Beta
×

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!

Officer's Group Calls for Ban On 25 To Life

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the it's-offensive-all-right-offensively-bad dept.

The Courts 148

Kotaku reports that the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund is calling for a boycott of 25 to Life. From the post: "It is absolutely unconscionable that game makers are enabling young people--or anyone--to dramatize shooting and killing as a form of entertainment while officers and innocent people are dying in real-life on our streets every day. We're encouraging parents, caregivers and everyone who is concerned about both law enforcement officers and children to ensure this game never makes it into the homes or hands of impressionable young people."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Oh Noes! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540349)

Oh Noes!

Why dramatize it (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540381)

When you've got the real thing available online?

http://ia300831.eu.archive.org/3/items/al-jaishul- [archive.org] islami-baghdad-sniper/al-jaishul-islami-baghdad-sn iper-70mb.rmvb

Seriously, isn't this sort of thing how Arnie got rich...and into office?

Re:Why dramatize it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540668)

(why is handling URLs so difficult on this site?)

http://ia300831.eu.archive.org/3/items/al-jaishul- islami-baghdad-sniper/al-jaishul-islami-baghdad-sn [archive.org] iper-70mb.rmvb

short working URL to parent "link" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540875)

http://urlx.org/archive.org/9382 [urlx.org]

This downloads a 60MB video. No idea what it is yet.

Re:Why dramatize it (1)

Elwood P Dowd (16933) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541129)

Uh, just use HTML. It's like any other website.

<a href="http://YOUR URL HERE">YOUR LINK TEXT HERE</a>

Alternatively, /. has a custom short form:

<url:http://YOUR URL HERE>

Re:Why dramatize it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14541148)

There is a 24 MB version of it in .wmv (the OP linked to a 70MB .rmvb)

Still not seen it, but it's here [archive.org]

Curse these games! (5, Insightful)

dubl-u (51156) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540384)

Yes! These games are an outrage. In my youth we had good, clean, wholesome fun. We kids ran around outside and played, uh, Cops and Robbers.

Re:Curse these games! (1)

rbgaynor (537968) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540422)

Or Cowboys & Indians (while smoking candy cigarettes).

Re:Curse these games! (1)

zxnos (813588) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542047)

we prefered cops and drug runners. complete with little baggies full of sugar or flour. when we got older we went to a wooded area and used paintball guns... ...fun

Re:Curse these games! (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540655)

Yeah but in those times, it was just "I shoot you, you die", not "I shoot you and watch as " (insert graphical description of a man's death, with guts and everything).

Re:Curse these games! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540781)

Yeah but in those times, it was just "I shoot you, you die", not "I shoot you and watch as " (insert graphical description of a man's death, with guts and everything).

Yeah, heaven forbid that children should see that violence is violent. Better that they grow up thinking that violence is just a blip on a radar screen. I'm sure that comfortable veil of ignorance will result in our children making smarter political decisions in the future.

Re:Curse these games! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14543572)

There's a big difference as exposure to violence as violence, and personally-inflicted violence as entertainment.

Re:Curse these games! (2, Insightful)

clydemaxwell (935315) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540802)

No cg will ever live up to our imaginations.

Re:Curse these games! (1)

Beatbyte (163694) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540864)

Either way it's make believe.


Get over it!

Re:Curse these games! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14542007)

Yes.

"I shoot you, you fall over dead. Ha! I got you Suzie and Jacob! Got all the Indians!"

and

"I shoot you, the bullet pierces your eye socket and ricochets out the side of your skull. Blood, brains, and chunks of bone explode out the side of your head and your screams of agony are silenced almost immediately by the liquid quickly jammed down your throat. Ha! I got you Bitchf*cker and Asspounder! I ended your pathetic lives and will eat your scrotums while I force your naked, bleeding mothers to watch" ...Same thing to a 6-year old.

Re:Curse these games! (3, Informative)

iocat (572367) | more than 8 years ago | (#14543147)

Maybe things were different in my neighborhood, but we would often stage elaborate, drawn-out, death sequences... ideally including falling from a tree if a pile of leaves were available. Of course, we also had the "other guy" rule (as in "right now I'm a different guy, shoot me," or "you be another guy for a second so I can shoot you."), so we weren't really killing each other...

That all aside, the group seems to be calling for a BOYCOTT of the game, not a BAN on the game, which are two very different things. I think the story headline should be revised.

Re:Curse these games! (3, Insightful)

Surt (22457) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540694)

I think the difference was that in that game, the robbers were portrayed as the bad guys.

Mod parent up. (2, Interesting)

Valdrax (32670) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540990)

I was thinking the same thing. In the old kids game, you ran around saying, "Bang!" and "missing" a lot. The good guys were the only ones allowed to shoot and win, and the bad guys played out losing with child-like melodrama. Only the cops would win, and then you'd switch sides so that you could be the good guys and win.

