94 replies to this topic

[Tom Henrik]

Let's see... did I play games with violence and sex in them as a kid?
- Yes.

Did I enjoy these games?
- Yes.


Do I want my kids to play games from today with violence and sex in them?
- No.

Is this a double standard on my part?
- No.



WARNING: Strong content ahead!
(The most disturbing screenshots are links only. Watch at your own risk.)


Nudity!

Kiddie Tom liked this game:


Tom's kiddie likes this game:
http://images.jlist....s/ts3_small.jpg



Violence!

Kiddie Tom liked this game:


Tom's kiddie likes this game:
http://www.gamer.hr/.../manhunt_02.jpg







I think there is a slight change in the games lately, but maybe that's just me. I don't want my kids playing games like that. Not in a million years.

[DeathDude]

Well I admit I did play some violent and mature rated games before I was considered the mature age   but they weren't too bad ya know like Perfect Dark, I still remember though when I was 16 trying to rent that game at one place and they wouldn't let me and the vendor there said that apparently there was lots of blood! (Which is a lie since there is some but not lots ) and you can blow people's heads off! (Lie number 2 you can't do that) and extremely violent (Ha Ha extremely uh no)

Point I'm making though is indeed parents need to take a role and see what their kids are playing, see the types of games they are renting and not just saying yeah rent that game, actually take an active role and set guidelines for what is acceptable and what's not, not to just think that all games are fine to play. Definitely with my kids I'll be doing that, watching what games they'll be playing and taking a role not just sitting back and letting them run the show in a way.

[Moogle]

Wow......that one game (the first link in Toms post) is extremely disturbing.... I definitely hope thats rated A and not publicly sold, thats just creepy...
The second games n Tom's post (Manhunt) well....thats Rockstar for ya

[DeathDude]

Yeah I wonder about that first game, if it's sold must be rated A, it's just gotta be as for manhunt never actually played it myself, I do know it's a gruesome game but as gruesome as Soldier of Fortune? That I have no idea.

[DakaSha]

taikara, on Oct 31 2005, 01:13 AM, said:

DakaSha, on Oct 31 2005, 12:09 AM, said:

taikara, on Oct 30 2005, 04:19 PM, said:

I think parents that let their kids play games with graphic violence and sex content (like San Andreas)  should be shot.

i find that extremly offending considering i was allowed to play both

Daka, when San Andreas came out, you were 21 or so, well old enough to decide whether or not you wanted to play it without your parents' intervention.

When you were a *kid*, say 15 and younger (as at about 16, parents tend to have less control over whether their kids participate in certain activities, as the moral values of the child are typically mostly formed at this point, though still in development. To me, 16 is too old to be a child, too young to be an adult.), the games were NOTHING like what is available now, in terms of violent and sexual content, especially realistic violent and sexual content.

The sad thing is that MANY parents don't monitor their children's activities, and so don't realize they're playing games like San Andreas, or getting their grubby little kiddie hands on pornographic material.

And then they wonder why their kids grow up to be violent little misogynists.

And no, I don't think entertainment media is to blame for kids bringing guns to school and shooting other kids, or kids raping other kids, or anything similar. I think the parents are to blame for being sucky parents, and that's why I feel so strongly about it. I blame the parents of yesterday for today's society, and I feel that they should be held accountable. I was exaggerating when I said they should be shot, but it was to demonstrate just how strongly I feel about poor parental guidance.

sure your right about the games changing but there were games that were just as violent back then (NARC on the NES comes to mind). the graphics weren't as good but your imagination takes over, which could be seen as worse.

movies and literatur are also part of the whole thing and i was also allowed to watch or read whatever i liked.

if i had to decide on what is worse then id go with violence... no doubt about it. id really like to know who came up with the idea of sex being in some way negative... even for children(im not saying kids should constantly be confronted with it but people act like the world is going to end when they are... well i guess we all know why westerners think this way ). how can sex which is nothing more then the way all mammels create kids be something bad?

what i do think is sad is that alot of parents dont take the time to talk to thier children... so a stupid influencial child may "learn" something from some game but it definetly isnt the games fault.

just think about it... people were more violent 1000 years ago then now... or at least more brutal. Inquisition, children being thrown to baboons for entertainment, torturing (well we still have that but it isnt politicaly correct at least), beheadings, witch burning, slaughtering of whole villages (ok we have this also but it isnt really considred to have much strategic value)... they didnt have TV, games and nobody could read.

