PDA

View Full Version : Rockstar in trouble yet again! When will it stop?


GRMac13
11-27-2003, 11:55 PM
From New York Newsday:


November 25, 2003, 8:56 PM EST


Outraged Haitian-Americans and elected officials called for a boycott of a video game they call racist and violent, and said legal and legislative actions are being explored to have it banned New York.

A 10 a.m. demonstration is being planned for Dec. 15 outside the offices of Rockstar Games Inc. the maker of "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City" at 575 Broadway in Manhattan. The event will kick off legal action and peaceful protests in response to the game that community leaders said demoralizes Haitians and Cubans, depicts them as thugs, thieves and drug dealers, and goads the characters to kill Haitians.

State Sen. Carl Andrews (D-Brooklyn) said he will introduce legislation to ban the video game and examine it for any violation of state law.

Haitian-American communities and "concerned citizens" worldwide are being mobilized for a campaign to boycott stores that sell the game, urge parents not to purchase it and to seek a refund for any game they have already bought.

"We believe that it was the purposeful intent of Rockstar Games Inc. to create a product that was controversial in order to increase sales," Henry Frank, executive director of the Haitian Centers Council in Brooklyn, said at a news conference on the steps of City Hall Tuesday.

Councilman Miguel Martinez said the Dominican community was in solidarity with the Haitians.

Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide is holding talks with American authorities about "this new affront to the Haitian people," according to Harry Fouche, the Haitian Consul General in New York.

Jim Ankner, a spokesman for Take 2 Interative Software Inc., Rockstar's parent company, said, "We empathize with the concerns of the Haitian community and we are giving serious consideration to them. Some statements made by fictional characters in 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City' have been taken out of context. There was no intention to offend any ethnic group, and we take these claims very seriously."

Attorney Sanford Rubenstein, head of a legal team representing the Haitian-American community, said he will call on federal, state and city prosecutors to "determine if this racist video game violates existing civil rights statutes and if so, take appropriate legal action immediately" against the two companies.

"Racist dialogue including 'kill all the Haitians' amounted to yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater," he said, "and is similarly not protected as freedom of speech."

Direct link to the article:

Haitian-Americans Call for Video Game Boycott (http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/manhattan/nyc-game1126,0,2151300.story?coll=nyc-manheadlines-manhattan)

AJ
11-28-2003, 12:03 AM
A little edit aaaaand:

"We believe that it was the purposeful intent of Rockstar Games Inc. to create a product that was controversial in order to increase sales," Henry Frank, executive director of the Haitian Centers Council in Brooklyn, said at a news conference, both creating controversy and increasing sales. He later said "I fail to see the irony".

:rolleyes:

halo
11-28-2003, 12:13 AM
State Sen. Carl Andrews (D-Brooklyn) said he will introduce legislation to ban the video game and examine it for any violation of state law.

lets shoot first ask questions later?

Haitian-American communities and "concerned citizens" worldwide are being mobilized for a campaign to boycott stores that sell the game, urge parents not to purchase it and to seek a refund for any game they have already bought.

any game? right off to the store i go...Rascal for Playstation is definately going back now, thats all the excuse i need ;)

ZEROSKULL
11-28-2003, 12:18 AM
Sighhh this is what happen when a game is really at high stage and sad people trying to take their money off from them.

GRMac13
11-28-2003, 04:16 AM
Here's a direct link to a video of a news report on the protest:

CBS NEWS - Haitian Community Protests Racist Rockstar Video Game (http://wcbs.dayport.com/viewer/viewerpage.php?Art_ID=6984&tf=chtopsviewer.tpl&Customer_ID=Haitian%20community%20protests%20violent%20Rockstar%20Video%20game%2C%20Arnold%20Diaz%20reports.)

Agent D
11-28-2003, 04:43 AM
No ethnicity/country was "well represented"... it's an organized crime game. That's the whole point. It wasn't "good guys versus evil Mexicans/Haitians" as they seem to think. :rolleyes:

Hell, 90% of movie and video game bad guys are white (Matrix, anyone?), and no one complains about that.

Dumb lawsuits/movements like this spread far more racism than they prevent (especially if it's imagined in this case). It really seems like they should be spending more time doing important things.

PhilOsirus
11-28-2003, 04:52 AM
Yeah this game as crooked corporate Texans, haitians gangs, cuban gangs, white biker gangs, italian mafia. I did say gangs by the way, because there are also white and black normal citizens in the game!

chudofsinister
11-28-2003, 06:33 AM
I bet the developers just look out there windows and laugh at the crowds.

mlykke
11-28-2003, 11:31 AM
Sometimes I so sick and tired of hearing about these pissed off people. How about going home and spend some time with your kids and learn them about what is real and what isn't. These demostrations are just bad excuses for bad parenting.

flipnap
11-28-2003, 01:01 PM
These demostrations are just bad excuses for bad parenting.

you are obviously not a parent..

PhilOsirus
11-28-2003, 05:51 PM
Seriously how is this any different than the complains about the Sopranos, and anyone who complained about the Sopranos could have complained about the God Father. And what about all those movies and albums that portray African American street gangs with "thugs yo what money cash yo blam blam"? At least GTA portrays EVERYONE, black or white, as crooks and criminals, and EVERYONE, black or white, as normal citizens as well.

Gentle Fury
11-28-2003, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by chudofsinister
I bet the developers just look out there windows and laugh at the crowds.

Are you kidding? They look at the protesters and see dollar signs!!

Funny that something as silly as GTA: VC is getting so much controversy and I've heard very little complaint about Manhunt......their latest and most brutally violent and realistic snuff film game!

Kick ass game btw......you can chop off peoples heads and throw em at other people :)

halo
11-28-2003, 07:36 PM
Kick ass game btw......you can chop off peoples heads and throw em at other people

cool, how far can u throw them?

Gwot
11-28-2003, 08:07 PM
Depends on the resolution you have your monitor set to. The higher the rez, the farther you throw! :curious:

GRMac13
11-28-2003, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by Phil "Osirus"
Seriously how is this any different than the complains about the Sopranos, and anyone who complained about the Sopranos could have complained about the God Father. And what about all those movies and albums that portray African American street gangs with "thugs yo what money cash yo blam blam"? At least GTA portrays EVERYONE, black or white, as crooks and criminals, and EVERYONE, black or white, as normal citizens as well.

Exactly. And Cuban-Americans could have complained about "Scarface" and all the other films that portray Cubans as drug-dealing thugs. But complaining or protesting are one thing, trying to have a law passed to prevent these types of games from being sold to mature adults is quite another. I hope the government stays out of this, because censorship means everybody loses.

It confounds me how these folks can be so outraged as to organize a protest against a video game, while thousands of their fellow Haitians are starving and dying everyday in their homeland. There are much more serious issues facing the Haitian people than this.

AJ
11-28-2003, 10:50 PM
I'm personally disgusted by the scenes of wanton automible destruction within the game. Not only was I able to crash my car, but after a number of minutes play it 'exploded into pieces' - and yet my main character could just get into another.

Why is everyone ignoring the unfair and abusive representation of cars in the videogame industry?

I mean - If Herbie were still alive....

:blush:

gmask
11-28-2003, 10:58 PM
>>> And Cuban-Americans could have complained about "Scarface" and all the other films that portray Cubans as drug-dealing thugs.

Well actually they did complain about it..

"Protests in Miami

Though he used the same title as the 1932 Howard Hawks' gangster film, De Palma actually visualized "Scarface" as John Huston's "Treasure of Sierra Madre" with cocaine substituted for gold. It got off to an inauspicious start: The violent and expletive-filled epic was greeted with protests and derision by Miami's Cuban community, which disliked its portrayal, and given an "X" rating (since replaced by the NC-17) by the Motion Picture Assn. of America's rating board. Bringing in three psychiatrists and a narcotics squad officer to testify in their behalf, the filmmakers eventually landed the more commercial "R." "

http://new.blackvoices.com/entertainment/movies/bv-ent-movies-scarface091703,0,5631763.story?coll=bv-entertainment-movies

El Beano
11-29-2003, 12:41 AM
This is all simply stupid. These people should be punished hard!

GRMac13
11-29-2003, 06:20 AM
Originally posted by gmask
>>> And Cuban-Americans could have complained about "Scarface" and all the other films that portray Cubans as drug-dealing thugs.

Well actually they did complain about it.

I know they did. My point was that complaints and protests are fine. Trying to pass legislation is not.

Originally posted by gmask
"Protests in Miami

Though he used the same title as the 1932 Howard Hawks' gangster film, De Palma actually visualized "Scarface" as John Huston's "Treasure of Sierra Madre" with cocaine substituted for gold. It got off to an inauspicious start: The violent and expletive-filled epic was greeted with protests and derision by Miami's Cuban community, which disliked its portrayal, and given an "X" rating (since replaced by the NC-17) by the Motion Picture Assn. of America's rating board. Bringing in three psychiatrists and a narcotics squad officer to testify in their behalf, the filmmakers eventually landed the more commercial "R." "

http://new.blackvoices.com/entertainment/movies/bv-ent-movies-scarface091703,0,5631763.story?coll=bv-entertainment-movies

Yea, they covered all of this in the Scarface Special Edition DVD (of which I am a proud owner). However, I don't recall the Cuban community trying to have any laws passed to ban the film. I believe they were just trying to force DePalma to alter his film, or refrain from making it at all.

gmask
11-29-2003, 06:38 AM
>>I know they did. My point was that complaints and protests are fine. Trying to pass legislation is not.