This game's a little nastier with no clear morality, actual graphic death, and a glorification of the "thug life." I'm not sure that I'd support a ban on it, but no one can really sanely offer that this is good, clean, kid-friendly fun.

Re:Mod parent up. (3, Insightful)

'nother poster (700681) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541155)

You must have grown up in a different time and neighborhood than me if the cops always won when you played.

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541300)

I didn't say the cops won, I said the cops were the good guys.

Re:Mod parent up. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14541421)

Again, different neighborhood.

If we learned anything from the second Rodney King trial, cops will lie to avoid liability for their violent action. In other words, cops are not always the good guys. They are as capable of being criminals as you or me, and they have a lot more protections from being caught/prosecuted than you or me. I wish they were the good guys, but that simply is not the case. There are far too many counterexamples, even with the protections.

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

D'Sphitz (699604) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541588)

the LAPD may have been the bad guys, but i'd hardly call Rodney King the good guy.

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

undeadly (941339) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542384)

the LAPD may have been the bad guys, but i'd hardly call Rodney King the good guy.

So, if a police officer feels a man/woman is bad they can do whatever they like?

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541796)

The question is not how they are in real life, but how they were portrayed in the game. Cops are quite clearly not always, and IMO not even more often than not the good guys. But the question is who is the good guys in the cops-and-robbers game played by children.

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

'nother poster (700681) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542786)

Once again, different neighborhoods at different times it could be either that were the "Good" guys.

Re:Mod parent up. (3, Insightful)

Landshark17 (807664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541895)

I'm not sure that I'd support a ban on it, but no one can really sanely offer that this is good, clean, kid-friendly fun.

I agree with you on that. Would you allow a five year-old to play GTA? That's like asking a if a five year-old should be able to see "Reservoir Dogs."

The game rating system needs an overhaul, and parents need to take more of an interest in what their kids are playing, because there seems to be this wierd double-standard. Parents don't mind that little Timmy is buying GTA, because it's just a game and games are harmless kid's stuff, but then they get completely shocked when they find out what's in GTA. And then they let little Timmy buy Manhunt because games are just harmless kid's stuff and the cycle starts all over again. Computer games started out innocently enough and most were kid-friendly, and that stigma still follows all games around, which is why people yell so loud when they find this kind of extreme content.

Mod parent down (1)

RESPAWN (153636) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542336)

The difference is that games like this aren't intended for kids. They are intended for young adults like myself who grew up on video games and who still play them semi-regularly. Why villify this game and not similar movies like Get Rich Or Die Tryin?

I really wish people would get over this misconception that video games are only for kids.

I also wish groups like this would get over theirself and stop trampelling all over people's free speech rights.

Re:Mod parent down (1)

Valdrax (32670) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542867)

I really wish people would get over this misconception that video games are only for kids.

I wish that people would get over their misconception that many parents won't end up buying this game for their kids. However, like I explicitly said, I don't support a ban on the game. The poster I was promoting and I were attacking the notion that this game is no different from kids playing "cops and robbers," which it is clearly an adult send-up of.

(Also, where have you been? People have been complaining about Get Rich or Die Tryin' [bbc.co.uk] already.)

I also wish groups like this would get over theirself and stop trampelling all over people's free speech rights.

Actually, the group involved is calling for a boycott and not a ban, so personally, I wish posters like this "would get over theirself and stop trampelling all over people's free speech rights." </tongue-in-cheek>

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

lt.com.riker (946759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542648)

<i>This game's a little nastier with no clear morality, actual graphic death, and a glorification of the "thug life."</i>
<br><br>
Hmm, just like real life. No clear morality, actual death, glorification of the "thug life" through higher wages. Thats how poor our society is.

Re:Curse these games! (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540750)

In that game, you chose which side you were, and changed sides from time to time, and imagined the entire scenario.

In this game, you're stuck hating cops the whole time, and given plenty of extracultural inputs to help you do that.

There's a difference between make-believe and indoctrination.

Re:Curse these games! (1)

F_Scentura (250214) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540908)

"There's a difference between make-believe and indoctrination."

Exactly, these games are make-believe.

Re:Curse these games! (2, Insightful)

sdhankin (213671) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540917)

In this game, you can play as either cops or robbers. How are you "stuck"?

Also, I strongly doubt any game can make you hate or love a specific group. If you hate cops, don't blame the game.

Indoctrination indeed.

Re:Curse these games! (1)

dubl-u (51156) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541835)

Also, I strongly doubt any game can make you hate or love a specific group. If you hate cops, don't blame the game.

I strongly agree.

