×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

UK Politicians Threatened By Bully

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the thuggish-behaivor dept.

Games 76

Though its release date is still a ways off Next Generation is reporting that UK politicians are already calling for careful consideration, and possible banning, of the Rockstar title Bully. From the article: "Do you share my concern at the decision of Rockstar to publish a new game called Bully in which players use their on-screen persona to kick and punch other schoolchildren? Will you ask the prime minister to refer this video to the British Board of Film Classification? If they don't make any changes will the government use its powers to ban this video[game]?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

76 comments

Wtf? (2, Insightful)

KDan (90353) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889755)

Why the hell would anyone want to play a "bully" game?

If you were a bully at school, you've already done it. If you were bullied at school, that's hardly going to be an enjoyable activity.

What a bizarre idea for a game...

Daniel

Re:Wtf? (3, Insightful)

Prospero's Grue (876407) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889856)

If you were a bully at school, you've already done it. If you were bullied at school, that's hardly going to be an enjoyable activity.

I listened to a radio documentary about bullying a few months ago - and there a few "bullying" games out there (one of which focused on girls and relied on social stigma as opposed to violence). The woman they had try it out enjoyed it.

Frankly, I don't buy either of your arguments. If you're the type who likes to dominate - then gaming offers you a means to do so (and is consequence free). If you're someone who has been dominated - then to dominate others (even fictional others) in a game can be cathartic.

That doesn't mean I support a ban - but I don't think you can assume there's no market for it.

Re:Wtf? (5, Informative)

Pxtl (151020) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889892)

Because the game isn't about being a bully. It's about fighting back. And meeting girls, pranking teachers, etc. Imho, it's the coolest concept ever for a game, and I'm disgusted by people who think "ooh, Rockstar is making a bad game about beating up kids" without even looking into it (or looking at what your kids are going through at school and realising how this game might make them feel better about it).

Re:Wtf? (4, Funny)

lightspawn (155347) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890413)

That's hardly fair, isn't it? You're using your actual knowledge of the game in this discussion, instead of imagining all kinds of things. What are the politicians supposed to do?

Re:Wtf? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13890438)

Rockstar isn't about making good games ...
They aren't about making games that empower people ...

Simply put Rockstar is about making any game and then putting a marketing spin on it in such a way that it offends everyone except for their core demographic; they add elements to their games that are not important, and don't really add anything, simply to offend people.

Why do they do it? Because getting a politician to claim that their game should be banned (or actually getting the game banned) does wonders to build 'street cred' ammong insecure teen boys, who then buy the game in droves.

Do I think Rockstar doesn't make good games? No, Do I think there games could not empower people? No. I do think that they're playing a dangerous game that will only result in massive political opposition to 'Mature' rated videogames that will have governments regulating the videogame market; the reason the ESRBs were created is because the videogame industry did not want the government to have control, Rockstar is single handedly undoing the work that was done beforehand.

Re:Wtf? (2, Informative)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890671)

It's a shame that you posted anonymously because you deserve Insightful mods for that.

I can't help but wish politician were smarter because the whole violent game issue has extremely valid points on both sides. I'm a huge supporter of seeing video games as an art form, and at the very least as a vessel for freedom of speech, and in that sense I feel that any developer should be able to make and responsibly market any game to a reasonable market without any legal issues. But at the same time, it's petty for gamers to say that violent games don't make kids violent. Just like football and other competetive (especially contact sports in general), (violent) games can make kids more aggressive and violent themselves. I know this because they've affected me, flat out. I grew up fantasizing that every random place I was going to in real life was a bloody battlefield and was fascinated at the thought of how I would do in the situation of the main characters I play as in war games.

Am I violent? No, despite growing up playing roller hockey (ice hockey players are encouraged to go for more hits so I don't know if I'd be different if I was born in Michigan rather than Florida) competetively and seeing war and violence glorified, I was always able to somewhat keep myself in check and remind myself that games are games and real life is real life. My cousin, on the other hand, between growing up wrestling us (his cousins, older than him by five years) and playing violent games is a serious bully at school, and whenever he sees an ad for a game with guns his instant reaction is "that game looks awesome!"

