Houser Problems

12

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Syntax

lol wut

avatar

horzo

What crap. GTAIV is fun. As a video game, this is its reason for being. Whather or not it has redeeming social value is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps Mr. McDonald should be writing for the National Review rather than Max PC.

 

 

avatar

captrespect

So your basicly saying that we shouldn't make games like this because the government might use it to create regulations?  Sorry, but the just the governement threat of "clean up your act or we'll censor" is still sensorship. If you arn't doing something out of fear of it being used to make laws against it, you might as well just make a law against it now.  We should defend them because the government has no right to do this.

It doesn't matter what you think of GTA IV. We should  "imagine it projected on the screen before the Congressional Subcommittee on Sticking Our Noses in Other People’s Busines" then we should defend GTA IV to make sure they able to do a damn thing about it.

avatar

Wildebeast

I've never played any of the GTA series, except for an hour or so on Vice City. I've never watched the "GTA4 Sex" video, or seen the "hot coffee" mod in action. Just not interested. (The driving model really does stink, btw.)

I'm a fan of "Crackdown" on the 360, though. To me, it's the same play model --but with a different moral slant (you're penalized for killing innocents). The driving model isn't much better, but I really enjoy driving insanely fast through a busy city --trying not to hit civilians, but ramming bad guys.

These are "sand-box" type games. How evil a player you are, is pretty much up to you. Has GTA4 got a different riff on this??

My brother introduced me to Crackdown, and he says he like GTA4 better. I expect it's a matter of personal taste. I've always loved the Civilization series --which plenty of people don't care for.

I really do think people's issues with this really is about censorship, though. If you are an adult, responsible for what a minor is viewing ---you really need to realize You are responsible, if you allow them to watch/play this game.

I'm still embarassed that my brother & his wife allowed their teen-age son to play the older games, decided to allow the 8 year old to own his own copies too, and then were schocked when they realized that M for Mature actually means there are Mature themes.

I think people who are complaining about games like this are the same ones who complain about their 8 year old learning swear words for friends at school. If you want your kids to avoid this stuff, you need to do one or more of the following:

A) Raise them to avoid Mature rated material, until they reach your specified age. Make sure the people you trust with your kids are aware of your wishes and will follow them.

B) Teach them to avoid relationships and dealings with people who will expose them to this kind of material, against your wishes.

C) Raise your kid(s) in an Amish or other similar community, where either no-one has electricy --or your family is the only one.

D) Find youself some kind of Convent-school, where the rules are as/more strict than your own.

Parenting is tough. Maybe there should be a an X rating for some/many games that are now M [and XXX for pornography?]. I really do think the GTA series is a symtom of a problem, not the problem itself.

avatar

Sonickid101

 ...but i'll defend to the death your right to say it. The same should apply to all forms of media and print under the freedom of speech. You may not agree with the content or subject matter but you should defend thier right to produce it. The ammount of censorship we have already is already a slap in the bill of rights as it is. In other countries nudity and sex isn't a big deal at all. All this is just the result of a conservitive country founded by puritans, quakers, and candlestick makers. This is why we defend these guys Tom. I myself being the sick mother that I am have been enjoying debaucherous games like these since leisure suit larry all the way to postal and GTA. Hot Coffee or not the more attention you give it the more you fuel the flame. Besides morals are BS nowadays anyway who's normal. its all subjective. So what if a game developer wants to put diseased cowheads into thier game or give you the ability to piss in the face of a flamin gimp until he pukes on an electrical transformer till it explodes technically the game developer didn't tell you to do anything he just put the system in place to facilitate such behavior which we behind closed doors gleefully enjoy in all its hours and hours of priceless entertainment and ear to ear smiles as we decapitate endless amounts of fools with a kitana on the beaches of Vice City. Don't agree with me tough i'll just go artificially inciminate this goat with my turky baster and be on my way. You lose good day sir! I said good day!

avatar

sirphunkee

I don't think Tom or anyone here was arguing that the company didn't or shouldn't have the right to put such content in their games, or that mandated censorship is right... 

 The point is that if this industry doesn't do a better job of self-regulating it's public image, the unwanted negative attention that brings will surely eventually lead to "someone" (i.e. the US gummint) thinking that they NEED to censor and otherwise regulate what we can see/hear/play on our pc's and consoles.