[A. J. Raffles]

Inquisition? I don't think that already existed 1,000 years ago.

But I agree with Moogle and DD: those pink pixelly knickers are way disturbing...

[DakaSha]

well 700-800 years ago then... it doesnt really make a difference... digital technology wasn't really moving at light speed back then

[A. J. Raffles]

Good point.

[taikara]

Regardless, Daka, the number of "adult" games available nowadays is hugely increased,  and many are far more explicit than they were even 5 years ago. To make it worse, any child with an internet connection and poor parental guidance can gain access to any number of hentai games (such as the one in Tom's example) or violent adult games with very little effort.

But regarding the change in accepted content, the same goes for movies and literature. Back in the 50s, Catcher in the Rye was subject to banning and mass book burning for its "explicitness", and by today's standards, it would probably receive a PG rating.

Tolerance is good, and enlightenment is good, and it's good that our society no longer makes a habit of banning or burning books for their content, but too much of any good thing is still too much. Where do we draw the line? What is our society moving towards, when our children are putting sex before love? Sexual positions before relationships? Aggression before compromise? Violence before peaceful resolution?

It seems more like regression to me, not progress.

And I'm not an idealist, and nor am I a pacifist. I understand that there will probably always be violence and sex in society, and both (even violence) are necessities... but that doesn't mean we need to encourage the perspective in our children that either of these things are something to be taken lightly... and poor parents do just that when they allow their children complete freedom to do whatever they want, whenever they want, without guidance.

We don't need to allow our children to become desensitized to these things, we need to educate them as to the consequences of participating in them.

[Juni Ori]

A. J. Raffles, on Oct 31 2005, 07:03 AM, said:

Inquisition? I don't think that already existed 1,000 years ago.

But I agree with Moogle and DD: those pink pixelly knickers are way disturbing...

Episcopal Inquisition began in late 12th century by Pope's bull, which failed poorly. In response Papal Inquisition began in early 13th century and couple decades later torture was accepted as a way of interrogation. Infamous Spanish inquisition begun in 15th century and it lasted to 19th century. Cause of inquisitions infamy was actually English propaganda. England was only West-European country where inquisition never reached and they fought several wars against Spain. Most of heretics and witches were still taken care by local earthly authorities.


Sorry for that. But to the point: why on earth should we shield and deny our children of what they will encounter more than enough over years? Better to raise them to understand and handle such situations and try to guide them to even somewhat decent path. And if they like playing violent games or watching violent movies, so what? Like mentioned above there's history full of examples of violent and sexual entertainment and we still and possibly therefore exist. I believe bigger problem is their overall use of time. Whip them to good hobbies they seem to be interested and keep them busy. Respect is they key. To respect them and teach them to respect others.

[DakaSha]

im not talking about the 50's... im talking about the 80's and 90's. we got into the discussion because of the "parents that bla should be shot" quote. im not trying to prove that violence and sex are not harmful. i dont believe that either one is harmful in any way but i can understand that some people do and also understand that its something that there is is no use in arguing about...

Quote

Whip them to good hobbies they seem to be interested and keep them busy. Respect is they key. To respect them and teach them to respect others.

yessir  

i bet you could take most kids that come from a decent/good family and set him in front of a television set playing San Andreas (which is a joke... i really dont see why san andreas is so bad.), watching violent movies and movies with heavy sexual content (not porn) and the kid will turn out like every other kid... just not as niave as others his/her age (like i said... a decent family... meaning they would talk about it)

[Tom Henrik]

Deathdude said:

Yeah I wonder about that first game, if it's sold must be rated A, it's just gotta be as for manhunt never actually played it myself, I do know it's a gruesome game but as gruesome as Soldier of Fortune? That I have no idea.