The point that parents should decide what their kids can and can't handle doesn't refute the fact that there are kids who can be profoundly affected by games that encourage you to kill (I'm not blaming anything for Columbine or anything like that, just wrapping things up). Yes, parents should raise their kids, but what's the difference between banning violent games from kids and banning cigarettes from kids? Both are the parent's responsibility (one is significantly easier to acquire... but you get my point), and both can be harmful. The problem I see right now though, is that it seems they're trying to ban mature games from kids under all circumstances, even if parents think their kids can handle it. I can't say I agree with either or neither side here, but gamers who so adamantly defend games in light of these posts are just as bad as the politicians, imho.

Re:Wtf? (3, Interesting)

Wandering Idiot (563842) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891734)

My cousin, on the other hand, between growing up wrestling us (his cousins, older than him by five years) and playing violent games is a serious bully at school, and whenever he sees an ad for a game with guns his instant reaction is "that game looks awesome!

But are you sure the bullying is due to wrestling and video games, and not just him being big for his age/a jerk/etc.? I mean, you yourself just said you grew up similarly, and yet never became a bully.

I'm not saying video games can't have some emotional or cognitive impact- pretty much any medium can, but I haven't seen much to indicate a large causal relationship between fictional and real violence. Certainly not enough to consider the regulation of it a public safety, rather than a public standards/obscenity matter.

Re:Wtf? (1)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892618)

No, because he's a really good kid and the entire family was shocked or is currently unaware that he even gets in trouble at all in school. Bullying isn't in his nature, he's always been hyperactive and being bigger than other kids doesn't help, but neither did associating violence with play growing up.

Re:Wtf? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13893780)

just think if the politicians dealt with reality as much as they try to deal with video games

Who's who (1)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892517)

Which character do you think the politicians are more similar to?

Hmmm?

Now do you understand why they want to ban the game?

Re:Wtf? (2, Insightful)

sbryant (93075) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889942)

Why the hell would anyone want to play a "bully" game?

Why would anyone want to play a game where you steal cars and shoot the police?

I guess neither you nor the politicians ever played Skool Daze, where you could go around hitting other kids. (There was actually more to the game than that, though!)

Real life bullying is a serious problem, but I don't (yet) see that such games make kids more prone to violence or bullying. In fact, too much game-playing tends to lead to apathy, AFAICT.

All that said, I too think it's a bizarre idea for a game. I shan't be getting it!

-- Steve

Re:Wtf? (2, Interesting)

Guiannos (195466) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890717)

This isn't a new concept, though... I remember playing the card game Lunch Money [atlas-games.com] back in high school, which is the same kind of thing...

The premise is that you are a bunch of catholic school girls trying to beat each other up for your lunch money on the playground. Cards include attacks, weapons, etc.

Fun game, regardless of your feelings on bullying.

Re:Wtf? (1)

Walkiry (698192) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895117)

Ever heard of Skool Daze [worldofspectrum.org] ? The premise of the game is not as important as how the game plays. Why would anyone play an ex-convict working for the mafia? Because GTA games are fun and well made, that's why. Bizarre indeed...

Once again... (0)

crotherm (160925) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889758)

the bigger bullies in the Government are picking on the geeks who make games...

No wonder Rockstar made this game. For once, geeks could pretend to be the bully and see how the other half lives..

I am well over 18 (3, Interesting)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889809)

There has been a lot of devolution going on in UK politics the past few years.
Some of it great , like the devolution of parliamentary powers . Others not so great , such as the New labour AKA: Old conservatives.

This type of censorship is totally unacceptable , we have a ratings system which is complied to by retailers , giving it an 18 rating is more than sufficient .
Devolution of public freedom ,many steps were made during the 70's and 80s to loosen up the censorship in the UK . Are we now taking another step backwards, if this comes to pass then I would say yes.