Okay.. well that contradicts what you said previously but I beleive you ;-)

As citizens they have the right to attempt to get laws passed.. as much as any other faction in the US does.. I'm not making any call on wether or not their complaints are or would be justified but that if there was a factual foundation to it and a real problem then they have every right to lobby for and attempt to have a law made. Their are all sorts of powerful "self interest" groups that do this.. the ones with money and connections get alot of what they want.

Too bad their aren't enough computer graphics people to pass any laws in the favor of computer graphics people.. :beer:

scene215
11-29-2003, 07:12 AM
You know when I go to Miami and drive past Little Haiti I dont think about that old Haitian voodo lady with the 64' parked out in the front and how I should go and shoot up some Cubans to help out her boys. Or when I throw my hawaian shirt and blue jeans on I dont think about gettin these Cubans in my freshly jacked van and gettin them to a spot to kill a couple of Haitians. Nope I just think damn, I wonder if that homeless person over there has gotten a chance to play GTA: VC and how he/she feels about it.:thumbsup:

You know what I think. I think these protesters are mad because they dont have a video game to call their own. Maybe Rockstar should create a "Make Nice With Everyone/Thing" game. You can chose what sex, ethnicity, weight, height, etc., your character would be and then go door to door shaking hands and giving hugs and kisses to everyone.... oh forget the hugs and kisses because that would be sexual abuse and maybe even molestation. And it might not be right to actual shake hands with others since they might see it as a physical confrontation. I guess all their game could really be is politcal correct people walking around saying "How are you?" and "Good day" and doing nice things for all the nice people in their nice video game.

Yeah... Something like that.:wip:

MaTaDoR
11-29-2003, 02:06 PM
talk about disturbing games by rockstar, I wonder when one of these jobless bums is gonna get their politically correct hands on manhunt and rip THAT apart... heh

Chewey
11-29-2003, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by gmask


As citizens they have the right to attempt to get laws passed.. as much as any other faction in the US does.. I'm not making any call on wether or not their complaints are or would be justified but that if there was a factual foundation to it and a real problem then they have every right to lobby for and attempt to have a law made. Their are all sorts of powerful "self interest" groups that do this.. the ones with money and connections get alot of what they want.



That's quite a revelation...
:rolleyes:

gmask
11-29-2003, 06:20 PM
>>>Maybe Rockstar should create a "Make Nice With Everyone/Thing" game.

LOL.. that would be fun :applause:

KolbyJukes
11-30-2003, 12:59 PM
<RANT ALERT>

A message to those protesting:

I'm going to put it simply: This shit is really starting to piss me off. Don't ban these games, don't protest at the stores...just be aware of the games you buy for your children...You can't blame adolescent violence on one video-game, how about taking a look at the entirety of Western/Eastern culture...we haven't come that far since the days of the gladiators...violence sells...blood sells...people are entertained and exposed to violence all the time. Be involved in your children's gaming lives, buy them games appropriate for their age....obviously a game rated 'M' is not appropriate for a 9 year old... and as for the supposed racism...it's an organized crime game...everybody is portrayed in a negative light...

I pray for the day when all this fundamentalist, conservative, tradionalist bullshit comes to it's end, protesting every violent/sexual videogame/movie is getting tired...really tired.

Unled
11-30-2003, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by Gentle Fury
Are you kidding? They look at the protesters and see dollar signs!!

Funny that something as silly as GTA: VC is getting so much controversy and I've heard very little complaint about Manhunt......their latest and most brutally violent and realistic snuff film game!

Kick ass game btw......you can chop off peoples heads and throw em at other people :)

Well if you notice, people don't become outraged by a game until it's old news. How old is GTA and they're just now getting around to protesting it? A little late fellas.
I still hear people talking about the violence of Doom :rolleyes: and how it drove the kids to shoot up that school.

So we should start hearing the outrage on Manhunt in about a year or two.

anieves
12-01-2003, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by flipnap
you are obviously not a parent..

I'm aparent and i agree that the law suite is an excuse for bad parenting.

Since the suite was filed in the states and I'm in the states I have to agree with that statement. In this country (USA) people don't want to be responsible for their own actions but they rather have the government to take over the responsabilities that they should have. If you are a parent, a good parent, you and only you, should know what you are getting for your kids and what they are doing and who they hang out with etc. those are responsabilities that came with the birth of your child; those are not government responsabilities.

If we had a looser pays system this kind of law suits would decline drastically.

gmask
12-01-2003, 12:56 AM
Originally posted by anieves
If you are a parent, a good parent, you and only you, should know what you are getting for your kids and what they are doing and who they hang out with etc. those are responsabilities that came with the birth of your child; those are not government responsabilities.


I agree that a complete ban seems unreasonable but the comprimise of enforcing vendors to not sell to minors has also been decried as censorship and similair points have been made about parenting.

Perhaps all restrictions on what minors can buy should be lifted because it's the parents responsibility to keep them under lock and key or follow them around 24/7 to make sure that adults don't sell them things the parent doesn't want them to have.

Even if all the characters in this game were squirrels it would still be criticised for being violent.. and most likely the squirrel lovers of america would try to pass a ban for cruelty towards squirrels.

The bottom line is America and apparrently the rest of the world as well loves depictions of violence.. it's up there with freedom of speech... pretty sweet eh?

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 01:43 AM
Originally posted by gmask
The bottom line is America and apparrently the rest of the world as well loves depictions of violence.. it's up there with freedom of speech... pretty sweet eh?

Sure is. That's the whole point though, isn't it. Depictions of violence and sex in games, film or music are just as much protected by freedom of speech as any other form of media. The responsibility lies with the individual to determine thier own moral values, not with the government. You can't pass legislation to ban certain materials based on the ideals of a few without compromising the rights of many others.

Imagine how lovely the world would be if every form of media that depicts violence, sex, or discrimination (racial or otherwise)were outlawed because a few folks found it intolerable. It'd be great, in addition to not having access to most M-rated games, we'd have no access to films such as:

The Godfather
Scarface
The Shining
Kill Bill
Deliverance
American History X
Caligula
Higher Learning
A Clockwork Orange
Natural Born Killers
Fight Club

You know what? I could probably make a list about a mile long. Most of which would be of films that contain much more graphic violence as well as a much more negative depiction of certain racial or ethnic groups than is displayed in GTA. Video games are just the newest and most vulnerable scapegoat in this never-ending crusade to stifle creative ventures that are considered controversial and/or offensive by some. In fact, before games, it was violent films that were targeted, and before that, it was music (Elvis was banned for pete's sake).

gmask
12-01-2003, 02:02 AM
Originally posted by GRMac13
Sure is. That's the whole point though, isn't it. Depictions of violence and sex in games, film or music are just as much protected by freedom of speech as any other form of media. The responsibility lies with the individual to determine thier own moral values, not with the government. You can't pass legislation to ban certain materials based on the ideals of a few without compromising the rights of many others.

Right and white power groups must feel really oppressed because they can't market games depicting their values or have tv shows.. The point being that there are actually limits on free expression.. you cannot pump the general public with hateful images or ones that promote violence towards any particular group of people. Likewise this website is moderated and in fact not a free expression forum.. does that make it unamerican?

Personally I don't believe that Rockstar is prejudiced against any group or race or at least that was probably not their intention but the country has changed over the years and due to civil rigths things you might do or say have changed. It may be your right to use the n word but you can't very well get away with naming a foodchain with it these days can ya?

It's also one of those things where the owners of Rockstar are probably mostly if not all white.. so only the polish can make polish jokes if you know what I mean.

>>Most of which would be of films that contain much more graphic violence as well as a much more negative depiction of certain racial or ethnic groups than is displayed in GTA.

The difference being that those films come and go.. they are still in circulation but the viewer is passive and probably does not spend hour upon hour day after day rewatching the same film.

The italian cmmunity has had things to say about how they are portrayed in films.. well they must all be mafia types right and talk a certain way and act a certain way and the general public finds it amusing.

So as I previously said I don't feel that this game or similair games should be banned outright but given the likelyhood that the depictions of the violence seen in them will increase and become more graphic I don't think it is unreasonable to enforce restrictions on sales of them to minors just like there are restrictions on movies.

Goon
12-01-2003, 02:14 AM
Is it just me, or are all of these protests and stuff really just five or ten people making a lot of noise?
I've noticed that except for a few major rallies about serious events, whenever the news covers such an event, the cameras seem stationed to amplify the crowd.
Like if there is only five people, and the station is pro-whatever-they-are-protesting, then only close ups are shown and no long shots exposing how pitifully little support they actually have.

gmask
12-01-2003, 02:16 AM
Originally posted by Goon
Is it just me, or are all of these protests and stuff really just five or ten people making a lot of noise?


