Posts Tagged ‘Grand Theft Auto’

Well lo and behold, this new moral panic on the nonexistent link between violent games, and the Navy Yard shooting hasn’t fucking ended. It got 500 times worst, folks. Wayne Lapoopiere has reared his ugly fuckin’ head again!!!! This time blaming the shooting on the yet to be released GTA V.

“The evidence against Grand Theft Auto is not to be disputed. Clearly, excitement over the imminent release of this game led Mr. Alexis to commit celebratory murders… Either that, or [Alexis] was going on a ‘practice run’ in anticipation of playing this degraded piece of garbage.”

Obviously, Lapoopiere has had his head up his ass all of  his life because it’s plain to see that Mental illness caused this shooting. I quote

Alexis had been suffering a host of serious mental problems, including paranoia and a sleep disorder, and had been hearing voices in his head, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the criminal investigation was still going on.”

How could anyone call games “degraded pieces of garbage?” I have no clue. It disgust me. Games =/= Garbage! It’s fucking assholic! Wayne Lapoopiere is no better than the rest of the anti-gamer fucktards out  there.

“at anything other than Grand Theft Auto V for this tragedy is morally irresponsible,”

You mean, that blaming GTA 5, a game that couldn’t have caused the massacre is NOT morally irresponsible? Stop smoking Crack Lapoopiere! It’s just an agenda by these deranged gun nuts who helped to create the Sandy Hook Shooter to cover up  their role in the shooting. Lapoopiere should be held accountable, not the NOT YET RELEASED GTA 5! The next quote is the worst of the bunch…

“It’s high time Congress and our president backed sensible video game regulation. Anybody that wants to purchase a copy of Grand Theft Auto V must undergo a background check, a psychological evaluation, and a five-day waiting period. Most importantly, all copies of the game must be kept under lock and key when not in use.”

What the Fuck?! We need background checks, psychological examinations for people buying violent games now! Since when has anyone actually found ACTUAL proof that Alexis even played them? If you take all the BS the media spreads that says ALL the shooters in mass shootings were violent game addicts as the truth (it’s not), you still get a mere 0.00% of all gamers have had any violent crimes associated with  them. There are 211,000,000 gamers world wide this year alone, and only 2 has killed people according to the media.  So all copies need to be kept in lock and key? Even OUR OWN BOUGHT COPIES? WTF! Someone needs to throw Lapoopiere in the fucking insane asylum for talking through his ass…. Do we really have idiots like this who would do what he wants in our administration? I say we do!! It’s fucking idiotic!!! NONE of those 211,000,000 need to get background checks and psych evaluations!! NONE!!! JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP WAYNE LAPOOPIERE!

In other news, the site that posted this garbage article kept on giving me this crap every time I tried to copy quotes from it, showing up in  the bottom of the pasted text every single time!!!. Unwanted advertiser assholes they are!! sigh…

Read more: <article URL>”

Duke Nukem Forever

Image via Wikipedia

Today, I spent 4-5 hours doing some work with a spreadsheet, looking at how prevalent things the media always says about violent games, are in reality.  To aid me in this, I used the list of all 605 FPS games ever released that I got from wikipedia. I used this in a previous article into a trend following big video game controversies that I blogged about recently.  This list over the last year has been invaluable for me in helping debunk claims about violent games that certain pro-censorship group and media outlets seem to put out.

An article on RockPaperShotgun that I dug up from last year is the source of the first claim I will use scientific evidence to debunk. Unlike the media lies that keep popping up, that I did studies on to see how much they were being spread, these claims have games that the claims actually make sense for, but the claims say that MOST or Many Games  fit the description of the claim, but in fact the truth is far different, in most of these claims. So these aren’t lies at all, just over generalizations, really.

To help me to see how common these claims are in games I used the below spreadsheet to help me. It was basically a copy and paste job from the Wikipedia article. I took each claim and made a column for it. Then I made 3 rows, 1 for how many games fit the claim, how many Popular games did out of all 81 FPS games that I think are considered “Popular”, and how many games out of all 605 were popular games that fit the claim.  The total number of games the wikipedia article lists is 605, from 1985 to 2011. Yes that’s right, FPS games were actually created as really badly done maze games back in the late 80’s. All these games have similar enough gameplay or movement to make them FPS games, and there are 28 before Wolfenstein 3-d.  Looking at the Wikipedia article you can see that there are literally 100’s of FPS games that the attackers of such games never even know about, like “In Pursuit of Greed”, “Cybermage”, “Kens Laybrinth”, “Nitemare 3d”, “corridor 7”, “Blake Stone”, and 200+ more I won’t mention. All they see are either video clips of controversial games or descriptions. I on the other hand have played 100 of these games myself and have seen descriptions of hundreds more  of them in the Media (from PC Gamer, to Video Gaming sites, to blogs, etc). I have literally been playing FPS games since 1992. I’ve played 100% of the popular ones in the 90’s and many of the popular and non popular ones in the 2000’s.  Call me biased, all you want, when you read this article. I don’t care. Fact is, I am an Infinitely better source of what games have what features on them than some hack journalist trying (or succeeding) to make a million bucks on sensationalist claims to scare parents into talking to their representative. This leads to the Rep’s actually creating bills to censor violent games.

But… Let’s go into it shall we?

