Witchhunt. Bring your pitchforks.

[JJ]

Jamie J is no longer here. He died of pure rage on seeing the Daily Mail article. Sympathies to anyone who knew him well.


Regards, his family.

[madhair60]

The best thing of all is, the next day, NOTHING. Not a videogame to be seen. Now there's some actual news, the Mail has no need for filler. bedmen.

[ChaosX3]

The Mail are complete pillocks. The only thing people need to read is the LOCAL news. They can watch the good, important stuff on the BBC.

[JJ]

Here's a nice article I found on the Net by some guy:

Manhunt is one of the most brutal, violent and disturbing games ever released. As such it received an 18 certificate from the BBFC when it came to UK shores last November for Sony’s Playstation 2 console. The game was reasonably popular with critics and gamers alike, hailing from the same development studio as “Grand Theft Auto”, Rock Star Games. Earlier this year Manhunt was ported over to Microsoft’s Xbox console and PC where it attained similar success. The game, no doubt, sold thousands of copies across all three gaming platforms, never once falling foul of retailers or distributors. And now it’s being blamed as the sole cause of a murder.

I own Manhunt and went back to it last night just to jog my memory of its content before writing this article. In Manhunt you play a prisoner on death row who, after being executed, wakes up in an empty room with nothing but a radio headset, through which you receive information from an unnamed source. You are an unwilling participant in a snuff movie and you must do anything to survive. You are being hunted by murderers, rapists, sadists and other depraved psychopaths. You must stick to the shadows and execute them before they bring you down. It’s obvious why Manhunt is rated 18. The atmosphere, setting, gameplay mechanics and objectives are very mature. This is not a game for kids.

If Manhunt creates killers then shouldn’t I be one too? I own the game and I know the difference between right and wrong. Countless others own the game and I don’t see them patrolling the streets with murderous intent. Surely a game cannot be held responsible for a person’s actions? To not understand the difference between right and wrong/reality and fiction makes you a danger to society and yourself without the influence of a videogame. As such, Manhunt may well have influenced the style of this recent murder but it certainly isn’t the cause. There are many other violent games on the market, “Soldier of Fortune” being a prime example. That game allows you to blast the limbs off your enemies with various real world weapons. Violent scenes fill our Cinemas and TV screens, why aren’t those to blame? The video game industry is huge but it can still be made a scapegoat. The industry just isn’t mainstream enough and this sort of publicity puts games into a bad light. This knee-jerk reaction could spell trouble for the future of gaming, especially for Rock Star.

There has been a call to ban Manhunt from sale. Dixon’s have been the first store to remove it from their shelves. If other retailers follow suit, Manhunt will become a hot piece of software. Every gamer that missed it the first time round will rush out to purchase the controversial title while they still can. Manhunt fell from the game charts some time ago but this media frenzy is set to bring it right back from the dead for all the wrong reasons. If Manhunt really does turn the player into a killer aren’t those calling for the ban shooting themselves in the foot? When Manhunt secures its place at the top spot next week will there be a sudden spate of violent killings across the country? Of course not, and there were no killings when it was released nine months ago.

If there’s a problem with video game violence then there’s a problem with violence in every form of entertainment, be it on TV, in cinemas or in books. With violence depicted across all mediums, all we can do is call for stronger censorship. But why should those level headed individuals like me not be allowed to enjoy it just because of one person? Games certainly don’t govern the way I go about my life. I’m responsible for my own actions.

Also, the Daily Mail forums are bursting with people disagreeing with the article. Not a single person on the thread agreed with it. Here's an excerpt of one of the opinions being given:

Ok, lets look at it this way. I have been a gamer for almost half my life. (which means I've been playing games for about 13 years). My favourite games have been, in pretty much chronological order, Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Duke Nukem, Half-life, GTA & GTA 3, and more recently Far Cry and Unreal Tournament.

Now I ask you, does this exposure to violence make me a dangerous individual? Does me playing these games throughout my adolescence cause me to harbour secret desires to run over pedestrians in my car, or chase after people with a baseball bat and a high powered rifle?