Probably.. okay let's protest unethical news team.. yah! :applause:

Neil
12-01-2003, 02:16 AM
While you guys are talking about Rockstar, any ideas on what exactly Rockstar is trying to accomplish with Manhunt?
The tease it as only being extremely violent, they don't even show gameplay?

gmask
12-01-2003, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by Neil
While you guys are talking about Rockstar, any ideas on what exactly Rockstar is trying to accomplish with Manhunt?
The tease it as only being extremely violent, they don't even show gameplay?

Could it be that they are exploiting "Blood and Gore, Intense Violence and Strong Language" to sell games.. naw probably not..

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 02:48 AM
Originally posted by gmask
so only the polish can make polish jokes if you know what I mean.

Not true. For example, many black comics make a living poking fun at "white folks" with no repercussions. If a white comic tried to do the same, it'd be considered intolerable. That's called a double standard.

Originally posted by gmask
The difference being that those films come and go.. they are still in circulation but the viewer is passive and probably does not spend hour upon hour day after day rewatching the same film.

I disagree with the logic that a game can influence a healthy individual to commit murder. Still, if a kid is playing a game constantly, as you put it "hour upon hour day after day." Then, isn't it the parent's responsibility to say "Hey, Junior, shut the darn game off and get to doing some homework!"? Heck, if the kid was upstairs playing "tetris" all day, the parent should unplug the darn machine. It's like parents are afraid to discipline thier children these days.

Originally posted by gmask
The italian cmmunity has had things to say about how they are portrayed in films.. well they must all be mafia types right and talk a certain way and act a certain way and the general public finds it amusing.

As an Italian-American, I am embarassed by the actions of a few vocal naysayers in my community. If somone views all Italians as "mafia-types" it's not due to too much exposure to "the Sopranos" or "Goodfellas." But rather a result of ignorance on the part of that individual. The same is true for those who consider all blacks to be "thugs" or "drug-dealers" due to too much MTV rap videos. Are the videos to blame, or is it rather the person's upbringing and environment? Again, one has to question a person's intelligence (or simply, common sense) who lets MTV or Rockstar shape thier ideas and beliefs.*

*That's the job of the parents and to some extent teachers and other role models in the person's life.

gmask
12-01-2003, 03:40 AM
>>>Not true. For example, many black comics make a living poking fun at "white folks" with no repercussions. If a white comic tried to do the same, it'd be considered intolerable. That's called a double standard.

That's not entirely true.. Their is still a fair amount of racial humor.. but it has to be tempered. I think Steve Martin is probably the whitest person who has managed to have fun with black/white racial humor.


>>>I disagree with the logic that a game can influence a healthy individual to commit murder.

This is not the topic at hand. It's wether or not a game of films portrays a group of people in a diminuitive way. It's very like that a white kid growing up in the burbs will experience fear of almost anyone else that they are not exposed to in real life.

>>>Still, if a kid is playing a game constantly, as you put it "hour upon hour day after day." Then, isn't it the parent's responsibility to say "Hey, Junior, shut the darn game off and get to doing some homework!"? Heck, if the kid was upstairs playing "tetris" all day, the parent should unplug the darn machine. It's like parents are afraid to discipline thier children these days.

Yes very true.. but this does not negate there being some sort of comon deceny of vendors to respect age restrictions for the games they sell. Otherwise they shoudl be allowed to sell hardcore porn to chidlren.

>>>As an Italian-American, I am embarassed by the actions of a few vocal naysayers in my community. If somone views all Italians as "mafia-types" it's not due to too much exposure to "the Sopranos" or "Goodfellas." But rather a result of ignorance on the part of that individual. The same is true for those who consider all blacks to be "thugs" or "drug-dealers" due to too much MTV rap videos. Are the videos to blame, or is it rather the person's upbringing and environment? Again, one has to question a person's intelligence (or simply, common sense) who lets MTV or Rockstar shape thier ideas and beliefs.*

The music industry has certainly been riding the gangster pony to death..

>>That's the job of the parents and to some extent teachers and other role models in the person's life.

It goes beyond parents and teachers.. it's every person.. every family is not an island. There is the larger society to consider. Why should teachers have any repsonsibilty? They aren't the parents? Orphaned children.. well they have no parents so who cares about them.. they don't even count. Members of the surrounding comunity and businesses.. they don't owe the community anything.. they should peddle anything they can to make a buck.

Anyway like I said an outright ban would be unfair and perhaps a violation fo free speech but clearly Rockstar will continue to up the ante and churn out more and more increasingly offensive games until a law is passed. A reasonable comprimise would be for vendors to self impose a non sale to minors ban.

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 03:54 AM
Originally posted by gmask
Yes very true.. but this does not negate there being some sort of comon deceny of vendors to respect age restrictions for the games they sell. Otherwise they shoudl be allowed to sell hardcore porn to chidlren.

The topic at hand is not an age-restriction on sale of these games, it's about an outright ban of the game. The people involved in this case want for the game to be unavailable for purchase in New York state.

Originally posted by gmask
The music industry has certainly been riding the gangster pony to death.. .

And they'll do so as long as people are going to buy it.

Originally posted by gmask
Why should teachers have any repsonsibilty? They aren't the parents? Orphaned children.. well they have no parents so who cares about them.. they don't even count. Members of the surrounding comunity and businesses.. they don't owe the community anything.. they should peddle anything they can to make a buck. .

Of course teachers have responisibility, because it's their job to look after these children for X amount of hours a day. Same goes for the people who run orphanages or foster homes. They have a direct responsibility for these kids. Still, this is off topic since these folks make no mention of restricting the sale of the game. They want complete banishment.

Originally posted by gmask
Anyway like I said an outright ban would be unfair and perhaps a violation fo free speech but clearly Rockstar will continue to up the ante and churn out more and more increasingly offensive games until a law is passed. A reasonable comprimise would be for vendors to self impose a non sale to minors ban.

It looks like nobody wants to compromise here. These folks want to legislate an outright ban, not a "self-imposed ban on sale to minors."

gmask
12-01-2003, 04:21 AM
>>>The topic at hand is not an age-restriction on sale of these games, it's about an outright ban of the game. The people involved in this case want for the game to be unavailable for purchase in New York state.

What I am saying is that if vendors had been more respectful that things may not have come to this.

>>>And they'll do so as long as people are going to buy it.

This is not a justification for it.

>>>Of course teachers have responisibility, because it's their job to look after these children for X amount of hours a day. Same goes for the people who run orphanages or foster homes. They have a direct responsibility for these kids. Still, this is off topic since these folks make no mention of restricting the sale of the game. They want complete banishment.

I was being facetious, government officials are paid to make laws that are in the interest of their constituencies.. that's their job and responsibility.

>>>It looks like nobody wants to compromise here. These folks want to legislate an outright ban, not a "self-imposed ban on sale to minors."

As I have allready stated more respect from the vendors of the ratings and sales to minors and I don't think this would have happened. If Rockstar continues to put out games like this and as logn as there are angry parents and other groups of people who feel singled out and eventually something will be enforced.

If it were easier to enforce parents to be parents then that would be the best solution but clearly that is not possible. Whereas you can control what is sold to the general public.

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 04:42 AM
Originally posted by gmask
What I am saying is that if vendors had been more respectful that things may not have come to this.

Respectful to what? They are making an honest living. Besides, what do vendors have to do with this issue? The people in the article are trying to have the game banned due to the content therein. There is no mention of vendors or sales practices whatsoever.

Originally posted by gmask
I was being facetious, government officials are paid to make laws that are in the interest of their constituencies.. that's their job and responsibility.

There's a difference between an honest interest in these issues, and pandering to focus groups in a bid for votes. Unfortunately, it is oftentimes the latter that is true.

Originally posted by gmask
As I have allready stated more respect from the vendors of the ratings and sales to minors and I don't think this would have happened. If Rockstar continues to put out games like this and as logn as there are angry parents and other groups of people who feel singled out and eventually something will be enforced.

Again, the issue is not about selling this game to minors, but rather whether to sell the game at all. The minors issue is irrelevant in this case.

Rockstar will continue to make these games as long as they are profitable (which will likely be a looong time), and I say more power to 'em. On the same token you'll always have these special interest groups up in arms over the material. However, ulimately the majority of Americans seem to have no real moral or ethical problem with these types of games. I mean if they did, would GTA really be "the best selling game of all time." I think not.

Originally posted by gmask
If it were easier to enforce parents to be parents then that would be the best solution but clearly that is not possible. Whereas you can control what is sold to the general public.

Again, this is not about parenting, but the rights of adults to have access to material that some find "offensive."

scene215
12-01-2003, 04:46 AM
I just saw a miami council member on the news tonight stating that they were also in on this ban. Apparently "Kill all the Haitians" and "Kill all the Cubans" is promoting genocide and he urged members of the Cuban community to get in on the ban issue.

Perhaps the protesters should play the game a bit and see its not focused on a certain ethnic groups demise, instead of taking a snippet from a cuban gangleader or a little murder mission.

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 04:52 AM
Originally posted by scene215
I just saw a miami council member on the news tonight stating that they were also in on this ban. Apparently "Kill all the Haitians" and "Kill all the Cubans" is promoting genocide and he urged members of the Cuban community to get in on the ban issue.