From what I read on the BBC (1)

JimmehAH (817552) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889839)

One politician raised the point that the game should be referred to the BBFC for classification. This is quite normal (though not usually mentioned in Parliament).
Commons leader Geoff Hoon said something along the lines of 'that decision should be made when the content of the game becomes more clear'.
Doesn't look like there will be much chance of it being banned.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4380020.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Re:From what I read on the BBC (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895169)

I'm more worried at the suggestion that if the BBFC allow the game to be released, the Government will go over their heads and ban it anyway.

Ignore it if you want it to go away. (2)

thenetbox (809459) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889843)

Rockstar games probably have low marketting costs because the people who are trying to shut them down are the best marketting team a company can hope to have.

If parents did their jobs and followed the game rating systems that are being spoon fed to them then there would be no problems anywhere.

The Jerking of Knees (3, Informative)

Thedalek (473015) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889875)

Every time Bully comes up, there's always the instant response of "Oh, that's horrible! A game where you bully kids?!"

So many people seem to be missing the point that this game is about pulling pranks on bullies, not kicking Mortimer Snerd's butt and taking his lunch money. The idea is supposed to be that you get picked on, then you start fighting back on behalf of the little guys.

Re:The Jerking of Knees (4, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890887)

It's interesting how parents are more concerned with a game that involves bullies than they are with actual bullies. While things are changing, bullying is still considered a "right of passage" for victims (even though it compounds to the extent that many of these victims just drop out of school because they can't focus on education and surviving every day and nobody will take them seriously or extend a hand) and "boys will be boys" for the bullies.

I excelled in three sports simultaneously (wrestling starting at five, judo starting at eight and jujitsu starting at ten), and was always too much of a softy to ever bully anyone, but you did see it going on often. And while people like myself could step in whenever we saw someone being mistreated, you couldn't be there all the time and if someone steps in to prevent an act of bullying today, that bully is just going to come down twice as hard on the victim when nobody is around, tomorrow.

So, frankly, I'm glad to see that bullying is slowly being treated more like the crime it is than just "children being children". School is for educaiton - not abuse. Period. But I'm disapointed that more people are more upset over an innocent game than the actual bullying itself. And what - are they going to start claiming that Rockstar is responsible for encouraging and teaching children to e bullies? After all, it's not like bullying has been going on for oh.... at least a few millenia.

Re:The Jerking of Knees (1)

Nivoset (607957) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890987)

i was a small fry, but quick, i started protecting people in school from bullies... ie: i started beating on the bullies. not th ebest method. but it did seem to change the bullies. never got in trouble. never got caught. dont nessisarily feel good. but let me kind of turn the tides. Bullies should be taken care of more often by the schools though.

Re:The Jerking of Knees (3, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892607)

In my experience, the person who does the most damage gets the punishment. If a bully picked on a kid, the bully would usually not get in trouble, because nobody would tell. If someone stepped in and kicked the bully's ass (which I did a lot, because even kids much older than myself weren't aware of my outside-of-school sports), the person who beat up the bully would get suspended or otherwise punish.

I also knew kids who would be picked on bullies and, finally, fight back. But the teachers always came into the mix after the bully had already started the fight, the other kid had kicked his ass, and the kid who was the victim of the bully got the suspension and punishment.

So, really, you can't win. And there are always ignorant adults who feel that one person under 18 assaulting another person under the age of 18 is just "kids being kids".

There are certainly times when a kid is clearly just whining. But there are more often than not times when a kid is clearly being harassed and violated and assaulted. I have no problem with treating these kids as criminals. Their age and location (school) should not excuse them from punishment.

And ironically, it seems these days that it's the quiet kids who are picked on that are singled out by adminsitrators as potential Columbine follow-ups --- rather than the punks who are acting out by harassing and terrorizing those kids in the first place.

Still, I hope adults continue to take these things more seirously. There's nothing I hate more than someone my age justifying what happens to kids in school today because "I was picked on and beat up and I turned out fine" or "I beat up and picked on other kids and they turned out fine". I mean . . . come on . . . If adults did this sort of thing to each other, they'd be imprisoned.