Claim 1 : Many games give you “bonus points” for headshots

(source – Parenting group the article on rockpapershotgun into the funding of brain scan studies)

This really overexagerated claim is the first I will debunk. It’s true, there are a few FPS games, 10 or so that reward headshots. Now 10 might seem like a lot. But there are over 600 FPS games ever released, so the % of quite low, really. In fact it’s only 1.16%! Tiny. It’s a bit bigger (8.64%) for popular games only, and those popular games only make up 1.16% of all 605 FPS games ever released! Games that reward FPS games include all Unreal Tournament games and Modern Warfare games plus Battlefield : Bad Company. All are popular, unfortunately. But.. Still. 10 out of 605 is a bit much for “many” isn’t it….

Claim 2:  Many games allow the player to be a “gangster”

Source :

This article makes several inflammatory claims against purveyors of thy video game violence (Gaming Companies), including how anyone who is saying they don’t cause “violence” is being paid by the game companies, and even cites the “Doom will become reality Hoax I debunked in the first post in this blog. The claim that Many games are Gangster games, is based on paranoia over GTA, and only that, because besides the 5 GTA games (which for completions sake, I put in the spreadsheet, even though they aren’t FPS games), there are very few other popular “Gangsta” FPS/Third Person Shooter games out there. Life of crime, true crime, that is like 10 tops. So at worst it’s 15 of 605, which is still FAR less than 10%! In FPS games + GTA only the % I got was 0.83% of all 605 games were “Gangsta games”.  That’s LESS  than 1%! Popular games were 7.41% out of all FPS games+GTA games that were popular. That’s a bit bigger, but far from overwelming. Those Popular “Gangsta games” make up only 0.99% of all 605 FPS games+GTA games ever released! So much for “overwelming” proof that “Gangsta” games are making kids want to join gangs based on a mere 5 out of 605!

Claim 3: Many games reward “Deviant Behavior”

Source : A post  that was linked in one of my studies into the natures of comments on News Articles attacking violent games

One of the quotes I highlighted in my studies (with a funny cartoon drawing) basically said that most games reward “deviant behavior”. For the purposes of this study I assume “Deviant” = “Law Breaking” (Aka, Stealing, Murdering in Cold Blood, etc).  The thing is that there are more games in all 9 or so Video game genres that Punish “Deviant” Behavior than Actually reward it. I’m referring to crime systems in RPG’s, of course, like the crime system in Morrowind, Or Oblivion, for instance. For those who are unawares, Both games allow players to steal and kill… However there are “town guards” walking around the whole fantasy universe and if any of the characters in the game (any of them) see you doing the crime the guards will come after you and arrest you. Then you can 1) Pay gold – and get stolen items taken from you : or 2) Resist arrest (and get attacked by the  guards who are much tougher than you no matter how good you are) or 3:) Go to jail and lose a lot stat points making  you weaker.  A lot of article writers take examples of games that don’t reward or punish “Deviant” behavior and use it as “proof” that those games reward “Deviant” Behavior, example : Some article said that GTA rewarded running over people, and killing  them right and left. In fact the game actually punishes stuff like this. Believe it or not, GTA DOES have a crime system similar to Oblivion. Commit Murder, and you get the cops come after you. It’s not as bad as oblivion, but you ARE being punished for committing crimes, despite what the media always says “GTA rewards mindless killing”… Blah-Blah-Blah-Blah-BLAHHHHHHH! Another thing is that both GTA and Morrowind/Oblivion are sandbox games. All of  the gameplay, any of it really, is OPTIONAL. Nothing is required. Killing pedestrians is something you never are FORCED to do. Same thing with running over old ladies. It’s something that isn’t required either. It isn’t even rewarded, despite what the media says.  It’s punished.  Morrowind and oblivion are the same way. No crime is encouraged, or required to progress in any story in the game, unless the player CHOOSES to do so.The problem is that 99% of GTA fans CHOOSE to do this stuff. Because honestly, the game’s story sucks.  THAT’s the problem.

I played Vice City. Everything was FINE BUT the story. The story sucked so bad. The missions, were frustrating, annoying and aggravating. I gave up after the “save lance vance” crapola quest where he died over and over again. The only replay value was running over old ladies. That’s it.  Did you know you can also be an ambulance driver, taxicab driver, airplane and boat pilot, and play real golf in GTA. Of course not. The media completely refuses to mention the things in the game that are ACTUALLY redeeming, or non-violent. SHYAH!

Like GTA, in morrowind or oblivion there are quests that REQUIRE you to commit crimes. But their all optional. The thing is that Elder Scrolls games like Oblivion and Morrowind aren’t much less “crime infested” than GTA. Yet GTA gets all the controversy for basically being a thug, and prostitutes. Elder scrolls games controversy has lead to 1) Someone complaining about topless mods for Oblivion, and 2) Some parody group ripping Skyrim for Gay Marriage, with fake but hellarious Claims. GTA’s controversy amounted to 1) Lawsuits, 2) Bans, 3) Constant anti-gaming propaganda directed at Rockstar, Nonsense claims being spread about these games, and 4) Controversy about 1 THIRD PARTY SEX MOD that happened to use SEX SCENES REMOVED by rockstar.