Perhaps the protesters should play the game a bit and see its not focused on a certain ethnic groups demise, instead of taking a snippet from a cuban gangleader or a little murder mission.

Genocide!? What the f*ck? It's one guy fighting against a bunch of "gangs." Not an army hellbent on wiping out an entire race. Talk about taking things out of context, they make it sound like a Hitler role-playing game. Idiots.

Rockstar better make sure all of it's gangs in GTA 4 are composed of white suburban kids armed with super-soakers.

gmask
12-01-2003, 05:15 AM
>>>Respectful to what? They are making an honest living. Besides, what do vendors have to do with this issue? The people in the article are trying to have the game banned due to the content therein. There is no mention of vendors or sales practices whatsoever.

I could think of alot of game titles that would probably sell but generally be disrespectful to all sorts of people.. if they were profitable does that mean I'm on the moral high ground.. no. Gauging by profit ..is much of the world's problems... not just America's but by all accounts we have the market cornered on it.

>>>There's a difference between an honest interest in these issues, and pandering to focus groups in a bid for votes. Unfortunately, it is oftentimes the latter that is true.

Gun Lobby.. Tobacco Lobby.. dump nuclear waste in your backyard lobby.. there are plenty of self interested lobbies that are worse than this.


>>>Again, the issue is not about selling this game to minors, but rather whether to sell the game at all. The minors issue is irrelevant in this case.

To a degree it is because largely it is children and people in their 20's playing games. Does anyone have any statisitics on this they can link to?

>>>However, ulimately the majority of Americans seem to have no real moral or ethical problem with these types of games. I mean if they did, would GTA really be "the best selling game of all time." I think not.

The majority of Americans? That's a vast generalization presuming that even a majority of people in america play these kind of games..let alone computer games on a regular basis. Sur eit's a growing number..but it's also a growing population.

>>Again, this is not about parenting, but the rights of adults to have access to material that some find "offensive."

Well as I have tried to explain to you allready I think some moderation and respect from vendors would have curbed this but it doesn't really matter.

A few years from now they'll be making games with graphic virtual rape and other unspeakable acts of violence and prejudice and when people protest that there will be shrill cries that it's censorship to stop those kind of games. Why would people of any age need to "play" with crap like that I wonder?

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 05:38 AM
Originally posted by gmask
I could think of alot of game titles that would probably sell but generally be disrespectful to all sorts of people.. if they were profitable does that mean I'm on the moral high ground.. no. Gauging by profit ..is much of the world's problems... not just America's but by all accounts we have the market cornered on it.

Morality is a funny thing. What's immoral to one person, may not be someone else. Also, I don't see how determining value by profit poses a problem. And for whom does it pose this problem?

Originally posted by gmask
Gun Lobby.. Tobacco Lobby.. dump nuclear waste in your backyard lobby.. there are plenty of self interested lobbies that are worse than this.

That's a matter of opinion. As you say these are "self-interest" issues. Maybe those are "worse" issues to you. May not be the case for someone else.

Originally posted by gmask
To a degree it is because largely it is children and people in their 20's playing games. Does anyone have any statisitics on this they can link to?

Actually, the main demographic for gamers is males in thier 20's.

"61 percent of all game players are age 18 and over."

http://www.internet.com/corporate/releases/02.11.06-gamerep.html

http://www.idsa.com/releases/4-21-2000.html

http://cyberatlas.internet.com/big_picture/demographics/article/0,,5901_3070391,00.html

Hence the reason why many more games are being released with an "M" rating. This older demographic is much more profitable one to market to than the under 18 crowd.

Originally posted by gmask
The majority of Americans? That's a vast generalization presuming that even a majority of people in america play these kind of games..let alone computer games on a regular basis. Sur eit's a growing number..but it's also a growing population.

Do I really need to specify "the majority of Americans (who play video games)"? It's sort of irrelevant if these games are offensive to those who would never encounter them.

Originally posted by gmask
Well as I have tried to explain to you allready I think some moderation and respect from vendors would have curbed this but it doesn't really matter.

As I have tried to explain to you, the vendors are out to make a living. Why would they refuse sale of these items to people when they are making a profit from it? Again, the issue of minors is irrelevant in this case.

Originally posted by gmask
A few years from now they'll be making games with graphic virtual rape and other unspeakable acts of violence and prejudice and when people protest that there will be shrill cries that it's censorship to stop those kind of games. Why would people of any age need to "play" with crap like that I wonder?

"Virtual Rape"? Do you have a link to support this? Violence and sex have always been a part of entertainment, and they will continue to be as they are a part of human nature. No amount of censorship or legislation will change that fact.

gmask
12-01-2003, 06:28 AM
>>Morality is a funny thing. What's immoral to one person, may not be someone else. Also, I don't see how determining value by profit poses a problem. And for whom does it pose this problem?

Unless you are talking about reality in which case it is immoral and illegal to do most of the things depicted in these games.

>>That's a matter of opinion. As you say these are "self-interest" issues. Maybe those are "worse" issues to you. May not be the case for someone else.

Profiting from death and disease is certainly a noble cause ain't it? Do you think the world can run it'self in a state of corporate dominated anarchy?

>>Actually, the main demographic for gamers is males in thier 20's. "61 percent of all game players are age 18 and over."Hence the reason why many more games are being released with an "M" rating. This older demographic is much more profitable one to market to than the under 18 crowd.

It's 20 percent more profitable approximately.. that 40 percent who are under 18 is still a reasonably large number of people.

At any rate if their numbers were so unimportant to the profits of the game industry then enforced restrictions on the sale of these games to them wouldn't really be threatenimg would it?

>>>Do I really need to specify "the majority of Americans (who play video games)"? It's sort of irrelevant if these games are offensive to those who would never encounter them.

Except that these other people are parents and teachers.. other people driving cars.. the world's population is not segregated into gamers and then the rest of the world.

>>>As I have tried to explain to you, the vendors are out to make a living. Why would they refuse sale of these items to people when they are making a profit from it? Again, the issue of minors is irrelevant in this case.

It's no wonder the rest of the world views Amercia as being the soulless pawn of capitalism... as this is the mantra.. if there is a profit to be made ..make it no matter how low it takes you.


>>>"Virtual Rape"? Do you have a link to support this? Violence and sex have always been a part of entertainment, and they will continue to be as they are a part of human nature. No amount of censorship or legislation will change that fact.

I was making a prediction .. given the lack of interest in moral values expressed it is clear that if a game included graphic depictions of such acts or worse that game advocates would scramble to protect it under freedom of speech no matter how vile it becomes.

Of course I have to wonder if these same people gave a single moment of interest or protest to all the funding for the arts that was lost in the 90's because of a few radical artists.

What's the limit? Is there one? As as a society we have become increasignly numb to these hardcore views of sex and violence. Is there a ceiling?

Humor me with what you would think would be going too far in a game? Keep in mind that I have said that I don't agree with an outright ban of this game.

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by gmask
Unless you are talking about reality in which case it is immoral and illegal to do most of the things depicted in these games.

Of course. But we're not talking about reality. This is make-believe. As an artist I'm sure you can appreciate the value of imagination.

Originally posted by gmask
Profiting from death and disease is certainly a noble cause ain't it? Do you think the world can run it'self in a state of corporate dominated anarchy?

Profiting from death and disease, huh? Are we still talking about games here? I'll assume you're referriong to the Tobacco issue. In which case, again it's a matter opinion. Smoking is a personal choice. If people want to buy cigarettes, and it kills them, they have only themselves to blame, not the tobacco companies. If someone eats too much McDonalds and dies from obesity, should we then outlaw hamurgers? What about liquor? We know too well what resulted from the banishment of alchol in this country. Too much of anything is no good, but ultimately it's about personal responsibility.

Originally posted by gmask
It's 20 percent more profitable approximately.. that 40 percent who are under 18 is still a reasonably large number of people.

At any rate if their numbers were so unimportant to the profits of the game industry then enforced restrictions on the sale of these games to them wouldn't really be threatenimg would it?

Again, this is not about "restriction" but about banishment. The publishers are effectively marketing and selling these games to adults. The numbers don't lie.

Originally posted by gmask
Except that these other people are parents and teachers.. other people driving cars.. the world's population is not segregated into gamers and then the rest of the world.

Of course it is. When you are discussing the content of the games. Said content has no effect on the parent, teacher or "people driving cars " (whatever that mean). Unless of course their children are playing said game, at which point it is their own responsibility to determine it's appropriateness.

Originally posted by gmask
It's no wonder the rest of the world views Amercia as being the soulless pawn of capitalism... as this is the mantra.. if there is a profit to be made ..make it no matter how low it takes you.

It seems you have a real problem with capitalism. Would you rather live in a Communist society? That doesn't seem to be working out that well either. Again the term "low" as you've used it, is subjective.

Originally posted by gmask
I was making a prediction .. given the lack of interest in moral values expressed it is clear that if a game included graphic depictions of such acts or worse that game advocates would scramble to protect it under freedom of speech no matter how vile it becomes.

That's an unfounded presumption. Have you ever played GTA or are just drawing conclusions based on the news media and hearsay?