Re:The Jerking of Knees (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894120)

I also knew kids who would be picked on bullies and, finally, fight back. But the teachers always came into the mix after the bully had already started the fight, the other kid had kicked his ass, and the kid who was the victim of the bully got the suspension and punishment.

That was so me. It only happened once though, because real bullies are smart enough to stop before you become enraged. A faux bully kept harassing me and eventually I kicked the shit out of him, and got expelled from school. AFAIK nothing happened to him besides the punishment I gave him. If I'd known I'd be expelled, I'd have given him a few more good ones...

And ironically, it seems these days that it's the quiet kids who are picked on that are singled out by adminsitrators as potential Columbine follow-ups --- rather than the punks who are acting out by harassing and terrorizing those kids in the first place.

I'm not sure how this is ironic. Those ARE the kids (assuming they're getting bullied, anyway) who are the danger in that particular respect. Of course, if you somehow eliminated the culture of ass-kicking, you'd eliminate the danger of making kids snap and shoot up their school, too...

I sure wish columbine had happened before I went to school, though. I coulda just worn a black trenchcoat and spent a lot of time reading the shooter's bible, and not gotten my ass kicked so much. I was a mama's boy, see (I didn't really get better until about age 23) and my mother naturally told me "leave them alone and they'll leave you alone" and other stupid bullshit like that - my father's idea of parenting was "mind your mother" so that was no help either. If I could give one piece of advice to people being bullied, it would be to FIGHT BACK. Even if you get your ass kicked, keep getting up and getting back into it until you can't any more. One of two things will happen; either you will win, or you will get hurt so badly the administration can't just blow it off. A pyhrric (sp?) victory is better than no victory at all.

Re:The Jerking of Knees (1)

Nivoset (607957) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894894)

the easiest way to quick finish a fight (is to well. know how) is know a few mean things that in themselves are dirty.

one i learned to like was when they would get close in of my face (they liked to do that for some reason) was to hed but them only decently hard. it generally really threw them off balance and off guard. since they were the one "intimidating you" then they would generally be quiet and leave. orr... a bigger fight would enseu... my school had a rule about punching... if you didn't punch them, you didn't fight them... being the fun of that.. i tripped them.. allot. but i also had kids growing onto my side cause i was small (60lb 4' in up till 9th grade) and that i tend to protect my friends.

Re:The Jerking of Knees (1)

Pluvius (734915) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891617)

Depends on what you mean by "bullying." If you're referring to verbal abuse, pranks, and mild physical conflict (flicking someone's ears, for example), then I would say that yes, bullying is a rite of passage. After all, a lot of things happen out in the real world that could be considered very similar to this form of bullying, and you have to be able to cope with it.

If you're talking about deliberately causing bodily harm, that's not bullying; that's assault.

Rob

Re:The Jerking of Knees (2, Insightful)

Xarius (691264) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893736)

1. It's 'rite', not 'right'. Important difference. </pedant>

2. Bullying is increasingly getting worse as a direct result of powers of discipline being removed from schoolteachers and the like. We're in a society where kids cannot get shouted at school, cannot get a good thrashing from their parents, and can basically do what they want.

I don't know how it works elsewhere, but in my school bullies were sneered at by all of us popular kids (gasp, a slashdotter was popular) and generally looked down upon. The only people who got bullied were the poor or stupid kids, of which the bullies were a part.

If we had nice corporal punishment, a good thrashing for bullies, it wouldn't happen. No one likes to be beaten, so to misquote the old phrase: Take the rod, beat the child. Liberal pansies can moan all they like, kids don't understand being talked at, but they do understand a smacked arse.

Re:The Jerking of Knees (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13891391)

not kicking Mortimer Snerd's butt and taking his lunch money

Well... have you ever played Lunch Money [atlas-games.com] ?

