Thailand bans Grand Theft Auto IV

[Zero]

You don't see to understand what "target audience" is. Pedophiles may well watch Lolita, but they aren't the target audience.

 

With games (specifically) don't the marketers and the creators usually have a pretty different idea on what the target market is? The huge posters (I see around my city) of GTA definitely suggest themes that would appeal to those interested in criminal violence.

 

I'm guessing the marketers don't mind taking in their money. The game creators who may have wanted a tad more sophisticated audience- may take slight offense, or maybe not.

 

 

[a side note since this is my first post in the thread: I think the guy is a psychopath or has something wrong wit him; but this has been said 10000s of times already on various forums)

Edited August 7, 2008 by Zero

[Deadly_Nightshade]

What exactly is the target audience for these two games, and why are they more or less likely to emulate the actions of characters in the game world?

The target audience for GTA includes a lot of stupid immature kids whose parents don't care what they do with their time.

 

The buying audience might, but I doubt they were who the game was designed for.

[Wrath of Dagon]

That's a very idealistic view of the game industry. It's pretty well known that target demographics for most M rated games start at 13 or so. There was also a story not too long ago about gang members playing GTA and going out trying to emulate it and kill cops. Somehow I have a hard time imagining gang members playing Deus Ex. Besides, killing civilians is not the goal of DX, it's just there because it's designed to provide moral choices to the player.

Edited August 7, 2008 by Wrath of Dagon

[Deadly_Nightshade]

There was also a story not too long ago about gang members playing GTA and going out trying to emulate it and kill cops.

 

Please provide some proof to back this up, not that the actions of one small group -that would have probobly done similar acts even if they had not played the game- should get a game banned.

 

Besides, killing civilians is not the goal of DX, it's just there because it's designed to provide moral choices to the player.

 

I did not know the focus of the Grand Theft Auto series was mowing down innocent civillians, not that I like the games or have played any of them for more than a few minutes - so I might very well be mistaken.

[Hell Kitty]

Man, what a load of horse ****.

 

It's pretty well known that target demographics for most M rated games start at 13 or so.

 

A ridiculous conspiracy theory that doesn't even make any sense.

 

There was also a story not too long ago about gang members playing GTA and going out trying to emulate it and kill cops.

 

Lies, plain and simple. Did crime not exist before the GTA series?

 

Somehow I have a hard time imagining gang members playing Deus Ex.

 

This is a load of nonsense. How does belonging to a gang have any bearing on what computer or video games you might play, or even if you play them at all? Stupid stereotyping. That gang you mentioned before, it was made up of poor black kids, right? I have a hard time imagining middle class white kids forming gangs and committing crimes.

 

Besides, killing civilians is not the goal of DX

 

It's not the goal of GTA either. Or Hitman. Or Assassin's Creed. All 4 of these games do however allow you to kill innocent civilians, if that's what floats your boat.

Edited August 7, 2008 by Hell Kitty

[Deadly_Nightshade]

All 4 of these games do however allow you to kill innocent civilians, if that's what floats your boat.

 

And all of those games penalize you for that act in some way, so it is not like they are encouraging the killing.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Committing crimes and killing anyone and everyone is what GTA is all about, it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise. What's important is the message the game sends, not what it depicts. A book can depict murder, but it's very different from a book advocating murder.

[Xard]

no no no no

 

What's next, Godfather must be banned?

[Moatilliatta]

@Wrath of Dagon

Try playing GTA before you go pretending to know anything, GTA is about solving missions in a freeform sandbox world. Killing civilians is rewarded through very small sums of money and penalized by the police coming after you.

 

Try not being ignorant.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, solving missions through theft and murder. I suppose you're going to tell me there's no mission to massacre construction workers with a remote controlled helicopter? Edit: Cops coming after you is not a penalty, it's a gameplay element. You're then supposed to murder the cops, or haven't you noticed?

Edited August 7, 2008 by Wrath of Dagon

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Committing crimes and killing anyone and everyone is what GTA is all about, it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

 

And here I thought the goal was to make money in a sandbox world...

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, it's an economy simulation, Alan Greenspan's favorite.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

You're then supposed to murder the cops, or haven't you noticed?

 

Or you can evade them and lay low for awhile.

[themadhatter114]

People always want a scapegoat when this stuff happens. Ronald Reagan was shot because of Taxi Driver. The Kentucky school shooting was because of Basketball Diaries. The Columbine massacre was because of Doom and Marilyn Manson. But the 2nd amendment was an easier target than the first, so we got ridiculous laws like the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban.

 

Anyway, any kid who says that he did something because of a game is a moron. He's either severely mentally ill or he's lying to deflect attention on someone else, especially if his family is being advised by Jack Thompson. I wouldn't have been surprised if Jack had flown out to Thailand as soon as this happened to give the kid an excuse.