I own this game myself, and let me tell you - there is NO more violent game out there. I bought it because the cover and screens on the back made it look like a horror game like Silent Hill. So I wanted to have a good scare.

And I got waaaay more than I bargained for!

The whole POINT in the game is to be as brutal as possible. There are dozens of different weapons - and each weapon has three levels of attack. Green, yellow and red attacks.

WARNING!!
Do not click on the links, or read any further if you have a weak stomach


To give you a recap:

The Plastic Bag
http://ps2media.ign....111303_9med.jpg

Green: You put the bag over the face of the guy (from behind), then strangle him to death.
Yellow: You put the bag over his face, turn him around, punches him in the face a couple of times, then kneecap him in the face (the screenshot is just before the kneecapping).
Red: You put the bag over his face, turn him around, elbows him in the face, kneecaps him for a while, then twist the head around and break his neck.

Mind you, this is the first weapon and the least violent one...


Steel Wire
http://www.rockstarg...s/pc/pc-mh6.jpg

Green: You wrap it around the guys neck, and strangle him to death with it - while the wire cuts a little into his throat.
Yellow: You wrap it around the guys neck, strangle him to death - and just for the heck of things you pummel the guy using your fist, elbows and legs afterwards.
Red: You wrap it around his neck and jigsaw it back and forth until you have severed off his head. (You may pick up the head if you want, and use it for decoys later - or simply throw it at the enemy.)


A shard of Glass & Knife
(Same attack videos - just different weapons)
http://www.gamer.hr/.../manhunt_02.jpg

Green: You slit open the guy's throat. Quickly and painfully.
Yellow: You stab him in his throat, turn him around and stab him repeatedly in his stomach, then you kneecap him in his face.
Red: You stab him in his throat, turn him around, then dig out both his eyes using your weapon. I think you stab him some more afterwards as well - just for the heck of things.


Alright, I'll stop listing the attacks from now on - just know that it gets worse and worse and worse.... the weapons above (especially a glass shard, which can be found or made anywhere) are your basic weapons.

Here are the rest of the weapons available for your pleasure:
(Remember that ALL meelee weapons have three different levels of attack...)

Machete
http://www.gamer.hr/.../manhunt_10.jpg

Small Wooden Bat
http://ps2media.ign....unt_92403_1.jpg

Huge Aluminum Baseball Bat
http://ps2media.ign....unt_92403_4.jpg

Meat Cleaver
(ALWAYS decapitates the victim)
http://ps2media.ign....ok_092203_1.jpg

Hammer
http://www.armchaire...t/manhunt-4.jpg

Sickle
http://www.rockstarg...s/pc/pc-mh5.jpg

Crowbar
http://www.gamer.hr/.../manhunt_09.jpg

Small Axe
http://www.projectwo.../manhunt/08.jpg


The firearms don't have a special 3-level attack, and are as following

9mm Pistol
http://www.the-nextl...nt/screen06.jpg

Sawed-Off Shotgun
http://www.armchaire...t/manhunt-4.jpg

Tactical Shotgun
http://www.simplygam.../P2X0437_13.jpg

Assault Rifle

Tranquilizer Rifle
http://www.gamer.hr/.../manhunt_08.jpg

Sniper Rifle



Special weapon: Chainsaw


Edit:
There are many more weapons, but I don't recall them.

If I see a parent letting his or hers kid play this game, I don't know WHAT I would do. GTA is NOTHING compared to this game.

Edited by Tom Henrik, 31 October 2005 - 01:28 PM.

[Tulac]

Well then there's the mature rating on this game...

[DakaSha]

that seems like a pretty cool game

[A. J. Raffles]

...I don't think reading this post right after lunch was such a good idea after all...