.s. I was brought up in a former English colony and my mom is of English decent if that counts. :roll:
July 5, 2006 1:41:44 PM

Quote:
p.s. I was brought up in a former English colony and my mom is of English decent if that counts. :roll:


Personally I wouldn't use "English" and "decent" in proximity of each other. It might work with "descent".

So, you're from HongKong then?
July 5, 2006 9:22:50 PM

Quote:

Personally I wouldn't use "English" and "decent" in proximity of each other. It might work with "descent".


Ooooops me bad! :oops:  Lucky my mom doesn’t frequent these forums (she is always on my case about my bad spelling)

Reg “decent” you mean the football fans? :D 

Quote:

So, you're from HongKong then?


Nope originally from Sri Lanka (Ceylon) living in Russia now.
July 9, 2006 2:26:57 AM

Quote:


P.S. choknuti, you're from the motherlan- erm, U.K., right? You guys have page 3... There's something you'll never see in Australia.



Nope I am from Russia and fortunately don’t know what page 3 is :D  .



I think it's 'The Sun' newspaper in England that has page 3. Page 3 is a eye-candy for men. Not so strange but it is in a major newspaper, rather than some sealed magazine. It's odd that England has more lenient censorship laws and less crime than the U.S. Isn't less censorship supposed to equal a more violent society?

P.S. choknuti, your English is still better than 98% of the native speakers in this country.
July 10, 2006 4:57:58 AM

Quote:

It's odd that England has more lenient censorship laws and less crime than the U.S. Isn't less censorship supposed to equal a more violent society?


Can’t agree with you here (unless you are being sarcastic 8) ). IMHO more censorship = more repressive society, and not less violent one.


Quote:

P.S. choknuti, your English is still better than 98% of the native speakers in this country.


Thanks :D 
July 10, 2006 6:31:55 AM

Quote:

It's odd that England has more lenient censorship laws and less crime than the U.S. Isn't less censorship supposed to equal a more violent society?


Can’t agree with you here (unless you are being sarcastic 8) ). IMHO more censorship = more repressive society, and not less violent one.



Ah yes, here is an excellent example of what the thread originally became; whether a lack of face-to-face interaction leads to a lack of communication skills (and thus, social skills).

Yes, the question was half rhetoric and half sarcasm. Unfortunately, as you probably know, when we communicate with someone the spoken words make only a part of the conversation. Intonation, pronunciation, enunciation, body language and many more things are what enable us to discern how we should interpret what the other person is saying so that we can have a fulfilling conversation.

Unfortunately, text cannot convey all of the information we receive in a normal, nondescript conversation, which is why face-to-face interaction is so important. However, a lack of information usually leads people to assumptions, which breeds imagination. That, and LSD :lol: 

Here's a small experiment of dubious quality I just made up. Look at these four words:
- Elephant
- Computer
- Princess
- Bus

Now try to make a short story (about 500 words), about those 4 words. I deliberately gave you minimal information just to make your imagination work hard.

P.S. You don't have to post the story; you don't even have to write it if you don't want to. If you do post it, and you manage to set a precedent, don't blame me when the TH moderators say "stop making dem posts so long; you knows I's not so good at the reading". :lol: 

P.P.S. (Late edit): I misspelt 'whether'. I's not so good at the speeling :cry: 
July 11, 2006 6:48:19 AM

Wow!!! U an English or psychology major?
July 12, 2006 1:47:05 AM

Quote:
Wow!!! U an English or psychology major?


No, I'm just very analytical.

That, and, even though I am a native speaker, studying English is a hobby of mine.
July 12, 2006 5:13:46 AM

Quote:

That, and, even though I am a native speaker,


For an Australian that is a first!!! :tongue:
July 12, 2006 10:07:35 AM

Quote:

That, and, even though I am a native speaker,


For an Australian that is a first!!! :tongue:

You know what I mean! :lol: 

It's my mother tounge; my first-spoken language. I don't know how to speak the Australian bastardised variant of English; all I know is is that it sound like gibberish. Think of a sentence and try to visualise it as one gigantic word, then replace some of the words with Aussie slang, and throw in some profanity for good measure.

There is also native Australian, as spoken by the native Australians (aborigines), but if I remember correctly there are around 260 different languages. Not dialects, languages.
July 12, 2006 9:43:07 PM

Quote:


You know what I mean! :lol: 


Almost all my cousins, aunts and uncles on my mom's side are from Down under :o 

Quote:

There is also native Australian, as spoken by the native Australians (aborigines), but if I remember correctly there are around 260 different languages. Not dialects, languages.


Wow that's a lot. kinda like India
!