It's a card game, a-la Magic: The Gathering (which means it's quite old now), where the object is to do exactly that. You beat up the other kids on the playground and steal their lunch money. Don't seem to recall a big whoop-de-doo when that one came out... 'course, it wasn't a video game, and it wasn't Rockstar...

Re:The Jerking of Knees (1)

Thedalek (473015) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892098)

Meh. Played it. Extensively (former GF loved it).

The idea there wasn't so much bullying as 12-year-old schoolgirls in an all-out brawl.

But seriously, the anti-gaming press seems to have completely lost interest in non-electronic gaming. Some of the games on BGG [boardgamegeek.com] are outright obscene [boardgamegeek.com] .

Bully? (2, Funny)

Council (514577) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889880)

From the article: "Do you share my concern at the decision of Rockstar to publish a new game called Bully? If you don't, I'll beat you up after gym class!"

Rockstar is crazy (1)

courtarro (786894) | more than 8 years ago | (#13889976)

Why are they releasing a game like this? Is it their bread and butter to make their own lives as difficult as possible? How about the next game is one where you sit in a shack and send bombs via mail to unsuspecting institutions of higher learning? What about a game where you score points by mixing chemicals to produce the largest fireball? I mean, I'm all for gamer's rights, but at this point Rockstar is simply hurting the industry more than they're helping. Some things are best left untried.

As somebody mentioned above... (1)

supersocialist (884820) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890106)

Is it their bread and butter to make their own lives as difficult as possible? In a way, it is. They hardly have to advertise their games, because some Bible-thumpin' bloke who knows what's best for everybody will get the word out for them. The trouble they get from these people is probably greatly outweighed by the benefit of the extra press. (They say any press is good press.) Besides, it's their trademark or brand recognition or whatever. The same way you can look at animation and say "gratuitous musical numbers? big eyes? not japanese? must be Disney!" you can look at Bully and say "Rockstar's at it again." They push the "moral majority's" buttons and sell to the people who enjoy seeing those buttons pushed.

son of a... (1)

supersocialist (884820) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890148)

I could have sworn I hit preview.

Re:son of a... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13890680)

The little imps in the slashdot server were half asleep and took the wrong turning. Sorry.

Re:Rockstar is crazy (1)

Fr05t (69968) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890114)

How about a game where you actually find out what exactly the premise of a game is before you shoot off your mouth on /.?

FYI - the game isn't about being a Bully, it's about someone who gets bullied and starts to fight back with pranks.

The reason for Rockstar giving it this name is simple - it gets the ignorant talking (you) about it and spreading free publicity. In the end however it makes Rockstars opponents look like morons.

Re:Rockstar is crazy (1)

courtarro (786894) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890186)

I never said the game was about being a bully; the gameplay you mention, which I had already read about prior to making my comment, is just as bad as the summary. My point is that they're releasing games that they know will cause an uprising of parents and Congresspeople, but they continue to do it. How many intelligent companies push the envelope farther and farther every time there's a threat to legislate against them? They're going to find themselves shut down by censorship; not all publicity is good publicity.

Re:Rockstar is crazy (1)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890360)

Somebody has to. the world isn't perfect, no matter how mcuh people want to believe that it is, and just becaose YOU don't like something harmless dosen't mean that everyone else can't enjoy it either. I don't own a Rockstar game, nor ahve I played more than a half hour of one, but I appreciate them for making content that I don't have to lok at if I don't want to, but a few lound-mouths don't want made. This way, the next time someone I DO happen to like is questions, I might get a chance to enjoy it. See how it works?

Re:Rockstar is crazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13890154)

All they're doing is just giving their marketing department a vacation, why does everyone have to judge them for that?

Re:Rockstar is crazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13890187)

Oh ok, Jack Thompson.

Re:Rockstar is crazy (1)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890638)

"Is it their bread and butter to make their own lives as difficult as possible?"

They just released a game about one of the worst movies in the 70's (The Warriors). If that's not difficult, I don't know what is.