Don’t mistake my aim here. I HATE GTA games. But not for their violence. For their crappy gameplay, that locks you in one area until you finish X amount of shitty aggravating missions. NO exploration till you do the missions. Bah. I had almost no problems with the violence or sex because the game to me is a big parody. I could see through that. I didn’t take it seriously. Vice City, that’s the parody name for Miami. Miami Vice. Get it. Gotham city = New York City. But I keep seeing the media make up bogus claims about this serious endlessly. Even Doom (even after Columbine) Didn’t get the frequency of complaints GTA has gotten over a 5+ year time, that were bogus.

In the study I found 20 games (out of 605!) that reward “Deviant” behavior. This is mostly Blood, Blood 2, Shadow Warrior, etc. This might seem big but in reality it’s a mere 3.31% of all 605 games!  Out of 81 of the popular FPS games only 4.9% actually rewarded “Deviant” Behavior. A bit bigger but still LESS THAN 10%!

Claim 4 :  Many games have x-rated content in them

Source : An Article attacking Duke Nukem Forever

Duke3d brought x-rated material into the FPS universe. However the total amount of FPS games that actually have such x-rated “Sexist” material is EXTREMELY low. Duke3d is the only popular game to even feature this material among FPS games! No other Popular FPS games even have “naughty” content like this in them. DNF was anything but popular, the entire gaming community was spending their time attacking the “sexist” content in the game without actually playing it (even though it sucked, not because of the x-rated material). Shadow Warrior is all forgotten (that’s why It’s printed in my previous article.) That’s it. No other Popular FPS games have this damned “X-rated PORN!” in them… At all. Period…. Serious… Anyone using DNF as an “Example” of how sexist FPS games are in general is an IDIOT. The % of all 605 games that have this “Content” in them is 0.99%! Yes… Les than 1%. Serious. % of Popular FPS games featuring dirty material is slightly higher, at 6.17%. However these 6.17% of the 81 popular FPS games are only 0.89% of all 605 FPS games ever released.

Claim 5 : Many  games feature Decapitation

Source : The Amicus Brief of the group who using fake evidence in the said Amicus Brief for EMA Vs Brown

Since the above group started running their mouth over, and over, and over, and over again, about how FPS games with Decapitation in them are the norm, the claim has been spread all around the internet. The truth is very few FPS games even feature decapitation, at all. Many FPS games have blood and gore (62.96% of all popular FPS), most of the popular ones lack decapitation. Only 12.35% of all 81 popular FPS games even have Decapitation in them. Higher than the previous claims but still VERY small. Not even a third. Or even a 5th. Total FPS games that have decapitation is only 5.12%!  And even more shocking, the 12.35% of popular FPS games that have decapitation only make up 2.01% of all 605 FPS games ever made.

Claim 6 : Most FPS games are “Realistic”

Source : Same comment poster as Claim 3

The commenter who mentioned that games that reward “Deviant” Behavior, also said that most were “realistic”. Visually graphic maybe, but people think that just because FPS games are “Realistic”  LOOKING they are total realism simulators, with an 100% analogue to real life Military Combat. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Visual graphics have not been increased over the years at the same rate as combat realism, what people think when they read these claims. The truth is that combat realism is found only in 1 RARE kind of FPS games, “EXTREME” Tactical shooters. These games are NOT uber violent. They are Simulators of real life combat. And most aren’t even that popular because they are Insanely difficult. They should be. 1 hit kills you. No Health. Things like “marine Doom”.  Most Tactical shooters are at most 75% realistic. They do bullet damage fine, and health not around every corner, but things like mimicking real weapons, that almost always fail, with few exceptions. Number 1, in these games, gunshot sounds are quiet. Real gunshots are DEAFINGLY loud.  Number 2, real guns jam, break, and need to be repaired regularly. NO games do this accurately. Because that’s stuff that the military teaches. Number 3, as a gun degrades it fires worse. Accuracy and similar characteristics go down. No game mimics these 100% accurately. Some might have weapon degradation. Number 4. Armor in most FPS games, even some tactical shooters is 100% resistant to bullets. or Very resistant. In real life armor isn’t nearly that effective. There are armor piercing rounds that  go right through armor.  Number 5. In Realistic scenarios like Simulations, Getting shot anywhere can be deadly, not just the head and chest. Shot in the leg. You can’t walk. Shot in the knee or elbow, or fingers, you  might be in so much pain that you cannot even move. Shot in the neck, risk of paralysis. Very few, if no games simulate this. Some games TRY to emulate real combat but most fail. The total of these games that come close in some cases in certain areas (like weapon physics, STALKER is a great example, or damage to the player (Far Cry)) are a small % of the total 605 FPS games ever made. MOST Fps games realism level is ridiculously low. For the first 10+ years of FPS games getting shot would just do minor damage most of the time. Not till Far cry come out did this change. Guns had no recoil in most old FPS games. Total % of TRUE “Semi-Realistic” games is 6.61% of all 605 FPS games ever made. But very few of these are even popular. Only 4.94% of all 81 popular FPS games are like this. These “Popular Semi-Realistic FPS games” are only 0.66% of all 605 FPS games ever made!

Claim 7 : Most FPS games are “War Themed” games (think COD) that make gamers want to join the Military.