I think the biggest contributor to bad attitudes towards cops isn't video games, it's making them enforce a lot of bullshit laws. Pretty much everybody in the US grows up dodging the law through underage drinking, smoking marijuana, or driving a bit above the speed limit. It doesn't help that some cops seem to be pretty high-handed with their power.

One of the things I love asking people is how they contrast their attitude toward policemen with their attitude toward firemen. You would hope that they'd be pretty close, but they're often not. It varies widely across countries, though, and I'd be curious to hear what Slashdotters say.

Re:Curse these games! (1)

flogic42 (948616) | more than 8 years ago | (#14543581)

A ban on any book, movie, or video game is an unequivocal violation of the first amendment. They can restrict it to non-minors, but any further restriction will be struck down by the supreme court easily.

Good luck with that, officer. (5, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540392)

My fellow ghosts and I have been protesting Pac-Man for over 25 years, and we're still not safe from being eaten by some random gamer kid on the street.

That's because of the drugs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540587)

If those crazy gamer kids didn't have easy access to (power) pills, you would be much safer.

Boycott / ban (3, Informative)

Otter (3800) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540419)

The FA correctly notes that the call is for a boycott, but the headline there refers to a "ban" instead. Bizarrely, the submitter decided to use the body's correct wording in his body and the headline's error in his header.

Re:Boycott / ban (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540535)

Which tells me that that was done by an editor that was sensationalizing it.

Re:Boycott / ban (1)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541242)

Ban, boycott... what's the difference? The editorial position on the importance of the English language has been obvious long before the article posted last week that basically said, "words don't count".

Re:Boycott / ban (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14541391)

there's a big difference. they're not asking for the government to take away your choice to buy the game, they're asking you to use your choice and decide not to buy the game.

Re:Boycott / ban (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540542)

Bizarrely, the submitter decided to use the body's correct wording in his body and the headline's error in his header.

Bizarrely, the /. "eddatur" chose not to correct the submitter's error prior to posting the story.

Re:Boycott / ban (1)

I8TheWorm (645702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540720)

Nice find there... the spin in the titled was evidently used to try to incite the usual slashdot emotions. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a boycott, and I applaud them for using that route rather than a ban, as the title suggested. Excellent use of their first amendment rights. I don't, however, believe games such as this make for violent children, or "numb" them to the idea that killing people is ok. Now, as I log out of SWG, I'll be grabbing my lightsaber and taking out anyone without an imperial emblem on their chest that I come across.

Re:Boycott / ban (4, Insightful)

cyber0ne (640846) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541336)

I was wondering the same thing. Talk about needing to mod a story (or at least a headline) -1 Flamebait, sheesh.

By calling for a boycott, they leave the actual decision in the hands of the parents/guardians/game-buyers. As a community, this is precisely what we want. No absurd laws or regulations, just a group of concerned individuals advocating that people think about what they're buying before they buy it.

Sounds good to me.

In other news... (1, Redundant)

jclast (888957) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540424)

In a related story, flying turtle things the world over are calling for a ban on all Super Mario games.

So what is it? (4, Informative)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540436)

Both the summary and TFA seem to confuse a boycott with a ban. But they're not the same. The NLEOMF only seems to be calling for a boycott, or for what might be called "discretionary purchasing." I didn't see anywhere in their statement where they called for it to be illegal or impossible to buy the game. So TFA's complaint that "they shouldn't be able to dictate what I play. What's next, a ban on all movies depicting violence against police?" and the summary are pretty unfair to the organization, and are probably just flamebait.

Guess they never saw Postal (4, Insightful)

gasmonso (929871) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540444)

Postal really started this genre many years ago and created a stir. This is just the next target from crazy parent groups and surely not the last. If they would spend as much time with their kids, maybe they wouldn't be so messed up!

http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]

Re:Guess they never saw Postal (2, Insightful)

cliffski (65094) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540932)

And maybe if game designers spent as much time designing innovative new genres and subjects rather than doing another "lets kill people motherfucker!" style games to get the tabloid press coverage, we would all be a lot happier.
The real idiots in this story are the people who think this is a good idea for a game. Ultra violence is the last resort of the clueless designer.

Re:Guess they never saw Postal (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 8 years ago | (#14543253)

Do you really think you're going to replace religious thought with atheist ascendency with a site like "Religious Freaks"? Yes, having posters of the Virgin Mary wanted for arson and boxing photos of Jesus is the best way to prove the superior, rational nature of the atheist stance.

Hmm. (2, Informative)

velocipenguin (416139) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540466)

It looks like the original wire service report included various bits of unpleasant information from the Brandon Vedas [nydailynews.com] incident. That's some astoundingly sloppy reporting.