Answer: a resounding NO!. This argument has happened before. When Carmageddon was released, the newspapers got on their high horse and pretty much forced the BBFC to ban the game (in its full gore form at the time), so SCI had to release a frankly dull and uninteresting Zombie version. Oh and now look - about 2 years later, the ban was overturned. When GTA came out, again, uproar from our obviously right-thinking betters, but did that do any good? No. All this media frenzy does is give the games more publicity. Even though Dixons has stopped stocking the Manhunt game, I strongly suspect that sales will go through the roof. Will this create a whole crowd of amoral murders running around?

No.

What these people need to realise is that GAMES ARE NOT JUST FOR CHILDREN ANYMORE!. When the games industry started up, yes, the majority of games were made for children, it was the best market to aim for. Now, those children have grown up, and guess what, they're still playing games. But now we don't want patronising gumph like Super Mario Bros or Sonic the Hedgehog, we want something thatwe could watch on a saturday night at the cinema or on the TV. Games are regulated in the same way as films for heaven's sake - a game has been given an 18 rating BECAUSE IT IS NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN! The sooner parents and politicians get this into their heads the better.

As has been said previously in this thread, the responsibility falls on the head of the parents and the retailers. A Game is rated by the BBFC, it is always clearly displayed on the box. If a parent chooses to buy a game which is for an age group older than the child they are buying it for, then on their head be it. If their child then goes and commits a crime, they have no one to blame but themselves - they obviously didn't spend enough time teaching their offspring what is REAL and what is FANTASY, what is RIGHT and what is WRONG.

Just for the record, I am 25, married and have a son of nearly 2 and another on the way. In time I will no doubt buy my son a games console, and being the responsible parent that I am, I won't buy him games that I deem unsuitable. It is MY responsibility. A game is a form of ENTERTAINMENT and should be treated as such. It is not a form of mass brainwashing to create a generation of sadistic child murders. If we want to know what causes that then we need to look deeper into the human psyche than most are willing to look. So please, repeat after me: COMPUTER GAMES DOTH NOT A KILLER MAKE.

Anyway, thats my two pence. Whether you agree or not is up to you, but ask yourself this: If we were to ban violent computer games, we'd probably have to ban games like, erm Super Mario Brothers, Sonic the Hedgehog, Spiderman, hell pretty much every game that has been made in the last 20 years. We might as well ban Space Invaders and Missile Command while we're at it.

Dr Shipman's favorite game was Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing and look at the effect that had. Case closed, sir!

[321boom]

Interesting. I agree with quote two quite a lot.

[Zero at Florida]

I felt compelled to do the same thing as Nemesis did...

"Just yesterday morning, a scientest from anoymous origins just went into the local forest and captured some animals. In his test labs, he imprisoned animals inside small robots. Whereas he had expected them to come to life, they just stood there and the animals suffocated. The authorities learned of this and went to arrest him for animal torture, by the time they were there, he was wearing a fake orange mustache and was said "Yosh" in an unsual manner.
The blame was not directed this man, but to the "Sonic The Hedgehog" console games instead. Where animals are cruelly treated by the villian called "Dr. Eggman". Clearly, these follow up of Sonic games are setting a bad example on our children, as they already refusing to eat eggs.
All copies of the latest animal cruelity games: 'Sonic Heroes' and 'Sonic Advance 3', will be removed from the shelves by tommorrow and the RSPCA will soon sue Sega."

[Turbocharge]

they're taking this too far ow. Anyone read the Daily Record? they've got an article stating that local council are to use children to see which stores are selling games to under-aged kids. for god's sake, do they have nothing better to do with their time?

[JJ]

Turbocharge said:

they're taking this too far ow. Anyone read the Daily Record? they've got an article stating that local council are to use children to see which stores are selling games to under-aged kids. for god's sake, do they have nothing better to do with their time?

That's probably a good idea, actually. It's a step in the right direction - at least it means that they are recognising that retailers are more to blame then the developers themselves. If age laws were stricter and more properly enforced, then it could only make a positive difference on the issue.

[madhair60]

Turbocharge said:

they're taking this too far ow. Anyone read the Daily Record? they've got an article stating that local council are to use children to see which stores are selling games to under-aged kids. for god's sake, do they have nothing better to do with their time?

That's enforcing the law. Good for them. What's your problem with that?

[Turbocharge]

actually, it's breakingthe law. they passed a law years ago stating that they were't allowed to use kids.

[supersonicjim]

"But now we don't want patronising gumph like Super Mario Bros or Sonic the Hedgehog,"

sonic gumph!? no-one badmouths sonic, no-one should tell of others badmouthing sonic on a sonic forum.

i'm betting that twenty five year old is a v-german if ya know what I mean.