 Again, just because someone (like the gaming publishers) have the RIGHT to produce content like that, it doesn't mean it's in the industry's best interest to do so indiscriminately (or be percieved as doing so).

 Picture this: one evening at home, Senator Rev. Highnmighty sees yet another Dateline special on TV about how games like GTA are eroding our kid's morals etc etc.  He decides to check the XBOX game collection of his teenage son, and sure enough he finds a copy of that very game.  Does he think, "oh no, I need to pay more attention as a parent to what my kid is exposed to!" ??  Not likely, rather I'd expect he'd be in his office bright and early the next morning penning some new legislation that none of us here would be very thrilled about.

 I, for one, don't want to give those who feel they have a god-given duty to regulate my constitutional rights any more incentive or ammuntion than they already regrettably have.

 If we don't self-regulate how we handle and use our rights, we'll soon be sitting here blogging their epitaphs.

 

avatar

brannank

Tom, I agree with the brunt of your comments--there are moral absolutes, there is right and there is wrong. As a Born again Christian(John 3:3) Im convinced that the Bible is the plumbline reference point for truth and that truth doesn't change for the politically correct media or does it change due to the numbers of people that disagree with it or what year it is; I must point out however that viewing murders, porn...does have a numbing affect upon people, after a while it doesn't alarm us as it should, the military uses a phrase called "Killology", Killology is the method of acclimating military men into the killing with greater ease by exposing the subjects to images of killing and scenarios wherein they simulate killing until they no longer have a second thought or replusion at taking another life(and war is a necessary evil in the age we live)-the fact is that what would have been absolutely unacceptable fifty years ago is ho-hum today by a huge number of folks and I hope and pray that does change.

avatar

AndyYankee17

Tom, to you I say BOO. so what if the game's violent? everybody looks at the cons, look at the pros, maybe there's fewer serial killers in the world because poeple can vent their emotions in game? now, in warren spector's defense, I say hell yeah. imo GTA is the most overrated sack of crap ever coded.

avatar

sirphunkee

his issue isn't so much that the game is violent, but rather that it's violent (and otherwise explicit) without any particular social or artistic justification...and in doing so brings unwanted and unwarranted negative attention on the gaming industry.

a great man once said "perception is reality", and when franchises like this give the media a reason to give us a bad name, warranted or not, and the public opinion that invariably follows...not good my friend, regardless of what esteem we hold ourselves in. 

avatar

jwalch.hawk

Yeah, I agree, I'm pretty sure that's what his issue is.  Personally, this was (appeared in the mag) one of my favorite articles from Tom in a while.  Maybe that's just my bias because I happen to wholeheartedly agree.  In any case, the point is that it's violent with absolutely nothing else to its merit...  Oh wait.  There's sex too.  But like sirphunkee (wow, great handle :P) said, there's not really a particular justification for it, whereas in most popular titles that I can think of, these would be means to a larger end.  Maybe I just missed the point, but it seems all that game does is promote sex and violence for its own sake.  And it's a best-seller!  Not only does it make me more than a little sad inside that so many "gamers" (yes, I use that term loosely here) seem to enjoy mashing buttons just to mash heads and nothing else, but if I were a Senator (thankfully, I realized a triple-digit IQ precluded me from that...) it would be EXACTLY the smoking gun I would use to illustrate that the gaming industry needs to "clean up its act."

Yes, we have freedom in America for a reason.  But what happens when that freedom gets abused?  Terrorists abuse American freedoms and we end up with invasive airport security and the Patriot Act (not trying to make political statements condemning either, just illustrating the contrast between that and "total freedom").  What happens when game designers abuse their freedom of expression?  I'll let you fill in the blank.  The folks making GTA4 and designers considering games similar need to consider how much they could possibly be endangering other designers' freedom to express before they just blanketly make sex and violence for the sake of (quite clearly large) profits.

avatar

sirphunkee

thanks for saving me all that extra typing, that's exatly what I was getting at :)

and by saying "clean up it's act", your hypothetical senator means "allow us to regulate it"  *shiver*

point:  I have the RIGHT to stand out in my front yard and flick boogers at every car that drives by.  However, out of concern for the impact to my family's reputation in the neighborhood, I don't (despite how much fun I might have doing it, or how many people watch the youtube video of it).  Same idea here.

p.s. thanks for the props on my handle, I've been using sirphunkee since the intertubes were first a gleam in Al Gore's eye

avatar

AndyYankee17

eh, I stand corrected

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.