Pulling at your heartstrings, stringing you along (-1, Flamebait)

gnarlin (696263) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540492)

If you care about orphaned children, old people and disabled single mothers then please consider supporting the National Socialist German Workers Party and the Ku Klux Klan for a better feature!

to the media-whore-cave, Robin! (0, Offtopic)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540494)

Paging Jack Thompson. Please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Isn't the game rated MA? (4, Insightful)

arakon (97351) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540512)

Meaning its for older individuals? Not impressionable children? I'm not going to buy the game because it looks like a drole rehash, but keeping it out of the hands of children? The industry already did their duty with its rating. Now Parents need to do theirs and not buy the damn game for their kids. YOu don't give porn to 12 year olds, why would a game be any different. People need to wake up and realize just because its a game doesn't mean its suitable for children. I'm always astounded at what I see parents buying for their children in the games section.

It may be my opinion, but a parent that buys their kids this type of game probably wouldn't blink about giving said child a copy of Mien Komf(sp?: Hitler AutoBio) or a terrorist's manifesto because THEY NEVER READ WHAT IT IS! How damn difficult is it to LOOK at the content you are giving your children. Hell if you want to buy this game and you think your child can handle the adult subject matter and you want to take the time to discuss it with your child, fine by all means that is your right as a parent. It just drives me nuts to see all the irresponsible parents who think its everyone elses job to police their children.

Oh I understand you'll never be able to controll all that they see, but in my mind you should make a damn good effort to make sure they understand what they see and the consequences.

Re:Isn't the game rated MA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540871)

Mein Kampf.

Re:Isn't the game rated MA? (1)

arakon (97351) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541154)

Thanks, I would have looked it up myself but it tends to throw up red flags with the websense server.

Thank you. (1)

Mandelbrot-5 (471417) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542491)

Thank you for putting into words what I've thought for as long as I've been old enough to understand the concept.

It should be added, that parents need to have the balls to do their job and say no. When the child asks, "Why not?" understand that, "Because I said so," is not a response that teaches anything. The only thing that accomplishes is the child thinking, 'It's fun and Mom/Dad doesn't want me to have any fun.' resulting in a child that has no understanding of logic or reason.

Re:Thank you. (1)

lt.com.riker (946759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542748)

I can't wait to see how this generation that has grown up on video games handles their children playing video games. It'll be very educational for our society.

Instead, why don't they... (2, Insightful)

WhiteLudaFan (634444) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540522)

Instead of boycotting the game (though reasonable) and seeking to remove it from stores (something of a free speech issue?), why don't they spend more effort on supporting the ESRB rating system and its enforcement? They should do that if they're really focused on keeping it out of the 'hands of impressionable young people'.

I'm in! (1, Offtopic)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540539)

I'll certainly be boycotting this cookie-cutter crime game. It's $GameTypeoftheWeek with $Gimmick7654 added in - GTA with a pick-sides dynamic.
This is one gaming fad I've had 100% enough of, and I'm actually beginning to worry about the effect that this saturation marketing of crime games might be having on the many, many kids that are getting these games bought for them.
I hate these "OMG THINK OF THE KIDS" bandwagons, but to be blunt, fuck these game companies with their bullshit megaviolence crime tripe. In a few decades, we'll look back on this crap like we do to all the boring-ass crime investigation dramas from the 70's (which incidentally are having a high-tech renaissance as we speak - fuck that too).

Astounding (5, Insightful)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540559)

It is absolutely unconscionable that game makers are enabling young people--or anyone--to dramatize shooting and killing as a form of entertainment while officers and innocent people are dying in real-life on our streets every day

So, I assume you'll get right onto boycotting the show COPS, right? Because it dramatizes pursuit and police brutality as a form of entertainment while civilians and innocent people are being arrested in real-life on our streets every day.

Protesting killing? (3, Insightful)

Sierpinski (266120) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540609)

It would be impossible to even consider trying to quantify the number of media titles (games, movies, etc.) where killing has taken place. Of course I don't condone any type of real life murder, including the killing of peace/police officers. I do, however, wish to retain my right to play whatever the hell I want to play.

One thing that groups like this don't know or don't consider, is that the people who commit these heinous crimes are not the normal average everyday kids. If they have any type of mental instability that allows the line between reality and fantasy to blur enough to think that committing the crimes they see in these games is okay, then there is a word for that. Its called predisposition. Its not the games that is causing these violent crimes. I was playing GTA: San Andreas last night, where one of the missions I had to do was to rob a bank and a betting store. I successfully completed both missions, and guess what? This morning I woke up, ate my breakfast, took my kids to their babysitter, came to work, and so far have had a very productive day. Not once did the idea of robbing a bank or a betting store enter my mind, because I know the difference between real and fantasy. Those people who commit these crimes then blame video games or movies for them are either mentally ill, or they are just trying to find a scapegoat. Personally I feel that anyone that has the "mental" capability to actually take another person's life in cold blood has a mental defect, regardless of what the courts say. I'm not saying that these people should not go to prison, but I'm saying that thats not normal behavior.