Source : A commenter in one article surveyed in my studies into comments saying this

This claim was repeated many times in the comments I studied. Basically it said most Violent games are “Realistic” War games that are being used as recruitment tools by the Real Military. Only 1 FPS Game counts as this however, in reality that is. That’s American Army. No other FPS game is a recruitment tool, period. Many games use war as a thematic backdrop. However MANY of these simply lack proper realism. COD for instance has “points”, “Regenerating Health” while taking cover. Hardly realistic designs for the gameplay, in a true realism sense. So the claim that these games are “realistic” is coming from the visuals only. Gameplay wise Realism is only seen in a tiny sub % of all these games. Mostly Ghost Recon.  Out of all 605 FPS games, 17.52% are “war” themed. That’s less than a 5’th! Out of 81 Popular FPS games, 19.75% are war themed. That’s still less than a 5’th, barely. These “popular war themed FPS games” only make up 2.64% of all 605 FPS games ever made. Less than 3%!

Claim 8 : Most FPS games Glorify Terrorism

Source : Some news article targetting Counterstrike after Virginia Tech

This claim comes from an article attacking Counterstrike and any other games that allow the player play as a Terrorist, Overexagerating most FPS games like they are Terrorist training Simulators. The truth is that this is the least prominant type of FPS game of all the claims besides the last. There are literally only 4 FPS games ever made that fit  this description (0.66%!) out of the 605 FPS games ever made. Out of the 81 Popular FPS games only 3 of these 4 count as “Terrorism” Simulators (3.70%!). These “Popular Terrorism Simulators” only make up 0.5% of all 605 FPS games ever made! So any time you here this claim (not that It will be said much I think from now), Know that it is a pure, unfiltered, polished, Turd of a Bullshit claim!

Claim 9 : Most FPS games are Ultra-Violent

Source : MANY, Many articles saying this in many ways, basically all saying most FPS games are uber violentbased on descriptions of one game (good example is all the articles describing games like Postal 2 to attack the Justices who voted against CA in EMA vs Brown)

Ok… This isn’t so much a claim but a pattern among articles “damning” Violent video games.  These articles use examples from 1 or 2 violent games that are what I call “Uber Violent” games as proof that “most games” are like them. Uber violent games are a rare thing. What’s the definition of “Uber violent games”? Games that are so violent that most people would find them tastlessly violent.  Out of all 605 FPS games ever made, only 4.46% are “Uber Violent” like this. Only 14.81% of all 81 Popular FPS games could be considered Uber Violent. These “Popular Uber Violent” Fps games only make 1.98% of all FPS games ever released! (605)

Claim 10 :  There are games with “Decapitation” of “Prostitutes”, “Pushing victims into big running saws”, and “Sodomizingvictims with Broomsticks”

Source : Same group who filed the amicus brief above.

Ok…… The claim is that there are Violent games that have “Decapitation of prostitutes” and “sodomizing victims with broomsticks”. The former claim is a meticulous misinterpretation of the GTA games that is absolutely false. Yes. There are Prostitutes in these games and NON-graphic (aka not shown) Sex scenes in cars. And you can run them over after. But there is no way you can decapitate them…..  Proof is this forum….. I quote:

“It’s pretty bad, considering the game he describes does not actually exist. Could be it’s Postal 2 (doubtful), but the game doesn’t really give you much of a context for you to describe it in that sort of detail. They’re just trying to make it sound like the kid played GTA IV, but you can’t actually decapitate prostitutes in the game, so that’s bogus. ”

Ok… So It’s not any GTA games…. Name any other game with prostitutes… Hmm… DNF (came out after the claim was made = doesn’t count), Duke3d…….. No other FPS games or violent games feature prostitutes, at least decapitateable ones…. So guess what…. This is one of the 2 claims that IS an outright lie… Basically NO game allows you to decapitate prostitutes! Ok… So that’s bad enough. But what about the saws claim? Turns out  there is games that have this feature. JUST 2 of them! Manhunt 1 and 2. No others….  Those are popular games sure, and sick ones too….. But they only make up 0.33% percent of all 605 FPS games ever made! But since manhunt aren’t FPS games…… That’s actually a much LOWER % of all types of violent games because there are FAR more than 605 total FPS/Third Person Shooter/RPG/Survival Horror/etc genre games ever made…. So EVEN though 2 popular games that ARENT FPS games have this feature, they are the ONLY ones….. Now… What about the “Sodomize victims with Broomsticks” claim? SURPRISE! NO GAME FEATURES THIS AS WELL! Doing a Google Search on this claim lead to 3 things. 1) The Original Claim… 2) My Blog Debunking the Claim and 3) Gamers saying it’s not true and making fun of it…. NO other proof that a game with  this feature even exists….

So out of these  three claims claimed up by the pro family Group:  2 are complete Fabrications, and 1 is only seen in 2 games. Wow…. Sheesh….  Since 99% of these claims aren’t lies but gross overexagerations of games, I can’t say that the media saying them is doing it on purpose, or are spreading “lies”. However, it’s really bad… Because People today believe everything they hear…. My research seemed to show the real truth in the matter….

I am continuing my study into the nature of comments attacking violent games on articles in newspaper sites online. By definition the comments must fit these categories to be considered ‘attacking violent games’…

A) Spread lies about violent games

A2) Making up new lies about violent games .