Originally posted by gmask
Of course I have to wonder if these same people gave a single moment of interest or protest to all the funding for the arts that was lost in the 90's because of a few radical artists.

Generally, people only care about issues that directly affect them. If these same folks had no interest or involvement in the art community, they likely would not comment on it.

Originally posted by gmask
What's the limit? Is there one? As as a society we have become increasignly numb to these hardcore views of sex and violence. Is there a ceiling?

That is an individual decision. The ceiling is determined by the majority (ie. consumers). If a game or film (or any product for that matter) is produced which contains graphic sex or violence which the majority of folks find offensive, it won't last very long, because people will not be interested and therefore not spend their hard-earned money on it. Thus it will "go away."

Originally posted by gmask
Humor me with what you would think would be going too far in a game? Keep in mind that I have said that I don't agree with an outright ban of this game.

I think I answered that above. "Going too far" is determined by concensus, not Big Brother.

gmask
12-01-2003, 07:29 AM
>>>Of course. But we're not talking about reality. This is make-believe. As an artist I'm sure you can appreciate the value of imagination.

I think the demand for every increasing violent and graphic games is due to a lack of imagination. Pong was exciting when it first came out.. guess people had to use their imaginations back then..

>>Profiting from death and disease, huh? Are we still talking about games here? I'll assume you're referriong to the Tobacco issue. In which case, again it's a matter opinion. Smoking is a personal choice. If people want to buy cigarettes, and it kills them, they have only themselves to blame, not the tobacco companies.

If you haven't noticed the courts have not been easy on the tobacco industry have they? Smoking in public has been banned in many metro areas.. so yea it's a personal choice as long as you don't do it around other people

>>>If someone eats too much McDonalds and dies from obesity, should we then outlaw hamurgers? What about liquor? We know too well what resulted from the banishment of alchol in this country. Too much of anything is no good, but ultimately it's about personal responsibility.

It wouldn't bother me in the least if McDonalds went out of business.. I could care less. Fast Food in general is not exactly beneficial to this country. We used to have factories now we have fastfood... great!

Alcoholism destroys lives, families and causes death from disease and accidents. That's why we have a drinking age etc.

>>>Again, this is not about "restriction" but about banishment. The publishers are effectively marketing and selling these games to adults. The numbers don't lie.

The numbers say that by a 20 percent margin adults are buying the games. It's not like 99 precent are adults.



>>>Of course it is. When you are discussing the content of the games. Said content has no effect on the parent, teacher or "people driving cars " (whatever that mean). Unless of course their children are playing said game, at which point it is their own responsibility to determine it's appropriateness.

The cumulation of all this garbage games/movies/tv appears to have led to a rise in school violence and other deadly mischief. I would say that effects everyone.

>>>It seems you have a real problem with capitalism. Would you rather live in a Communist society? That doesn't seem to be working out that well either. Again the term "low" as you've used it, is subjective.

One does not have to sell their mother is the price is right in order to live in a captialisitic society and not be seen as a commie.


>>>That's an unfounded presumption. Have you ever played GTA or are just drawing conclusions based on the news media and hearsay?

Given how games have progressed over the years it is a reasonable presumption.. the adults gamers will continue to crave higher levels of violence and sex .. what is controversial now will be unexciting to them in a few years.


>>>Generally, people only care about issues that directly affect them. If these same folks had no interest or involvement in the art community, they likely would not comment on it.

Games aren't really art are they?..they are just a method for gaining profit. I mean why would a self interest group like the game industry care about other forms of free speech besides their own?

>>>That is an individual decision. The ceiling is determined by the majority (ie. consumers). If a game or film (or any product for that matter) is produced which contains graphic sex or violence which the majority of folks find offensive, it won't last very long, because people will not be interested and therefore not spend their hard-earned money on it. Thus it will "go away."

So you allways go with the majority?.. no opinion of your own? Humor me. What would make your stomach turn?

Agent D
12-01-2003, 07:33 AM
I'll have to agree with what GRMac has said so far.

Also, this thread isn't really about violence and children, capitalism, business ethics, or the dystopian future of video game perversion (that prediction has already happened in Japan anyway :rolleyes: ) This is about the percieved racism of GTA: Vice City.

It's too bad that the "soccermom" (for lack of a better word) mentality appears to be so common. One person hears or sees something out of context, and starts making assumptions, and everyone else follows without question. I really doubt anyone protesting has actually played it. :hmm:

Hopefully the earlier points were right, and the news are blowing it out of proportion.

gmask
12-01-2003, 07:37 AM
>>the dystopian future of video game perversion (that prediction has already happened in Japan anyway :rolleyes: )

That doesn't really surprise me.. it's only a matter of time before it takes a hold in the states.

>>It's too bad that the "soccermom" (for lack of a better word) mentality appears to be so common.

At least soccermom is paying attnetion to her kids and getting them to to participate in some healthy activities.

Agent D
12-01-2003, 07:49 AM
I was going to reply to some earlier stuff, but it was hopelessly off topic.

So... do you believe Grand Theft Auto: Vice City is racist? Do you think they're justified in protesting it? Have you played it before forming an opinion?

GRMac13
12-01-2003, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by gmask
I think the demand for every increasing violent and graphic games is due to a lack of imagination. Pong was exciting when it first came out.. guess people had to use their imaginations back then..

Again this is a subjective argument. Your opinion is just that, an opinion. Hate to break it, but I guarantee that there are many who disagree with your ideals.

Originally posted by gmask
If you haven't noticed the courts have not been easy on the tobacco industry have they? Smoking in public has been banned in many metro areas.. so yea it's a personal choice as long as you don't do it around other people

But I guess you wouldn't be happy unless it was banned completely?

Originally posted by gmask
It wouldn't bother me in the least if McDonalds went out of business.. I could care less. Fast Food in general is not exactly beneficial to this country. We used to have factories now we have fastfood... great

Well we used to have factories and fastfood, but that's besides the point. Anyway, so you would support a hamburger ban, huh?

Originally posted by gmask
Alcoholism destroys lives, families and causes death from disease and accidents. That's why we have a drinking age etc.!

We have all of those problems regardless of the drinking age. So to get back on topic, do you believe alcohol should be banned, or not?

Originally posted by gmask
The numbers say that by a 20 percent margin adults are buying the games. It's not like 99 precent are adults.

20 percent is a fairly large margin in this industry. Besides, the surveys in question don't specify the rating of the games which are purchased, just the quantity. Still, this is all irrelvant in the argument as age is not a factor in this case.

Originally posted by gmask
The cumulation of all this garbage games/movies/tv appears to have led to a rise in school violence and other deadly mischief. I would say that effects everyone.

Do you have a link to some conclusive evidence that supports this theory? Otherwise it just sounds to me like typical conservative mumbo-jumbo.

Originally posted by gmask
One does not have to sell their mother is the price is right in order to live in a captialisitic society and not be seen as a commie.

Who is selling one's mother? You're making judgements based on your own code of ethics. So what makes you the rule of law? IMO, these publishers are not "selling their mothers," they are simply creating entertaining adult entertainment so they can feed thier families.

Originally posted by gmask
Given how games have progressed over the years it is a reasonable presumption.. the adults gamers will continue to crave higher levels of violence and sex .. what is controversial now will be unexciting to them in a few years.

You still haven't answered my question. I asked "Have you ever played GTA or are just drawing conclusions based on the news media and hearsay?" I didn't ask for a dissertation on your prediction of future game content. Can explain exactly how these games have "progressed over the years" to lead you to this assumption? Can you give specific examples of this progression?

Originally posted by gmask
Games aren't really art are they?..they are just a method for gaining profit.

Again, that's your opinion. IMO, GTA is more a piece of art than "the lights going on and off" (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/dave_barry/4213398.htm). But this too is irrelevant to the discussion.

Originally posted by gmask
I mean why would a self interest group like the game industry care about other forms of free speech besides their own?

They wouldn't. And neither would any other self-interest group be interested in much other than that which benefits themselves. I would think that would be pretty apparent. Especially in this case.

Originally posted by gmask
So you allways go with the majority?.. no opinion of your own? Humor me. What would make your stomach turn?

What would make my stomach turn? Well atm, it's the stench from the sea of red herrings you've been slinging at me throughout this thread. Therefore, I will attempt to get the topic back on track. As Agent D said this thread is not about violence, children, or political beliefs. It's about race, and/or ethnicity. If you want to discuss that in the context of the article, I will gladly oblige. Otherwise, I will fish my way out of this maze of ad hominums and red herrings and call it a night. Feel free to have the last word, I will readily allow you that. Especially considering your history in that your personal insecurities (whatever they may be) will not allow you to peacefully resign to the fact that the topic has gone way off track. I will not respond to anymore of your comments that are beside the facts in this case.

Goodnight, sir! :beer:

gmask
12-01-2003, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by Agent D
I was going to reply to some earlier stuff, but it was hopelessly off topic.

So... do you believe Grand Theft Auto: Vice City is racist? Do you think they're justified in protesting it? Have you played it before forming an opinion?

I was only trying to suggest that if Rockstar and the industry wanted to show some good will they could. However they seem to wallow in controversy however it comes.

I'll state again that an outright ban is probably going to far.