Re:Rockstar is crazy (1)

British (51765) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891277)

They just released a game about one of the worst movies in the 70's (The Warriors). If that's not difficult, I don't know what is.

Can't you Dig it!?!?!??

Spike TV played The Warriors in anticipation of the game 2 weekends ago. It really is a good, nostalgic movie. While video game to movie conversions might be a step below the opposite(ie the doom movie), The Warriors as a video game just minght work.

Re:Rockstar is crazy (1)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895809)

Oh, I can dig it. My old startup sound on my 486 was the "Warriors, come out to plaaaaaaay." line by that guy who looks like Horscheck from Welcome Back Kotter. I like the movie. That doesn't change how pitiful a movie it is.

Dazed and confused, anyone? (1)

inajamaica (906275) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890197)

...then they better ban the sale of that movie as well, not to mention the Simpsons (Nelson).

Honest Question and relevant to the debate... (1)

Farscry (674981) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890229)

Does the UK have a similar basic right analogous to the US 1st amendment? If so, I'd think that banning the game would be both wrong and against the intent of the law, but providing that it is not sold to minors would probably still be legal.

I personally find the game ridiculous and tasteless, but in the US at least, I'd still fight for Rockstar's right to be able to publish it (and for stores to have to decide whether they wish to carry it).

My caveat is that while the concept of the "Bully" game strikes a little too close to home for me to enjoy, I do actually like the GTA series.

I know. I have weird double-standards in my tastes sometimes. ;)

Re:Honest Question and relevant to the debate... (1)

SteveAyre (209812) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890723)

We've got the basic human right of Freedom of Speech.

That's about it as far as I know (I could be wrong). We don't actually have a constitution as such. What we do have is a large number of acts and laws which have been build up over the centuries. Constitution of the United Kingdom [wikipedia.org] One is the Human Rights Act (see above). I'm not sure if it's also covered in any of the acts though.

Re:Honest Question and relevant to the debate... (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895323)

We have always had a tradtion of freedom of speech. Now it's actually part of the law under the Human Rights act. The government could always, potentially, abridge this right, but any bill that is not extremely specific will not get through. Our government - even the unelected house of lords - tends to be very wary about violating freedom of speech.

I suppose I can't blame them... (1)

djflipstarx (924242) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890294)

Given that someone was killed by someone who played Manhunt, I suppose people would point fingers to anything that Rockstar makes, including this game. Unfortunately, I predict this game will be used as a scapegoat for bullying soon after its release. However, a ban isn't going to work. Sure, you'll try to prevent the children from getting the game, but there will be other ways to acquire it, legally or illegally. If the game is a success in other areas but banned in the UK, then no doubt people will try to get it, even if just to say "Because I can." (Prohibition, anyone?)

Re:I suppose I can't blame them... (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895316)

Given that someone was killed by someone who played Manhunt,

Except this was tabloid hysteria. According to GamesIndustry.Biz [gamesindustry.biz] The victim played manhunt, and police were quite certain games had nothing to do with the murder.

Games vs War? (0, Flamebait)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890467)

Shouldn't the British Government be less worried about a game setting a bad example, than by their own bullying of Iraqis twisting the minds of a generation?

I completely fail to understand how one video game will have a greater effect on a child than images of their own country triumphantly wreaking havoc during a war?

Kids thinking it's OK to hit other kids might be bad, but is kids thinking it's OK to bomb other countries any better?

Skool Daze (1)

StonedRat (837378) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890578)

Bully just seems to be a modern version of Skool Daze and Bak 2 Skool. Did them games get this much media coverage because they contained a school bully which you beat up and knock out with a slingshot?

Re:Skool Daze (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13891076)

Repeat after me:

Those games. Those games. Those games. Those games. ad infinitum

Re:Skool Daze (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13895483)

Bully just seems to be a modern version of Skool Daze and Bak 2 Skool. Did them games get this much media coverage because they contained a school bully which you beat up and knock out with a slingshot?

No, because they didn't actively court it.

You're spot on with the prior art though.