I respect police officers and the dangerous job they do. I have several in my family, and have gone along on ridealongs with quite a few. I know all about the training they have, and the day-to-day dangers they can endure. However I do not feel that anyone has the right to tell me what I should and should not be able to play. One might say "Where can the line be drawn"... However given the history of 'cops and robbers', 'cowboys and indians', etc that I was bombarded with growing up, I don't think this is really any different, AS LONG AS the person playing these games is mentally fit to differentiate reality from fantasy. Do I feel that people should undergo mental testing to purchase a game? No. However I do feel that people need to stop blaming the games and movies and start putting the blame where it probably lies the most: On the parents. Parents need to teach their kids right and wrong, they need to teach their kids whats real and "make-believe". If they can see that their kid can't tell the difference between tv and real life, they need to seek professional help. I'm sick and tired of people blaming the game companies when its usually the parent's fault.

Children aren't born with an inherent understanding of good, evil, right,or wrong. They need to be taught these ideas. This is way before school, and rests entirely on the shoulders of the parents.

Re:Protesting killing? (1)

Ian Peon (232360) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540697)

...came to work, and so far have had a very productive day...
...on Slashdot.

Re:Protesting killing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540811)

Apparently you've never heard of 'lunchtime'. Its that time between noon and 1pm where you're sometimes allowed to eat and do other things besides work. Try it sometime.

Re:Protesting killing? (1)

srhuston (161786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540942)

I was playing GTA: San Andreas last night, where one of the missions I had to do was to rob a bank and a betting store. ...
so far have had a very productive day. Not once did the idea of robbing a bank or a betting store enter my mind

That's because you have TINY BALLS!

Sorry, got Catalina's voice stuck in my head now :P

Re:Protesting killing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14541314)

For mod who modded my original post flamebait: Just because you dont agree with my view doesnt mean you should mod down. Read the fucking mod rules.

Posted anonymously to save karma from morons like you.

-Sierpinski

Re:Protesting killing? (1)

John Courtland (585609) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541410)

Somebody's been doing that to a few other comments in this thread as well. They'll probably be caught in M2.

Re:Protesting killing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14543304)

Children aren't born with an inherent understanding of good, evil, right,or wrong

Are you talking about human children, or some sort of reptilian children of a species with which I am not familiar. If you had ever actually raised kids, you would know how stupid your remark sounds.

The good old discussion again (1, Insightful)

Inoen (590519) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540623)

I do appreciate the feelings that a widow of a policeman must feel when seeing violence against police glorified - or somewhat justified, as it may be. Or the feelings of a policeman who is patrolling the streets every day, in fear of being attacked. A very real fear in some cases.

That said, this game just represents the view of one group of people. Probably not even that. Art (in a broad sense) has always tried to provoke us, to try our morals, feelings and values. A Clockwork Orange is probably the most famous piece of art that depicts violence in a non-judgemental way. The outrage it created at launch is, a thing of the past. Today we think of it as nothing more than a provocative addition to the debate.

Is 25 to life a piece of art? It does provoke some thought. It probably wasn't made for the cultural elite (to say the least!), but it still caught their attention. It doesn't encourage violence (real violence, that is). So it doesn't qualify to be anything other than art. It isn't a political statement, not a call to arms or religious propaganda. It's just entertainment.

All i'm saying is that this is nothing new. The game is nothing new. The reaction to it is nothing new either. And i'll say to the policemen: Get over it; it doesn't represent the view of the majority of the population. And it won't have an effect on the violence on the streets.

I don't get it (4, Insightful)

max born (739948) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540638)

The images are wrong. The messages are wrong. And stocking it in U.S. stores is wrong.

And perhaps banning it is also wrong.

What's so different about violence in video games as opposed to violence in books, movies, TV, etc.? And what about all those shootout games kids play with toy guns? Why not ban those?

Millions of kids watch/participate in entertainment that contains violent content and millions grow up to be law abiding citizens. These guys don't have any evidence of a connection with games and real life. They just don't like the content and want to enforce their preferences on everyone else. Shameful.

Re:I don't get it (1)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540962)

Because the video game industry doesn't donate millions to political causes, or endorse candidates, etc. It is time that the video game industry start ponying up and purchasing candidates, like the movie industry does.

Re:I don't get it (1)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541024)

They just don't like the content and want to enforce their preferences on everyone else. Shameful.

If you RTFA, you'll find that despite the headline and the protestations of the author, the group is actually just encouraging people to exercise their freedom not to buy this game. They don't appear to be trying to enforce anything.