[JJ]

A new chapter in this saga, as the real reason for the backlash emerges. Money.

Murdered boy's family to sue Sony for £50m

THE parents who blame a computer game for inciting the murder of their 14-year-old son are to take out a £50 million lawsuit against Sony and the game’s creators.

Stefan Pakeerah was beaten to death with a claw hammer and stabbed repeatedly with a knife after being lured to a park by Warren Leblanc.

The 17-year-old was said to be obsessed with the PlayStation 2 game Manhunt, in which a man roams a city slaughtering scores of people. Leblanc will be sentenced next month.

The Pakeerah family, from Leicester, have hired a United States-based lawyer and campaigner against violent video games to begin a civil suit against the games industry they believe must share responsibility for Stefan’s death.

The Manhunt action would provide a test case in the British courts on the vexed question of whether computer games can influence the behaviour of adolescents. The computer games industry, worth £2 billion, could ride on the outcome.

Jack Thompson, a Miami-based lawyer, has been engaged by the family to undertake the action. He said: “Children are being trained to kill each other through these games. The tragedy of Stefan is not an isolated incident. The Pakeerahs are a brave family because they are willing to do something about it.”

Mr Thompson said that he would serve writs against Rockstar Games, the Edinburgh-based creator of Manhunt, and Sony Computer Entertainment, makers of the PlayStation 2 games console.

The action is based on a $60 million suit in America served by the families of two victims shot dead by teenagers in Tennessee who told police that they were acting out scenes from the violent game Grand Theft Auto.

Rockstar, owned by New York company Take-Two Interactive Software, is also the producer of Grand Theft Auto and now faces simultaneous action over two of its hit games.

Mr Thompson said: “I believe the charge of wrongful death being pursued in the US can be the basis for the Pakeerahs’ action.”

The campaigner said he wrote to Rockstar before Stefan’s killing warning the company that the violence in Manhunt would incite copycat behaviour and possibly murder.

Sony must also bear responsibility for allowing a game on its PlayStation platform which is played by children, despite having an over-18 age restriction, Mr Thompson argued.

“I am accusing the games companies of a conspiracy to avoid the law,” he said.

“They are clearly marketing these games at minors.” Action against retailers who stock the game may follow. Mr Thompson said that he would start the lawsuits with the Pakeerah family after Leblanc’s sentencing next month. He is preparing to call expert witnesses, including US military personnel who will describe how the same violent computer games are used to train soldiers to kill.

However, if the case proves successful it could make it more difficult for victims’ families to put killers behind bars. Defence lawyers will invoke computer games as the trigger for violent actions and plead mitigating circumstances.

Manhunt, which awards extra points to players for carrying out murders in a particularly extreme and bloody way, has already been removed from shelves by the Dixons group and the Game chain. It has been banned in New Zealand.

Patricia Hewitt, the Trade and Industry Secretary, has called on games manufacturers and stores to do more to protect children from “immersing themselves in images of extreme violence.”

But ministers say that Britain already has the most restrictive video classification system in the world and is content to let the British Board of Film Classification use its code to assess “realistic scenes of gross violence or sexual activity” in games. Rockstar, while offering its sympathies to the Pakeerah family, rejected “any suggestion or association between the tragic events and the sale of Manhunt”. The company said that the 18-plus game should not have been in the hands of a juvenile.

The company’s latest project is a game tie-in with a remake of The Warriors, the 1979 New York gang film which provoked scenes of copycat violence when it was first released.

Friends of Warren Leblanc convinced the Pakeerahs that Manhunt was an influence on his murderous behavious. Stefan’s father, Patrick, 41, said: “The way Warren Leblanc committed the murder was similar to the game Manhunt, in the use of weapons such as hammers and knives. I don’t play these games but if they are influencing kids to go out and kill people then you don’t want them on the shelves.”

Giselle, Stefan’s mother, said: “I can’t believe that this sort of material is allowed in a society where anarchy is not that far removed. It should not be available.”

However, psychologists who have examined the effects of computer games on adolescents have found no definitive link with violent behaviour and called for more research.

Responses?

[321boom]

I agree with the psychologists. Manhunt can't make you violent.