B) Call for games to be banned outright

C) Call for games to be restricted to adults

D) Enforce negative gamer stereotypes

D2) Shows dislike, hate, or a grudge towards gamers.

E) A Bias towards gaming, such that the person commenting thinks games don’t deserve 1st amendment

protection,  the industry is marketing “trash” to my kids, etc.

F) Not sure what violence effects on kids are a restriction might be in order…

G) Attacking the ESRB due to some flawed thing like the FTC study or the fact ‘my 9 year old’ could get bulletstorm.

H) Wants violent game manufacturers sued or games boycotted.

The previous 5 parts of this study (you can view the condensed version on my other blog here), found that out of 44 comments, 59% were spreading false claims (media lies) about violent games, such as the claim that “studies prove violent games make kids violent”, “these violent games break down the inhibition to kill”, “kids train on these games”. Some in this category said crap that was stereotypical of violent games, using uber violent examples of violent games to make it look like all are ‘uber violent’, when they are not, aka “These games allow you to decapitate people, and torture”, etc. 34% had a clear bias against the gaming industry (“their marketing this trash to the kids”), the games themselves (calling them “trash”, “junk”,etc), or or the gaming companies (“do these people have no conscience?”). Others in this category said “why should these games exist”, “I wish people would take the moral high road and not play these games so the kids won’t be effected”, etc.

In this part of the study I have 3 new articles I found (not ones that a recent though) all with some moronic comments in them. Article 1 is here

Comment data:

1 Comment of type E) Bias towards games, saying the country shouldn’t have violent entertainment, puts games in quotes to attack them like many journalists do, like they aren’t games but murder simulators, implying gamers have no intelligence.

1 Comment of type E) Bias towards the gaming industry, “bloody corporations should not have 1st amendment  rights”.

1 Comment of type E) Bias towards games – “1St amendment doesn’t give us the right to be indecent”…. Indecent… like anything that offends you. People should not have the right to complain about being offended. It’s stupid

1  Comment of type A) Spreading lies about games – Military uses violent games to break down the inhibition to kill, calls the ads of violent games in question in the article “Violent Ads”. The ads themselves don’t show violence. More Bs.

Next article (I know it’s a gaming mag, but the comments do fit some of these descriptions). Article is Here

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games – Violent games ‘desensitize’ kids.

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games – The Ads target kids.

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games – says ‘the carnage’ caused by violent games is equal to the the cancer causing problems in cigarettes.. Sigh… I hear this nonsense all the time….Also says that violent games make players more prone to violence, and spews a rediculas assessment on the future of gaming…

Also of type E) Bias towards games, saying… Well Just read the entire quote.

“Remember when the cigarette companies kept saying that no one had “proven” that cigarettes CAUSE cancer? So we continued to let the ads run where all the kids could see them. Lots of people died. Has it yet been scientifically proven that cigarettes cause cancer? Do you believe they do anyway?

Here’s the future of gaming: TVs as big as your entire living room wall. Life size enemies. Realistic wireless game guns with a loud bang and a huge kick. Maybe actual gun makers will make a wireless game clip that you can pop in the real gun where the bullet clip goes. Maybe someone will make an accessory that throws fake blood all over you when you shoot a game enemy at close range.

That’s OK, because no one has scientifically proven that violent games make the players more prone to violence. Until they do, let the carnage continue! ”

1 Comment of type E) Bias towards games – Saying “others are using pseudo facts to support their bias torwards games in the guise of anti-censorship”.

Next article Here:

This article is filled with lies and bs. Here we go.

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about games – generalizing games as games where you “take a club to a pedestrian”. Hello. Only GTA has that feature. 5 out of 500. It’s ridicules.

1 comment of type A2) Making up new lies about violent games – Claims violent games as training tools to recruit military at young age, says violent games ‘permanently burn memories’ into the minds of children, blah-blah blah… Common. Back up your crap. You can’t therefore it’s a lie.

1 Comment of type A2) Making up new lies about violent games – Claims violent games and action movies have too much things happening at once, overloading the brain, causing ‘anti-social behavior’ in kids. WTF?

1 Comment of type E) Bias towards games – First claims studies should make kids play games longer, to see ‘how senseless they become’

Also of type D2) – Shows a dislike, hate, or grudge, towards gamers. calls gamers bullies and says that parents should be put in jail,

Also of type A2) Mentions a fictitious link between violent games and real life military combat. More BS.

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games – Violent games break down the inhibition to kill. BS. Also advertize Grossman AGAIN!

1 Comment of type A) Spreads lies about violent games and Gamers… Says we are violent and violent games cause this… Also of type D2) Shows a dislike, hate, or grudge towards gamers.  I quote:

“And it games cause violence, so be it. If a gamer tries to be violent with you, remember this one rule of thumb, so to speak. Since gamers spend a lot of time inside playing games, they are physically weak. As long as you can avoid their powerful, unnaturally strong thumbs, you should be able to subdue them.”

I think this cartoon image describes this guy perfectly.

Pitiful. Who in the hell actually thinks that “violent gamers” should be “subdued”. Someone who hates gamers who think gamers cause school shootings, like that idiot who threatened to kill me on This goes beyond a mere perpetrating anti-gamer stereotypes and goes to wanting them physically hurt. Is this a trend? First we’re bullies, and now we need to be “Subdued”. Moronic.