Success (2, Insightful)

Ian Peon (232360) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540657)

A good friend of mine has been working on this game for some time. 25 to life (for the Google challenged) clearly isn't designed to appeal to parents and police officers, but more to the people who would like to rebel against them. Therefore, I think this bodes well for the success of this game.

No, I won't let my kids play it - at 3 and 5 yo, they're still working through the "Clifford the Big Red Dog" games. When they're closer to 18, I'm sure we'll discuss the VR headsets to augment the latest round of violent video games, but for now, nope.

I used to play Lazer Tag with my friends at night around our high school. It was fun and sometimes a huge adrenaline rush. It made it very clear to me that I never want to be in a firefight - I lost way too often, which in RL is defined as "more than once".

Re:Success (1)

Ian Peon (232360) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540726)

25 to Life [www.25tolife] for, I guess, the link challenged.

Re:Success (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14540983)

Link challenged indeed.
For the rest of us, it's http://www.25tolife.com/ [25tolife.com] :P

boycott, not ban. (2, Insightful)

freidog (706941) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540672)

Nice missleading headline though.
No one in the article mentions banning the game, other than the author who apprently postulates that the next logical step is banning all movies that depict violence against police, showing that he profoundly missed the difference between ban and boycott.

I'm going to be boycotting this game as well, not because I think virtual depictions of killing cops and the innocent are wrong, but because I think that like most games relying soley on offensive and gruesome content, this game will be terrible to play.

If you want to not buy the game based on 'moral' grounds, good for you. Don't take the Jack Thompson road to raving lunacy and I really can't take issue with this kind of protest; other than to say I think it defeats its own purpose. Controversy, and complaint is a substitute for the marketing budget in these kinds of games. This is a fairly small, niche (Adults only rating if I'm not mistaken), low quality, no class game; and leaving to flounder in obscurity would do more harm than a nationally publicized boycott.

Furthermore.. (0, Troll)

xenocide2 (231786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540678)

"The officers suggest a list of Healthy Titles for players to enjoy. The list includes titles such as 'Whack-A-Coon', 'Which Towelhead Is The Terrorist' (the answer is all of them) and the highly controversial 'MLK Assassination Simulator.'"

When will they realize.. (1)

egarland (120202) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540683)

..dramatizing something helps PREVENT it in the real world. Their boycott is more likely to do harm than good.

When will people wake up and pay attention to the fact that freedom of speech is a good thing. The more prevalent the bad things are in media, the more they are thought about and the logical end of that thought is that they are bad things and we shouldn't do them. These people think of the general public as thoughtless automatons who do whatever they see. Thats simply not how humans work. Video games didn't invent violence and overall, as a society we are playing them more than ever before and yet we are living with less violent crime than ever before. This isn't a fluke an it isn't "despite" violent games it is *because* of violent games.

These people need to crawl back into their zone of stupidity and shut up.

Boycott = tautology (1)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540717)

It's a boycott, so... ...the boycott amounts to not buying that which the boycotters would not have bought anyway.

M'kay,

Re:Boycott = tautology (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541218)

the boycott amounts to not buying that which the boycotters would not have bought anyway.

There's nothing wrong with being informed.br>
I wonder how many parents buy games for Joe Sixpack Jr. without knowing what they're buying? The title itself doesn't throw up many warning flags to concerned parents.

I don't think they need to worry (1)

ElVaquero (867318) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540721)

Why not boycott the game just because it's completely terrible? http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/25to life [metacritic.com] Seems like that would be more effective.

Re:I don't think they need to worry (1)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540893)

The single player sucks, but the online play is a lot of fun. I think the fact that this game is 17+ and parents boycotting the game improves the online playing experience, because it has kept all young troublemakers out of the game - this game doesn't have half the retards online that most games have.

Retarded (1)

j-turkey (187775) | more than 8 years ago | (#14540755)

I know that the posting said 'ban' and the article actually discusses a boycott, but even the NLEG's language is pretty unreasonable:

"It is absolutely unconscionable that game makers are enabling young people--or anyone--to dramatize shooting and killing as a form of entertainment while officers and innocent people are dying in real-life on our streets every day."

How is it unconscionable to dramatize this when we have critically acclaimed films which do the same thing (for example, Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs). Do we hold video games and movies to different standards? Why? Is there real data which shows that video games actually make people more violent than movies do? If that data exists, do they account for the huge decreases in violent crime in the US?

Re:Retarded (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541387)

How is it unconscionable to dramatize this when we have critically acclaimed films which do the same thing (for example, Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs). Do we hold video games and movies to different standards?

I have two answers to this:

1. Fighting a battle they can win: The common myth that most video games are for the under age crowd makes it easy for those not in the know to blunder and assume that if the parent hasn't seen the material they'll suddenly be shocked at the mere concept. In the case of the movie the parent may have taken an interest in the film and seen it. This would lead them to both a more informed choice as to letting their children watch and also make it easier to dismiss claims that are too far fetched.