Agent D
12-01-2003, 10:14 AM
But why exactly does Rockstar owe them any good will?

Protestors: "Hey! I heard from someone that your game is about murdering prostitutes and ethnically cleansing minorities. I hate you and am going to lobby to ban that game you made, you racist scum!"

To my eyes, this is basically what the protestors are doing. They attacked Rockstar under flimsy (at best) allegations of racism and are now trying to rally people to ban the game. Not exactly polite or considerate people.

So, in a position like this, game companies basically have two options.

Game Company Response A - Good Will: "We're sorry you feel that way, and to insure your peace of mind, we will put out a patch to remove all words referring to race or country of origin and all crime organizations related to them. Furthermore, we will remove all facial details from character models, and change the skin color to a uniform gray just to be sure. We're sorry for inconveniencing you."Game Company Response B - Defense: "Umm, no. See you in court."

I would pick B. Companies can't fold under pressure like this, or give any credit to these allegations, because it will only encourage others to do the same. It is also the moral choice, rather than professing false guilt with option A.

In fact, I were Rockstar, I would be tempted to sue the protestors for implying that they are a racist company. :shrug:

Neil
12-01-2003, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by gmask
Could it be that they are exploiting "Blood and Gore, Intense Violence and Strong Language" to sell games.. naw probably not..

Exactly. Then they know what they're getting into, and in that case i feel no sympathy for the situations that arise. GTA was a game with violence, not violence wrapped in a game.

Iain McFadzen
12-01-2003, 01:48 PM
I wonder how the game would have been recieved if the main character had been a racial minority instead of a honky, given his context.

flipnap
12-01-2003, 02:06 PM
I wonder how the game would have been recieved if the main character had been a racial minority instead of a honky, given his context.

I was wondering when someone would try to spin a new angle of hatred on this thread.. glad ive stayed outta this one (well, until now)


but I wont be back

Iain McFadzen
12-01-2003, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by flipnap
I was wondering when someone would try to spin a new angle of hatred on this thread.. glad ive stayed outta this one (well, until now)


but I wont be back

WTF are you talking about? What bloomin hatred?

I was just pointing out that by far the most reprehensible figure in the game, the character around whom all the violence is centred, is a white guy, and musing over the likely outcry that would have resulted had Rockstar chosen to make him black instead.

And I didn't even offer an opinion on it one way or t'other.

Jeez. Get a grip.

CritterCre8r
12-01-2003, 04:14 PM
It sounds to me like these people protesting have nothing better to do. Maybe they should just sit around and play more video games. That'll get 'em off the streets.

Neil
12-01-2003, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by Iain McFadzen
I wonder how the game would have been recieved if the main character had been a racial minority instead of a honky, given his context.

So now are we gonna discuss how almost all the lead characters in the FF series, Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, Zelda, etc.etc etc are all white too?

Seriously, what are you getting at?

Neil
12-01-2003, 05:15 PM
Maybe in the next installment of the Mario series they should get rid of Luigi and give Mario a long lost african american brother.

Get past the race please.

Iain McFadzen
12-01-2003, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by Neil
So now are we gonna discuss how almost all the lead characters in the FF series, Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, Zelda, etc.etc etc are all white too?

Seriously, what are you getting at?

I'm getting at the blatant stupidity of accusing Rockstar of racism, in light of the fact that by far the worst, most violent character in the game, the character the player actually gets to 'be', is white, and yet this is not seen as a slight against white people, wheras that most certainly would not be the case had the main character been an ethnic minority. I was making the point that people seem to look for an agenda where there is none.

Which, by the way, is precisely what both you and Flipnap did with your ridiculous knee-jerk reactions to my post, so thanks for proving my point so eloquently.

NanoGator
12-01-2003, 06:09 PM
Yeah boycot games for being too extreme, that won't attract people's attention.

Neil
12-01-2003, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by Iain McFadzen
I'm getting at the blatant stupidity of accusing Rockstar of racism, in light of the fact that by far the worst, most violent character in the game, the character the player actually gets to 'be', is white, and yet this is not seen as a slight against white people, wheras that most certainly would not be the case had the main character been an ethnic minority. I was making the point that people seem to look for an agenda where there is none.

Which, by the way, is precisely what both you and Flipnap did with your ridiculous knee-jerk reactions to my post, so thanks for proving my point so eloquently.

You're the first to bring up race though, so how was that anyone's 'agenda'?
And when you go throwing around 'honky' and leave it at that, ANY response to your statement you'd consider to be 'knee-jerking'. I brought up some examples to consider, by your logic, and you found it ridiculous?

gmask
12-01-2003, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by Iain McFadzen
I'm getting at the blatant stupidity of accusing Rockstar of racism, in light of the fact that by far the worst, most violent character in the game, the character the player actually gets to 'be', is white, and yet this is not seen as a slight against white people, wheras that most certainly would not be the case had the main character been an ethnic minority. I was making the point that people seem to look for an agenda where there is none.


Well given that in many games you have a selection of characters to choose from as you the player is there any reason that's not the case here?

chadtheartist
12-01-2003, 08:25 PM
I don't understand why this thread has grown so large. It's pretty apparent that Rocktstar knew what it was doing by making such games, and will have to suffer the consequences of their decision. Rocktstar decided to make their games their way, and people are reacting to it, their way.

I'm not personally a big fan of their games, but I really hold no sympathy for Rocktstar's plight in this issue. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen is what I say. I feel the outcome of this will be one of two things.

1) Nothing happens to Rocktstar.

2) Rocktstar will have to think about what they put into games from now on.

Judging by the way society is going today, I think it will be the first.

And for anyone who is actually interested, there are some studies that have been done on violent video games affecting our youth. There are links to back up the article, but I didn't follow through with them. Doesn't really concern me anyway, as seeing I don't have any kids. :D

http://www.truelies.org/download/Video_Game_Key_Facts.pdf
(right click and save)

And the website where I found this at:

http://www.truelies.org/PP_VideoGames.htm

Agent D
12-01-2003, 09:33 PM
^ That's not what this thread is about. ^


Originally posted by Neil
You're the first to bring up race though, so how was that anyone's 'agenda'?

I think you're in the wrong thread. This is about people protesting against Rockstar because they feel the game is racist.

Originally posted by gmask
Well given that in many games you have a selection of characters to choose from as you the player is there any reason that's not the case here?
Ok, so you haven't played the game. Tha wouldn't work given Vice City's cinematic nature, at least not without a few more months work at Rockstar and an extra disk. Aside from accents/player models, they would have to change the plot and missions as well, as the main character (Tommy Vercetti) is from the mafia in New York. Imagine filming a medium length film and having to make several versions where the characters name and race are different.

gmask
12-01-2003, 09:55 PM
>>>Ok, so you haven't played the game. Tha wouldn't work given Vice City's cinematic nature, at least not without a few more months work at Rockstar and an extra disk. Aside from accents/player models, they would have to change the plot and missions as well, as the main character (Tommy Vercetti) is from the mafia in New York. Imagine filming a medium length film and having to make several versions where the characters name and race are different.

It's not a film.. have you ever went to a film where you could tell the main character what to do? I know I have been to ones where I wish I could have told the main character what to do but that's another story.

I see what you mean about the ascents but as far as the characters "skin" there is no reason he could not easily be portrayed as any number of races. Character models/maps for games and their textures are relatively small.

What difference does it make wether he's italian or from new york? Couldn't he just as easily be a Black Panther selling heroin that he scored from the mafia who is from atlanta? But the game set in Miami where he's trying to sell cocaine and generally take over the town. The main cahracter couldn't be female cause then the mysogomy in the game wouldn't make nearly as much sense.



My question is was it neccessary in any context to include the phrase "kill all haitians" in the game?. I mean make fun of them all you want for being offended by this phrase but taking a flippant attitude only proves that game players might simply be insensitive to anything but their own amusement.

Even the spokesperson for Take 2 has enough tact to know when to take things seriously:

Jim Ankner, a spokesman for Take 2 Interative Software Inc., Rockstar's parent company, said, "We empathize with the concerns of the Haitian community and we are giving serious consideration to them. Some statements made by fictional characters in 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City' have been taken out of context. There was no intention to offend any ethnic group, and we take these claims very seriously."

At any rate if a game clearly was rascist then you would agree that a ban was in order right?

Iain McFadzen
12-01-2003, 11:45 PM
Originally posted by Neil
You're the first to bring up race though, so how was that anyone's 'agenda'?

Go back and read the whole thread, and stop making a fool of yourself.

And when you go throwing around 'honky' and leave it at that, ANY response to your statement you'd consider to be 'knee-jerking'. I brought up some examples to consider, by your logic, and you found it ridiculous?

I used the word 'honky' because I find the notion of anyone being offended by that word fairly amusing, and I liked the juxtaposition (and I'm white, in case you're not sure yet).

The reason I didn't aknowledge your 'examples', was because you were clearly missunderstanding my point and so they were totally irrelevant. You hopped into a thread you quite obviously don't understand, jumped to a conclusion that was completely and totally incorrect, and then went all agressive. It's not my problem if you can't be bothered to read the thread properly or don't understand what you do read, but for my part I apologise for overestimating your intelligence and I will make sure I spell out every little point I make from now on, just to free you from having to actually think about what you are reading and to avoid you any further embarassment.