 

And if you haven't played GTA4, you probably don't know what you're talking about. The game doesn't promote senseless killing and you don't kill any civilians as part of the storyline. Honestly, hijacking cars and mowing down civilians breaks immersion into the story because that's not really in the character. Aside from a few fascist cops, every person you kill throughout the storyline is a criminal.

[Moatilliatta]

@Wrath of Dagon

Cops coming after you is clearly a penalty since you loose the mission that you're on and will have to start over.

 

Also you're clearly either extremely ignorant or a troll so I'm not gonna take part in this discussion anymore.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Yes, it's an economy simulation, Alan Greenspan's favorite.

 

That is still a better description of it than what you are pushing.

[Wrath of Dagon]

@Wrath of Dagon

Cops coming after you is clearly a penalty since you loose the mission that you're on and will have to start over.

 

Also you're clearly either extremely ignorant or a troll so I'm not gonna take part in this discussion anymore.

You're the one who's either ignorant or lying. If it's a sandbox game, you should be able to do anything while not on a mission, right?

[SteveThaiBinh]

Please remember to post in a manner that is respectful of fellow community members.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

If it's a sandbox game, you should be able to do anything while not on a mission, right?

 

Yes, but that does not mean that you are not penalized for those actions. Your post hoc proctor hoc logical fallacy -id est, the game has X in it and thus X is caused by the game- is deeply flawed, as is your understanding of the games themselves.

 

Edit: Also, why did you not respond to my post about JFK Reloaded?

Edited August 7, 2008 by Deadly_Nightshade

[themadhatter114]

This is the simple fact of the matter:

 

The boy claimed that he simply wanted to see if robbing a taxi in real life was as easy as it is in GTA. Then he claimed that the driver fought back and he ended up killing him unintentionally.

 

Clearly the kid is a moron. He wanted to test if something that he made his character do in the game (note, not something that you ever have to do in the game) was as easy in real life. He could have just as easily seen it in a movie.

 

Basically, he takes a part of the game that isn't required, that happens to be removed from the context of the storyline, and says essentially that he wanted to try something that was in the game. You could just as easily claim that you killed some soldiers/cops/doctors after playing Half-Life 1 or 2, because if you ignore the context of the game, you would see that you do have to kill American soldiers in Half-Life 1 and Combine soldiers in Half-Life 2. You could also point to the fact that Half-Life allows you to murder scientists, and claim that that influences people, even though the murder of scientists is not consistent with the character or the storyline, just as murdering cab drivers is not a part of Niko Bellic's character or at all part of the storyline. It would do just as well to blame a game like Crackdown that features a government agent who takes out gang leaders, but also lets you murder civilians and other agents at will, stealing their cars and doing whatever you wish. In fact, I'm pretty sure that in Crackdown you have to go on a total rampage before the Agency will even send the cops after you.

 

Some people are violent and do stupid things. You can scapegoat guns, movies, video games, music, pornography, whatever, all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that people are responsible for their own actions.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Of course people are responsible for their own actions, but a culture of violence contributes to real violence.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Edit: Also, why did you not respond to my post about JFK Reloaded?

Because I don't know much about that game, but I assume the clearing up conspiracies part is just a weak excuse to be able to shoot Kennedy. If they were really trying to clear up cospiracies, there're are plenty of ways to do it other than actually shooting him.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

...a culture of violence contributes to real violence.

 

O RLY?

 

...I assume the clearing up conspiracies part is just a weak excuse to be able to shoot Kennedy.

 

O RLY?

[Bartimaeus]

If it reduces the chances of me getting killed, then ban it.

 

If a nation has stupid kids like this that can play it, I guess it should be banned.

 

If the world has such dumb people that disregard life as easily as that, then games like this shouldn't be allowed to come into existence, I guess.

Edited August 9, 2008 by Bartimaeus

[themadhatter114]

If it reduces the chances of me getting killed, then ban it.

 

As if that could be empirically proved. What if it increases the government's feeling of power, thereby increasing the probability that people will eventually feel repressed and lash out at the government?

 

I have an idea, make a list of things that you should ban under the "If it just saves one life..." reasoning. Then ban them all. Then see how many people get murdered by their government for disobeying and see how many government agents get killed in return. How many lives would you consider that you've saved?

 

If a nation has stupid kids like this that can play it, I guess it should be banned.

 

So, no matter the probability, as long as there are some morons in a country, everyone else's rights have to be infringed? I hope you're not an American.

 

If the world has such dumb people that disregard life as easily as that, then games like this shouldn't be allowed to come into existence, I guess.

 

We must protect the people from themselves!