[mobiusman]

Bleh.
Bleh.
Bleh.
Bleh.
I don't think Manhunt is to blame, but I think it's too violent.

[ChaosX3]

The campaigner said he wrote to Rockstar before Stefan’s killing warning the company that the violence in Manhunt would incite copycat behaviour and possibly murder.

That is BS. THAT IS BS.

[Turbocharge]

"marketing these games at minors"?!?!

it has a **%^*~££!£~ 18 certificate on it, you stupid %$£^%$£%!!!"!!

it's crap like this that pisses me off. stupid people like this should not be allowed out.

[JJ]

Metallix said:

Bleh.
Bleh.
Bleh.
Bleh.
I don't think Manhunt is to blame, but I think it's too violent.

Nope, its perfect. Just because it shows things that most games wouldn't dare to. It's a pioneer, and a landmark game in every sense of the word.

*sighs*

[madhair60]

SuperSonicJim said:

"But now we don't want patronising gumph like Super Mario Bros or Sonic the Hedgehog,"

sonic gumph!? no-one badmouths sonic, no-one should tell of others badmouthing sonic on a sonic forum.

i'm betting that twenty five year old is a v-german if ya know what I mean.

Hate to say it, but Sonic IS patronising gumpfff. Much as I love it.

[mobiusman]

Jamie said:

Nope, its perfect. Just because it shows things that most games wouldn't dare to. It's a pioneer, and a landmark game in every sense of the word.

*sighs*

Er... right....

[JJ]

Dragging this back up due to new info on the Manhunt case!

New twist in Manhunt controversy

The story of the “Manhunt” murder case took another twist with the revelation that the game was present in the victim’s home, not the killer’s.
Narinder Pooni, media services officer for Leicestershire Police, told MCV: “Apparently the game was found but it was in Stefan Pakeerah’s bedroom.”

Pakeerah was murdered by his friend Warren Leblanc in February.

While this fact does not in itself undermine the allegation made by Pakeerah’s mother and the Daily Mail that Leblanc was influenced by Manhunt, it does make the issue more complex. It also raises questions such as whether the 14 year old victim owned the game. And if so, who bought it for him?

As for the link between Manhunt and the crime, the police are clear. Pooni said: “We haven’t connected the game with the murder and we’ve already made that statement, but some sections of the media chose to ignore it…the motive was robbery.”

How ironic. The game WAS responsible for the murder, just not in the way we thought it would be! The 14-year old stole the other kid's game, who killed him for it.

[Turbocharge]

very interesting information there, jamie. What's your source? I have't heard anyhting about it in the papers recently.

At least the police aren't blaming the game for the murder. I can just imagine a prison mugshot of the Manhunt disk...

[JJ]

I first saw it on GameCentral Teletext, and then saw the article on www.mcvuk.com/html/news/story.jsp?newsId=1928139

[321boom]

More manhunt rubbish. Like I said before, manhunt can't have anything to do with crime can it?

[Mrcuddlebunny]

I'm surprised at the Daily Mail response actually... you'd have thought they'd have found some way of blaming illegal immigrants too. And Tony Blair.

But, yes, the article was garbage. These idiots who are jealous that they never had such a fantastic form of entertainment can't seem to get it through their thick skulls that violent games are a VENT for a person's sadistic side, not a TRIGGER. In these games, I can wind down and allow a little of my evil side to show without ever actually harming anyone. Is that a bad thing?? And banning Unreal Tournament 2004 is the biggest load of garbage yet. "Ultra violent" The Daily Mail says. Does it allow view of people's organs and intestines blown out? No. Can you hack limbs off people without killing them? No. The violence is of a cartoony and downright funny nature... I always find it hilarious to hit someone with a flak cannon and turn them into a flying shower of meat that causes only a pair of legs to remain... and I laugh uncontrollably if I fall into space and explode in a red cloud... The dry, cynical humour is great too... "Oregon ran over himself" or "Silly Othello, grenades are for the enemy"- Genius. ;D

And the Unreal Tournament article was also badly researched..."An alien empire has conquered Humanity and sends dissidents into a futuristic arena..." Oh REALLY?? Then explain why there's a mission which is a recreation of the stunning victory of the Humans destroying the alien mothership at the last possible moment! IDIOTS!

[/rant]

[JJ]

Haha, they got the descriptions for most of the games wrong. They confused GTAIII with Vice City.