1 Comment of type D2) Shows dislike, hate, or grudge towards gamers – says “people who play these violent games are people I don’t want to be around anyway.”

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games, generalizes the clip on the Jon Stewart’s Tonight show segment showing a girl being ripped in half as what most games are like, than mentions games have “passive and casual avatar rape and murder” in them. 2 Words : Custer’s Revenge. 1989! Stop making this damn fake claim of rape simulators up… It’s idiotic. These people read biased articles that keep putting that lie in the game and everyone believes this  tripe. It’s ridiculous.

Ok this next comment has nothing to do with violent game controversy but it’s BS, especially when Metal is mentioned:

“and don’t forget comic books and heavy metal music cuz they’ll make kids grow up to be homosexual murderers too”

I don’t know if this is a joke, but I doubt It. Homosexual murderers is something only a Fred Phelps lover would come up with…. These kind of people have been trying to say that metal is linked with a global satanic cult that ‘molest’s children, for years, along with “god hates fags”, “all masturbators are going to hell”, and the biased claim that all masturbators are child molesters and rapists.

Back to the offending comments:

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games – College students are all ‘desensitized to violent games’, and more bs..

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games. Says violent games are a great training ground for the ‘forces of evil. More nonsense about violent games being used to train killers. Sigh..

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games – Says ‘the weight of evidence’ proves violent games cause real violence… More BS.

1 Comment of type A) Spreads lies about violent games – says ‘ultra realistic’ battlefield simulators like COD, Medal of honor are ‘training’ or kids to kill…. seriously. A game with regenerating health, low bullet damage and no recoil is ‘training’… BS…

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about games – Says a famous psychologist who has been researching ‘media violence’ for a long time proves that violent games have a ‘long term effect on people’ without blatantly saying that they make us violent , or desensitize us to violence, break down our inhibition to kill, or any of the nonsense spread above…. Statements like this that are very open to interpretation, even though they are false, are equally dangerous as the ones that make nonsense claims like the three I mentioned after it.

1 Comment of type A) Spreading lies about violent games, says their an outlet for young children. When the industry markets violent games to 18-35 year olds.

1 Comment of type A2) Making up new lies about violent games – Claims just because the commentator drove around for days and because of the length, he was forced to automatically do things without knowing he did them, the ‘kids that play games 18,20,24 hours a day will go into kill mode!’ Is this another Grossman worshipper unknowingly or knowingly advertising his best seller?

1 Comment of  type A) Spreading lies about violent games – Says they desensitize, reduce attention spans, and make people obese. The last is the only one I would even consider.. The rest sounds like bunk.

1 Comment of type E) Bias towards games – says they are garbage.

Out of all the comments I’ve surveyed in previous parts and this part (72 in total), 41 spread lies about violent games. That is 57%. Out all of the 72 comments, 22 are clearly biased towards games, that is 31%. Out of all the newest of these 72 comments, (the ones surveyed in this part), there were no ones calling for violent games to banned outright, or restricted to adults, or their makers sued. The % have dropped due to this, 7% for bans or lawsuits, 4% for restricting to adults.

But… Looking at the sheer amount of people supporting violent game bans on facebook groups, you can see the want is actually higher. I will combine those numbers with these comments later…

The real problem in these articles, especially in the last one, are lies about violent games, especially ones that seem to be completely made up by the commenter.  There were 3 of these. The % of that is tiny, (4%) but is still notable that this is happening. The even bigger issue, despite the small lack of comments that do this (3 out of 77 – 4%), is comments that have a clear hate or dislike towards gamers themselves, not just enforcing negative stereotypes. I see radical censors all the time targeting gamers calling them subhuman, sociopath’s, “gamer shitheads”, the list goes on. Now by radical censors I do not mean all the people who are attacking violent games, just the most extreme of these. The list of people I can think of off the top of my head that this includes are limited to 5 people, 2 outside the US. It’s not a big group but they make it clear that they dislike or hate gamers on a regular basis.

Still I think the biggest issue I can see is the spreading of lies and making up new ones…. It is almost 60% and is around 65% combined… These things are spread many times by people I think are outright fans of the initial lie spreaders, the psychologist hacks  on TV after columbine.  In many of these lies, the one that says “the military uses games to break down the inhibition to kill”, is spread, at a decent pace, 6 out of 22 lie comments surveyed, that’s 27% of the lies! So 1 third of the lies spread are about breaking the inhibition to kill. Another 4 Mention the vague statement “games are training killers” or allude to that statement… While not as bad as the break the inhibition to kill nonsense, it’s still a lie and a big one. I debunked the 5 biggest lies, including this one in this article.

Not till the last article Did I see a  dislike towards gamers, so that’s a good thing. But on the last 2, new lies were being made up by the commenters and spread around. I am starting to wonder if some anti-gaming radicals are posting comments because a lot of  these new lies sound like something a radical would spread around to cause a panic. They hide behind the anonymous protection of the internet and no one knows who they are. That anonymous protection, the newspaper websites/forums/etc, are constantly protecting idiots online by not giving out their IP, especially if they are trolls. I think some anti-gamers abuse this privilege by starting secret ‘evidence gathering campaigns’ that involve brutally insulting gamers to see their responses to see how ‘violent’ these responses are to use in their next press release. I can’t prove it, but the work of the  denverpost troll who had a email account, combined with his last post “I have all the evidence I need to prove gamers are violent”, seems to suggest this is going on in isolated patches of the internet.