2. The context of the violence: Reservoir Dogs shows crooks who kill a police officer and end up being killed themselves for it and other crimes. It's not really an attempt to glamorize or make cop killing seem acceptable. While I have not played 25 to Life I have played GTA:SA and I must say, when push comes to shove killing a police officer is sometimes easier than running from one. In a sense the game makes it seem like cop killing is sowhat exceptable where most films show it as something negative. Not too many films glamourize the killing of legitimate police officers. And certainly the cops have complained about that in the past too.

Re:Retarded (1)

j-turkey (187775) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542471)

It appears that these aren't your arguments, and you're just replying based on your understanding of the situation...so if my remarks sound argumentative, I may not be arguing with you, but the argument itself -- for discussion's sake.

1. Fighting a battle they can win: The common myth that most video games are for the under age crowd makes it easy for those not in the know to blunder and assume that if the parent hasn't seen the material they'll suddenly be shocked at the mere concept. In the case of the movie the parent may have taken an interest in the film and seen it. This would lead them to both a more informed choice as to letting their children watch and also make it easier to dismiss claims that are too far fetched.

This is still not rational. The boxes are clearly labeled. The problem is not with the packaging, labeling, or concept. It comes down to uninvolved parenting, and then overplayed shock when they learn what their children asked them to buy.

2. The context of the violence: Reservoir Dogs shows crooks who kill a police officer and end up being killed themselves for it and other crimes. It's not really an attempt to glamorize or make cop killing seem acceptable. While I have not played 25 to Life I have played GTA:SA and I must say, when push comes to shove killing a police officer is sometimes easier than running from one. In a sense the game makes it seem like cop killing is sowhat exceptable where most films show it as something negative. Not too many films glamourize the killing of legitimate police officers. And certainly the cops have complained about that in the past too.
This makes no sense...so -- it comes down to the difficulty of killing a police officer and getting away with it? The developers created a fantasy-crime world, there has to be some use of illusion and editoral flexibility here, no? I mean -- what is a fantasy-crime game when everything is realistic? Would GTA be as cool if cops tried to stop you for speeding? I still don't see how this actually matters anyway -- it has not been shown to increase violence in any meaningful way (remember, we're experiencing record low violent and nonviolent crime over a 40 year period). Further, Reservior Dogs did not consider the cop-killing a negative. In fact, there was a scene when a robber was asked by another robber how many people were killed during a botched robbery. The thief mentioned how many police officers they killed, the other character asked again "any real people?" Remember also that the cop killers were the protagonists, and most of the protagonists shot each other.

Regardless, when children play cops and robbers, are there real consequences for shooting at police officers? Do the "robbers" get arrested for assult with a deadly weapon, attempted murder of a police officer, fleeing the scene of a crime, and resisting arrest (not to mention the crime of theft)? How come nobody is up in arms that? Is it because the violence is simulated? How is violence not simulated in video games?

In any case, people are welcome to complain about anything...but I'm glad to point out that their arguments are specious. These are indeed pretty lame (and probably the best I've heard).

Not buying it. (1)

Qrlx (258924) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541146)

This sort of rhetoric is found to be dressed up in The Emperor's New Clothes in light of the "recruitment tool" America's Army.

the best publicity... (1)

joeb2001 (192296) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541173)

the best thing the police officer's group can do about this game is to ignore it and not give it free advertising. With the atrocious reviews it's been getting http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/25to life [metacritic.com] it would stand to reason that this game won't have a very long shelf life without heavy promotion.

Bad title. (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541180)

A ban and a boycott are worlds apart. No wonder people are up in arms about stuff like this when our favorite editors can't even make sure that a story isn't misrepresented in the title.

What ever happened to... (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541194)

... movies and rap music?

Haven't heard of this before (1)

kalleguld (624992) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541209)

I haven't even heard of this game before this media-stunt. Better go tell my mom I want it for my birthday

Yes... (1)

Rapter09 (866502) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541245)

...but of course, the army is aloud to peddle America's Army as a recruiting tool. Granted that all officers of the law are (in a perfect world) examples of law and order and are respected (mostly) in the community, but people die everywhere all of the time. Death is a reality in a world such as ours. That doesn't justify violence, but it doesn't exclude games from being made because they're violent. I wonder how many officers have clothing that kids died trying to make in a sweatshop? It's just selective discrmination in a country who's media has whipped and thrashed the public on into an anti-gaming frenzy.

Just because you're shooting 15 000 polygons on a screen doesn't mean you're a cop killer. I respect the police, but I bust a good number of Counter-Terrorists everyday playing CSS. I guess by that logic I'm a cop-killer AND I hate mexicans (if you could call the new T models mexicans... No offence meant to anybody of that descent.)