Have a nice day.

AJ
12-01-2003, 11:52 PM
as a honky I am outraged.

Agent D
12-02-2003, 03:38 AM
Originally posted by gmask
It's not a film.. have you ever went to a film where you could tell the main character what to do? I know I have been to ones where I wish I could have told the main character what to do but that's another story. I'm talking about the in-game cutscenes and briefings between missions. Those are pretty much films.
I see what you mean about the ascents but as far as the characters "skin" there is no reason he could not easily be portrayed as any number of races. Character models/maps for games and their textures are relatively small.Yes, you could use the same voice for all of them I suppose, and the texture maps wouldn't take up that much space. However, that's not really the problem.
What difference does it make wether he's italian or from new york? Couldn't he just as easily be a Black Panther selling heroin that he scored from the mafia who is from atlanta?It would be a different game. The whole plot, is that Tommy Vercetti is in the mafia family, and is assigned to the mafia operations in Vice City, shortly after he is released from prison. They would have had to work out a completely culturally/ethnically neutral plotline from the start, rather than just trying to tell a crime story. About your point: If it were about a guy in the black panthers, it wouldn't make sense for the character to be able to select a white guy, would it?My question is was it neccessary in any context to include the phrase "kill all haitians" in the game? It's been a little while since I've played, but I don't think anyone actually says that. I think it's just a mission objective that pops up when one of the cutscenes end as the haitian gang is attacking.At any rate if a game clearly was rascist then you would agree that a ban was in order right? Sure, if they were lobbying stores to remove it from their shelves or something, but I think it would still be protected under free speech rights. I don't think many extreme racists are intelligent or skillful enough to make a good game though, so it probably doesn't matter.

gmask
12-02-2003, 04:12 AM
>>>They would have had to work out a completely culturally/ethnically neutral plotline from the start, rather than just trying to tell a crime story. About your point: If it were about a guy in the black panthers, it wouldn't make sense for the character to be able to select a white guy, would it?

I think with some clever texture mapping and recycling of models etc that you could build the game from several different criminal stereotypes.. Instead of throwing Pizzas he's throw buckets of chicken etc ..or burritos etc I dunno it could be pretty funny...

>>>It's been a little while since I've played, but I don't think anyone actually says that. I think it's just a mission objective that pops up when one of the cutscenes end as the haitian gang is attacking.

That's my point.. it's a message.. it would be less offensive if it was in the context of someone saying the boys across town want to "kill all the haitians".. rather than it being this mission given to you the player .. to "kill all haitians".. anyway I think it's a message that you want to avoid.. especially when you know something is bound to be controversial and is dealing with race. I don't think Rockstar can claim to be naive a this point.

>>>>Sure, if they were lobbying stores to remove it from their shelves or something, but I think it would still be protected under free speech rights. I don't think many extreme racists are intelligent or skillful enough to make a good game though, so it probably doesn't matter.

I would say that the level of protection is debatable. Like you could not outlaw the use of derrogatory words all together but any private establishment has the right to prohibit or censor the use of such language. If a website is broadcasting hate messages and this goes against the policies of the ISP they can pull the plug. Likewise if chain of stores wishes to pull the plug on a game in their stores they can.

The question is can a state ban any media from being sold in their province? I guess it's up to the voters and the courts

Agent D
12-02-2003, 06:34 AM
Originally posted by gmask
I think with some clever texture mapping and recycling of models etc that you could build the game from several different criminal stereotypes.. Instead of throwing Pizzas he's throw buckets of chicken etc ..or burritos etc I dunno it could be pretty funny... I don't know what game you're thinking of, but it sounds a lot more like Super Mario brothers than Grand Theft Auto. Like I said earlier, the entire story would be changed around if you could pick your starting character, and would be unfeasable.

That's my point.. it's a message.. it would be less offensive if it was in the context of someone saying the boys across town want to "kill all the haitians".. rather than it being this mission given to you the player .. to "kill all haitians".. anyway I think it's a message that you want to avoid.. especially when you know something is bound to be controversial and is dealing with race. I don't think Rockstar can claim to be naive a this point. I think it was more a matter of saving space onscreen and getting to the point by saying "Kill the haitians" instead of "Kill the members of the haitian crime group".

gmask
12-02-2003, 05:53 PM
>>> Like I said earlier, the entire story would be changed around if you could pick your starting character, and would be unfeasable.

Well it's moot but I beleive it's possible.. prerecorded dialogue being the biggest issue.

>>> I think it was more a matter of saving space onscreen and getting to the point by saying "Kill the haitians" instead of "Kill the members of the haitian crime group".

Then it's tragic syntax mistake.. still in regards to the game does that mean you should kill anyone in the game who looks haitian or just the ones that are criminals. From what I understand of the game you don't have to kill anyone if you can accomplish your missiosn some other ways but the more of a ruckus you cause the stronger the police repsonse to it.. I would imagine killing innocent civialians would add to the disturbance factor.

At any rate it still could be put in a better way.. and I think they can spare some screen space to sound less genocidal if this is all it boils down to.

SheepFactory
12-02-2003, 05:57 PM
http://little-gamers.com/index.php?strip_id=727

TheClick
12-02-2003, 07:23 PM
Name is Phife Dawg from the Zulu Nation. . . .
:D

PhilWesson
12-02-2003, 08:20 PM
the whole bit about recycling models and texture maps seems a silly to me. when you make a game that involves drama, you have a story, and in that story you have characters that are clearly defined. their motivations, backgrounds, and relationships are defined. Now, if you were to have an italian mafia member from new york suddenly be say... an asian delivery boy, or black bushman fresh off the boat, it wouldnt make sense, would it?

gmask
12-02-2003, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by david225
the whole bit about recycling models and texture maps seems a silly to me. when you make a game that involves drama, you have a story, and in that story you have characters that are clearly defined. their motivations, backgrounds, and relationships are defined. Now, if you were to have an italian mafia member from new york suddenly be say... an asian delivery boy, or black bushman fresh off the boat, it wouldnt make sense, would it?

Please explain what the the difffernce in motvations would be besides sell drugs and take overtown?

Does it make sense that he throws pizzas at people??.. he could be throwing anything at people..

Aboriginals aren't known for their tendencies to get involved with organized crime are they? However there is an asian mafia... in reality they use guns too ..rather than high flying kungfu kicks.. so they could be comparitable in gameplay to the italian characters.

Agent D
12-02-2003, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by gmask
>>> Like I said earlier, the entire story would be changed around if you could pick your starting character, and would be unfeasable.

Well it's moot but I beleive it's possible.. prerecorded dialogue being the biggest issue. No... it would have to be a different plot, and they would basically have to make an entire game for each character. Just because they CAN do something, doesn't mean they should, or want to spend the money, time, and disc space on it. Bottom line, it's not the kind of game where you have a character select screen.

As for everything else, it's pretty hard to discuss it if you haven't played it.

Asorson
12-02-2003, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by anieves
I'm aparent and i agree that the law suite is an excuse for bad parenting.

Since the suite was filed in the states and I'm in the states I have to agree with that statement. In this country (USA) people don't want to be responsible for their own actions but they rather have the government to take over the responsabilities that they should have. If you are a parent, a good parent, you and only you, should know what you are getting for your kids and what they are doing and who they hang out with etc. those are responsabilities that came with the birth of your child; those are not government responsabilities.

If we had a looser pays system this kind of law suits would decline drastically.


A parent's job is that of teacher, not of dictator. If only more parents would subscribe to this philosophy we would have so fewer social problems, especially among adolescents and teens. The problem is that parents are not satisfied just to impart knowledge on their children, because that still leaves them with free will. Children still have the choice whether or not to heed their parents advice. Free will is the most important human value, and denial of free will causes the most rage. Human beings will lash out and fight to the death to preserve their freedom over any other cause, and children, especially teenagers are phisiologically mature, and possess all of the same feelings, instincts, and emotions as adults do. Slavery was abolished over 100 years ago, but slavery still exists. It is our own children who are the slaves. They are denied the right to their opinions, denied the right to their actions, and denied the right to their own thoughts. It is no wonder to me that like any other human being who is denied their free will, they will fight back.

It is neither societies job, nor parents' job to dictate their childrens actions. However it is the job of both to offer children guidance through non hypocritical demonstration, not words. Children are observative and they learn from what they see, not what they hear. You can talk in a kids ear all day about how society should work, but if he or she looks around and what they see contradicts your statements, then you might as well be talking to yourself. No matter how much you shelter a kid eventually they will grow up and they will live in the real world. When that happens will they be prepared for it? In a world that consists of good and bad a child that is exposed to only good for 18 years will only be half as well prepared as a child who was exposed to both.

But most parents are control freaks. Most people in general are control freaks. They cannot bring themselves to trust the people close to them. They can't trust their own children, they can't trust their own spouses, so instead they attempt to dictate their actions in a way that is more acceptable to them personally. Then when these people realize they are being controlled they fight back. It is no wonder that most mairrages end in divorce, most children don't get along with their parents, etc. etc.