But that’s for another editorial. This study is far from complete and will not stop till I’m satisfied I’ve surveyed enough comments to show a trend. Stay tuned…

ESRB "Mature 17+" rating symbol, dis...

Image via Wikipedia

So, on my old blog I spent 2-3 hours researching for an upcoming article debunking 10 violent game myths. I posted this article on a social bookmarking site (digg), and tons of trolls came out saying crap like “badly written article, Downvote!” and one even visited a link to the pro-family group I called nutjobs for making up a claim that violent games allow kids to ‘sodomize victims with broomsticks’.  Something that I was pretty sure no game had in it…. The trolls then visited the groups site and I had to take the post down and the whole blog, to prevent libel.

But… the actual post that I linked on the site was debunking violent game myths. I am going back to recreate the post and debunk 5 violent game myths… With links to debunk them if possible… Here goes….

I will try to say why I think the lie is being spread, and then disprove it…. Below the paragraph about each lie I will write a section called “Data on Lie”, which will give rough estimates (in %) of how severe the lie is (how drastic the claim is compared to the truth), Popularity (how much it’s being said in the media since it’s conception), recent popularity (how popular it is in the media now), and respread (how much people have spread the lie in comments, etc, intentionally or not)

5: Violent games have controllable Rape scenes in them (really going strong now)

So the following article linked in this debunking of mine is spreading this lie that has been used dozens of times on anti-gaming articles bashing the SCOTUS EMA vs Brown decision. The lie is that there are violent games that have virtual rape in them where the player rapes a defenseless woman character in the game…. You have the Bulletstorm controversy saying that the game could cause real life sexual violence, then a biased claim by the psychologist in the article that violent games have caused real life rapes to occur, without any citing of any real cases… And many, many other articles calling violent games ‘rape simulators’…. Where did this come from?

You get the morons complaining about violent games going to the next level by saying violent games have rape in them to increase the moral panic, that’s what…. And the truth is, is that there hasn’t been a controllable rape scene in a violent game since “Custer’s Revenge” in 1989!, an adult game not even sold in normal game stores, then!

I hear the claim constantly from various people… Including this Connecticut anti-gaming AG  complaining about the Cal law being held unconstitutional by the courts before it got to SCOTUS.. I have heard it at least twice in articles bashing SCOTUS, and in many comments of articles I have surveyed in my study looking for anti-gaming comments to see what their severity is.

Data on lie:

Severity 100%

Popularity 55%

Recent Popularity 75%

Respread 30%

4: Violent games are marketed to kids

This myth is less drastic than the first one, but is still constantly spread around. The truth is this one has been used in many different ways, all claiming violent games are marketed to kids for different reasons. There isn’t one common reason why this is true… But My article on this (here) basically says that the ESRB ratings are often misconstrued as GOVT enforced by people who do the same thing with MPAA ratings.. They are both voluntary ratings and if a store doesn’t enforce them they don’t get in Legal trouble, unlike what the common belief is.  So when you get a biased study like the PTC ‘secret shopper survey’ that says stores sell M rated games to kids 80% of the time, you get people thinking that the industry is marketing games to kids.

The truth is that a recent FTC study says ESRB ratings are even better than MPAA ratings and enforcement in stores… but that doesn’t really disprove the myth…. What does, however is the target demographic of the industry is 18-35 year olds, according to this page. I have heard this on many articles in gaming sites, so I trust it….  If it were 5-9 year olds like all the anti-gamers keep saying then I wouldn’t even try to debunk this… But I have never heard any kind of evidence to support the biased claim that violent games are marketed to kids that isn’t something ridiculous like “violent game ads in our subway”, or “kids in a game store that sells violent  games that could be seen by a kid”, or recently someone on a forum said this great claim “Look at all the Lego games, proof violent games are marketed to kids” after saying that since there were violent game ads ‘everywhere’ the claim must be true. Basically it’s a lie.

Data on lie:

Severity 80%

Popularity 65%

Recent Popularity 45%

Respread 80%

3: violent games make kids violent

There are many studies that seem to prove violent game make kids ‘aggressive’ but the fact is that this lie is based on right wing journalists and violent game ‘experts’ misquoting these already biased studies by saying they prove the kids become violent after playing violent games. The studies themselves are flawed (as my debunking shows). Basically the studies use brainwave scanning on both groups of kids, kids who play violent games , and kids who don’t.  The aggression levels are proven through that, and through a competitive task that pits 2 people (1 from each group) against each other and allows the winner to blast loud static noise into the loser’s ears. The study says that the kids who play violent games hold down the ‘blast’ button longer. They don’t say how much, but from a comment on an article on a recent study, it was only milliseconds. Yeah. Nice proof.  But if that wasn’t the only thing making these studies flawed, we have the fact that many of these studies fail to even measure tendencies that could cause aggression in the kids before the study starts, so basically the more ‘aggressive’ kids aren’t even checked to see that another thing is making them ‘aggressive’, and the checks are right after they play the games, no checks done next day, next month. These are short term studies… Not good on seeing if a kid will ‘go violent’ after playing Doom.  To make things worse, there is no eliminating gamers from these studies… Using a 18 year old GTA fan as proof  of ‘aggression’, by playing GTA is a bit biased. Don’t you think… Now all of this proves the studies have holes. But where did the violence claim come from, the one that says violence is proven by these studies…

From the ‘violent game experts on the news’, the hack psychologists purposely misquoting studies after columbine, on morning talk shows. This lie was spread like wildfire back in 1999 and many people outright believe it without questioning. It’s sad.