Not that it's a surprise... (1)

Xaroth (67516) | more than 8 years ago | (#13890856)

...but the comments there are pretty loaded.

"Do you share my concern at the decision of Rockstar to publish a new game called Bully in which players use their on-screen persona to kick and punch other schoolchildren?"

I'm sorry, but other schoolchildren? The players themselves will, by and large, be adults - not schoolchildren themselves. Sure, sure, we can all argue "but that's not what they meant - 'other' here refers to the in-game persona", but that sort of sneaky rhetoric doesn't fly with me. It's a charged statement meant to imply that we have to protect the children from this sort of thing, when they're not the target audience and they're already going to be restricted from purchasing it anyway.

And yes, the irony in my sig is intentional.

UK Game politics (1)

kwietman (795554) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891146)

Apparently, the British have their own version of Jack Thompson. Once again, let's make the game companies responsible for the failure of parents to moderate their children.

moderate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13893070)

You keep using that word.. I don't think it means, what you think it means!

(yes, I know you were punning... *sigh*)

Bully for you! (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891473)

Perhaps they think the game is violating truth in advertising laws by classifying itself as excellent or splendid, as in "did a bully job of persuading the members", or expressing approval, as in "Bully for you!"

Bully? (1)

Digital Vomit (891734) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891710)

...a new game called Bully in which players use their on-screen persona to kick and punch other schoolchildren?

Coming soon, from Rockstar Games: Rapist.

Whatever happened to the good old days when the most popular video games were mostly about taking on the persona of a hero, rescuing people or saving the world and such? Don't people want to be good guys any more?

I guess I'm just a crotchety old gamer. :-P

Re:Bully? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13892007)

Or your just another knee jerk reactionary who spits venom when rockstar puts out a game. Maybe you should do some research on what the game is about first.

Re:Bully? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13893056)

A moron says what?

Read the other comments in the thread dumbass.

Katamari Damacy (1)

b1t r0t (216468) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891717)

In Katamari Damacy, you can go around kicking all your cousins. Even more fun, you can group them together Pied Piper style, then give them a group ass kicking. I guess it's time for that "M" rating.

It's also a simulation of terrorism by rolling up innocent people into a ball, then hurtling them into space where they will likely be destroyed by a laser beam from the eyes of a giant humanoid alien.

This We DONT Need (0, Flamebait)

Busshy (907448) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891949)

As a Parent who worrys about bullying of my children, the last thing the video games industry should be releasing is a game that in any way portrays Bullying as cool. People die through being Bullied, lets not have this game in the UK or indeed any country, Grand Theft Auto was one thin but this game pushes the boundarys to much. A big No No from me.

Re:This We DONT Need (1)

sloose (864787) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893691)

So Grand Theft Auto, with its references to drugs, sex, and murder is a big OK in your book. Drugs and violent crime kill more people, why are you worried about bullying? Actually, why the hell are your kids playing mature games in the first place. As a "parent", maybe you should put some more control in what games your kids are playing. As an adult, I admire the concept of this game, and I haven't been in a position to be affected by bullying for a very long. But I guess banning a game is always easier than being a responsible parent.

when will they learn... (1)

clragon (923326) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894250)

the more they want to prevent us from playing the game the more we want to play it, it's human nature. like Seifeld said once "if woman covered their heads (instead of breasts) we would be going down the street to pick up the latest edition of Heads" it's human nature to want what we can't get.

The irony is... (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895338)

I wouldn't have heard about this game were it not for the negative publicity from people who want it banned.

Re:The irony is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13895507)

I feel sorry for you if you really do equate that with irony and not marketing.

Re:The irony is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13895519)

It can be both.

but, the british government... (3, Insightful)

eglamkowski (631706) | more than 8 years ago | (#13896977)

Goes out of its way to feel sensitive towards those who want to blow up the kids in the schools. Banning Piglet and piggy banks.

What a screwed up sense of priorities. Worry about what the kids are exposed to only AFTER you worry about the kids getting blown up by a member of the religion of peace.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...