Quit trying to force other people to do your bidding, infringing on their free will, and people will stop hating you for it. Simple as that. Everyone should have the right to offer advice. If the Haitians want to protest that is great. Protesting is informative. It informs people that a certain number of people dissagree with what has happened and they will react accordingly. Trying to pass a law on the other hand is where the shit hits the fan. Once you cross the line from informing to controlling you have gone too far. The one inalieble right that we supposedly all possess as human beings is free will, and that should not be taken away to satisfy any-ones personal moral code.

gmask
12-02-2003, 09:02 PM
>>>The one inalieble right that we supposedly all possess as human beings is free will, and that should not be taken away to satisfy any-ones personal moral code.

I think free will and free speech are two different things.. again it's supposedly a democracy here.. so any law that is passed is not one person's moral code. State laws can be passed based on the morals of the voters in that state.

There are areas in US where you cannot buy alcohol.. you can drive outside that area and I suppose bring the alcohol back in for your own enjoyment. That same would probably happen with this game if it were banned in New York.

So free will is preserved you wouldn't be arrested for having the game.

faulknermano
12-03-2003, 02:04 PM
(i agree with gmask's rationale, for the most part, during the middle part of the thread.)

i had said this before: why increase the propensity for violence when we could sorely have less of it?

---

games, as well as mass media, is enviornment. it plays a part, just like commercials do in selling a product, or promoting that product's company's message / value.

---

but for the issue of passing laws: men are to be governed. a father / mother who gives free reign to the actions of his / her child could rear that child into goodness. but you cant expect a government to simply do the same. what we want isnt exactly what we need. a man's free will could drive himself and / or others around him to extinction, but a governing body, dedicated to perserving its own civilization will do what it takes to avoid that. that is what governments do: they try to perserve the posterity. sometimes our "rights" or our "free will" must take a back seat in eyes of the government. in a more microscopic level (e.g. family) it may (or should) take precedence, mainly because it is more personal.

what we want isnt always what we need. do you ever tell your kids that?

---

gmask: i may have been reading into your lines incorrectly, but you seem to be nonchalantly resigned to the degradation of modern-day moral values (an oyxmoron? :) ). am i wrong?

gmask
12-03-2003, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by faulknermano
gmask: i may have been reading into your lines incorrectly, but you seem to be nonchalantly resigned to the degradation of modern-day moral values (an oyxmoron? :) ). am i wrong?

I definately think the world and the games industry would survive without this or similair games. American cinema is allready criticised for pumping the world full of it's hollow product and not allowing the rest of the world's media to penetrate back in.

I think the makers of this game could probably come up with an equally elaborate gameworld and actually use imagination rather than exploit stereotypical themes and scenarios IMHO.

Iain McFadzen
12-03-2003, 07:27 PM
Bare in mind that the GTA series originated in Europe, not in the US. In fact, if it's discriminatory against anyone it's against America as a whole, painting as it does a rather harsh, if playful, caricature of how the Outside World view US culture and the relationships between the communities who make up that culture.

gmask
12-03-2003, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by Iain McFadzen
Bare in mind that the GTA series originated in Europe, not in the US. In fact, if it's discriminatory against anyone it's against America as a whole, painting as it does a rather harsh, if playful, caricature of how the Outside World view US culture and the relationships between the communities who make up that culture.

Oh great..

Could you explain the history then.. DMA-Design.com seems to have been consumed by rockstar.com whose headquarters is in NewYork ..although they have international offices and an address for production in the UK it's very unclear who and where the games are being designed.

halo
12-03-2003, 08:02 PM
Last time i looked DMA was based in Dundee, Scotland, UK. They are owned by Rockstar now, but that doesnt mean that they are not still British. ie they are probably still in Dundee.

gmask
12-03-2003, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by halo
Last time i looked DMA was based in Dundee, Scotland, UK. They are owned by Rockstar now, but that doesnt mean that they are not still British. ie they are probably still in Dundee.

Yeah probably aren't a whole lot of Haitians in Scotland either..

onlooker
12-03-2003, 09:15 PM
Wow! What a topic this turned into.

I personally think it's all ridiculous. I played some the first GTA, and it was cool exciting, and a bold different game with some controversial interaction. But my thoughts were that it seemed it was about criminals, and was all based on fictional events probably inspired by CNN.
It does not matter where in the world you live. CNN is accessible at some level, and if you live in America you have the freedom to choose. Rockstar chose to use the rating system, (good on their part) The game was rated M for Mature Adults. If you can't tell the difference between fact, fiction, game, movie, and reality. You need some serious psychological help. Weather your an adult or not.

I don't think you can blame the programmers, or game designers weather they be Scots, English, Africans, Australians, Jews, Blacks, Asian, or Anglo's for racism because they came up with a great game concept that would sell.
In my mind I never thought about the races, or the "Haitians" if there were any in the game while I was playing. It was just a great game to play. It was exciting, and fun because it's not real it's a total escape from it. Like a movie is.

Let me share a moment. When I was playing the game my character was on foot, and I (my character) beat a pedestrian to death with a baseball bat. his money was flying around, and I took it, (it was scoring me points) and I was laughing. Laughing in reality not in the game. Why would I do such a thing? That is not me. I'm not like that. Why you ask?

Why did _Quentin Tarantino use old style B movie blood shooting out of severed limbs in kill bill? And why did I love it? There are techniques now that make these things look totally real on film, and I was in agreement that the method used was the only way that should have been done. Why? If you know the answer you are probably completely sane, and have completed your training. If not. Seek immediate help from a professional Psycho Therapist. Your a freaking Moron that cant get a grip on reality which makes YOU dangerous.:twisted:

pseudoE
12-03-2003, 10:25 PM
This is quite a thread. I've read 80% or so of it, and I'm impressed with the ideas that have been expressed.

It's obvious to me that anyone who takes the time to think about this topic long enough to write down an opinion fore or against also has the common sense to understand the paradigm of video game violence and it's place in society.

But what about the lowest common denominator? After all, we live in a "lowest common denominator" culture. (I can't pull the cord on my lawnmower without my hand on the push handle)

an excerpt from the following CNN article:

"Two teen-age Tennessee boys who went on a fatal sniping spree said they were mimicking the game."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/fun.games/12/03/caribbean.outrage.reut/index.html

Before you come unglued, no, I'm not at all in favor of the trend of bubble wrapping the world. In fact I always read these accounts as a sort of 'reefer madness' reporting strategy. However, like someone early on in this thread said, be wary of coming down hard on those who vocally stand against this type of content-

A dissenting voice provides a unique point of view, and can be very informative. (Read: ignorance is not necessarily bliss)

Agent D
12-04-2003, 02:06 AM
Originally posted by gmask
I think the makers of this game could probably come up with an equally elaborate gameworld and actually use imagination rather than exploit stereotypical themes and scenarios IMHO. And you haven't even played the game. :rolleyes:

And why should we tell game developers what game they want to make, or which game is "right" to make? Besides, GTA games ARE imaginative in their basic concept, and if there are any "stereotypical themes and scenarios" they're intentionally added for humor or atmosphere.

gmask
12-04-2003, 03:20 AM
Originally posted by Agent D
And you haven't even played the game. :rolleyes:

And why should we tell game developers what game they want to make, or which game is "right" to make? Besides, GTA games ARE imaginative in their basic concept, and if there are any "stereotypical themes and scenarios" they're intentionally added for humor or atmosphere.

No but I would perhaps be interested in playing a game as detailed minus the violence and potentially rascist stereotypes. I like action, I like unfolding worlds but violence is a lowest common denominator and and an easy way out. Like sex it sells.. there is nothing imaginative about that.


It's also that Rockstar seems to only focus on seedy and violent subjects for their games yet have the talent and inventiveness to take some further risks and attempt a game that does not adhere to the sex and violence format. that is my opinion.. igven their success allready and momentum I think they coudl pull it off.

Iain McFadzen
12-04-2003, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by gmask
Oh great..

Could you explain the history then.. DMA-Design.com seems to have been consumed by rockstar.com whose headquarters is in NewYork ..although they have international offices and an address for production in the UK it's very unclear who and where the games are being designed.

AFAIK: DMA made GTA and GTA 2 in Dundee, were then bought out by Take Two Interactive and became Rockstar North, in line with all the other Take Two dev houses, moved to Edinburgh in time to release GTA3, though still under the DMA name (well, they were known as GTA/Rockstar then), before dumping the DMA brand completely on the release of Vice City.

I think.

Spankspeople
12-04-2003, 02:16 PM
Isn't part of Rockstar based out of Vienna?

faulknermano
12-04-2003, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by gmask
I definately think the world and the games industry would survive without this or similair games....

I think the makers of this game could probably come up with an equally elaborate gameworld and actually use imagination rather than exploit stereotypical themes and scenarios IMHO.

nicely put. obviously, i agree.



And you haven't even played the game.


i've played the game, and i think it was tasteless. :thumbsup:

And why should we tell game developers what game they want to make, or which game is "right" to make?

because some people's own beliefs and morality are important enough to express, and to fight for. why should you stop others from telling others what to do? nice circular argument there.

CGTalk Moderation
01-16-2006, 08:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.