Heck. I don't even LIKE the concept or the incessantly annoying ads for the game. I'll never play it. It looks more or less ridiculous, but It's the principle of the thing.

Ban v. Boycott (1)

Irvu (248207) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541256)

"Ban" means proscribing the game by law so that noone could obtain it. This would be a patent and offensive violation of the constitutional right to free speech. As such it makes for a noticable headline.

"Boycott" means that people who agree with them shouldn't buy it for themselves or others. It is a) legal, b) more likely, c) unsurprising, and d) less likely to generate pagehits.

Disconnect (1)

Bastian (66383) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541353)

It is baffling that adults are so self-righteous about artificial violence in video games while in real life they are doing a damned good job of teaching their children that violence [goarmy.com] is a great way [wikipedia.org] to solve [cia.gov] your problems. [cia.gov]

I'm so out of it... (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541554)

... here I was thinking a police organization was against a certain length of sentence...

Jaysyn

God bless America! (1)

danath333 (932231) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541736)

Games are a form of free speech dammit, and you should be able to make whatever kind of game you want.

Paging Jack Thompson: Officer Jack Thompson (1)

darkhadden (941003) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541748)

Jack hurriedly finishes up at the Globo-Christian donut shop, his fourth visit of the day, and runs out to his squad car. Another 1776 in progress, the unlawful playing or purchase of a videogame protected by the first ammendment. When will these DAMN hippy liberals learn there will BE no free speech, NO entertainment that isn't some Brokeback Veggietales galavanting on Noah's ship alone with all the other male versions of animals.

Same shit, different day. Where was this 'Officer's Union' on GTA, what about State of Emergency, or that horrible GTA knock off? What about 'Streets of Rage', you could choose to join the bad guy at the end! Oh horror of horrors! These political action groups are simply put: retarded. It's stemming from rightist agendas. By their own rote we have freewill, can be please play what we will??? Why don't they spend less time fishing news for something to protest and get their ass on the streets and bust some crackheads??

The real reason to not buy it.... (1)

corrosive_nf (744601) | more than 8 years ago | (#14541827)

is because it fucking sucks ass. One of the worst games to come out in the last 5 years. Its like max payne without the fun.

Re:The real reason to not buy it.... (1)

the roAm (827323) | more than 8 years ago | (#14543030)

way to quote Gamespot [gamespot.com] word-for-word -- have you even played the game? single player is fun yet short...the story is crap...multiplayer, however, is always nice does anyone have any original ideas anymore? i'm beginning to think i'm the only one. if its not gamers who just sqwak tripe thats been told tho them, its the parents, cops, politicians, etcetera blaming crap games for some guy killing some dude when he's 15 he's hated since he was 10

How bout we just ban it for being a crappy game. (1)

darkmayo (251580) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542008)

Thought I would give it a shot this weekend. Was thinking it was going to be fairly open ended where you can choose between being the law or breaking it. That was pretty much too much to hope for, each time one of these urban crime games come out I hope the people making it take more from GTA:SA then just gangstas bustin caps instead of gameplay and other elements that make the GTA series so good. But of course in 25 to lifes case its just a crappy game with thugs.

  One day we might see some developers wake up and instead of copying the theme of a game, they go for the actual gameplay elements. Otherwise we are going to keep getting shitty game after shitty game that tries to cash in on the popularity of GTA:SA

Personally I want to see a GOOD game in the GTA style where you take the role of the police officer (True Crime doesnt count because its a piece of crap)

Who plays these game? (1)

lt.com.riker (946759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14542833)

I bet the kids that are out on the streets everyday in their gangs, stealing and dealing drugs, aren't going home at night and getting their kicks by playing these games. The people who play these games are the ones with time on their hands and money in their pockets. Those copkilling gangs are out doing crap, not sitting on their couches playing the newest game.

I would like to see the stats on how many people (say 13-25) who play violent video games actually try to recreate the scenarios IRL.

Yeah, right. (1)

LittleBigLui (304739) | more than 8 years ago | (#14543476)

It is absolutely unconscionable that restaurants are enabling young people--or anyone--to dramatize eating as a form of entertainment while poor and innocent people are starving in real-life in african villages every day. We're encouraging parents, caregivers and everyone who is concerned about both the third and first world to ensure this concept of "cuisine" or "tasty food, yum yum" never makes it into the homes, mouths or stomachs of impressionable young people.

Ban the Sims!!! (1)

pnice (753704) | more than 8 years ago | (#14543500)

My parents are joining in with the local PTA to ban The Sims and The Sims 2. Allowing children to kill their parents in the pool, starve them to death, etc, is just way beyond what we have come to expect from a decent game maker.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?