Data on lie:

Severity 100%

Popularity 45%

Recent Popularity 25%

Respread 70%

2:  Violent games make school shooters  better shooters in real life.

This one is really alarming, not very popular in lies being spread by the media, but really alarming, none the less. It basically says that Doom, allows players to be better shooters in real life, and uses the evidence in a school shooting predating Columbine as proof. The shooter was very accurate shooter in the shooting, and an avid Doom fan. They said “he had never picked up a gun before!” and then said that Doom made him the better shooter….. Without debunking  possibility of him not going to a gun range, and actually practicing for real… Ok… Now the think is that the Columbine Shooters also were Doom obsessed…. But the FBI report  mentioned that they missed most of their shots! Why?

Recoil, the force that pushes the gun angle up after every shot.

99% of Violent games don’t have realistic recoil of weapons, Doom had none, Quake had none, Half-life : none, only games that have good recoil are tactical shooters. And they are so unfairly realistic that no one could ‘train’ on them without becoming frustrated.  The shots kill not hurt in those games, and the guns are very realistic with realistic recoil and kickback… But they didn’t really get popular till AFTER Columbine.. And since there hasn’t been a school shooting with a real link to Violent games since…

Recoil prevents someone from hitting their shots if they hold down the trigger like they do in the movies and in most violent games. It causes a real life gun to spin out of control, especially an Assault Weapon like a MP5, or any Assault Rifle.  The tactic taught in older violent games available in 1999 basically was (run into room, hold down fire button, kill all enemies, let go, rinse and repeat). This doesn’t work in real life. The person would be shooting the ceiling if they tried this for more than 2 seconds. The military teaches real soldiers to fire in short bursts to minimize the recoil… A debunking of this in Doom was done by me recently on this blog… Here it is. There is no way a violent game will make you a better shot. The tactics are incompatible with real life… At least they were before realism was added to FPS games in 2003+. Realistic tactical shooters weren’t really popular till Far Cry (2003). Before that it was all no recoil in weapons…

So no way in hell did the school shooters get better at firing a real gun by playing FPS games of that time.

Data on lie:

Severity 100%

Popularity 45%

Recent Popularity 25%

Respread 10%

1: violent games break down the inhibition to kill

Ok…  I’ve debunked this in my attack on the amicus brief with tons of lies submitted on CA’s side of the SCOTUS debate (go here for the debunking) but I will debunk it again…  The claim is that violent games are used in the military to break down the inhibition to kill. This blog completely debunks the claim, which is another claim spread by the “hack psychologists” after columbine…

Violent games are used in the military to train group tactics, it’s no secret. The Marines licensed doom for this purpose… But there is no branch of the military that uses them to break down the inhibition to kill. The above blog says that the inhibition to kill is part of what Boot camp is for, to make recruits automatically follow orders. This, is really the only way to make recruits fire when they are commanded to… Seriously… A video game won’t do this… You need to break down the recruit by Intimidation, exhaustion, and other factors to make them act automatically. This needs an environment where you cannot leave the environment, and have limited freedoms, and are being constantly screamed at for making any mistakes, and are being worked out so bad that your constantly exhausted. No video game does this. Period.

Data on lie:

Severity 100%

Popularity 75%

Recent Popularity 15%

Respread 90%

Duke Nukem 3D

Image via Wikipedia

It’s July 4’th again… The celebration of American Independence.  As a gamer, a game designer, and as a political commenter/ anti-violent game lies debunker, I think I need to reflect, on the nature of what we have here. And how some people don’t want our freedoms to be as strong as they are.

There are people out there wanting all violent games banned and think we’re sicko’s. The article I ranted about last night (you can view the rants further down in the page, to tired to do any linking now) proves it. People like them are not powerless. Constant attempts to restrict violent games to adults have been shot down in the Supreme court. They keep trying to restrict games to adults, and it fails. It is bound to motivate these people to request full age violent game bans… It has happened before.

In April 1999, right after the media blamed violent games for Columbine, 2 bills were introduced in 2 states, one being florida, the other being Minnesota (I think), that would have done just that, ban all violent games to all age groups. Neither bill passed. I really don’t think those bills are the last of the ones trying to do this. All that is required is a moral panic and people in power with deep religious views that hate violent games. They exist… In Utah,  they are quite common. It’s an infestation, really. Where is my bug spray…

Anyway, I think some people take this freedom we have for granted. Other countries, such as Germany, Australia  don’t have it. Violent games are outright banned in many countries, to everyone! It’s alarming the kind of freedom civilized countries lack… I’m just happy we aren’t one of these countries..

But the real question is how long will this last… The amount of violent games that are uber offensive, such as GTA, Duke Nukem Forever, Bulletstorm, etc has risen over the last few years. Previously back in 1997, you had Duke3d, Rott, Shadow Warrior, Quake, Blood, etc to complain about… Most violent games around that time had the same amount of blood these do, but weren’t quite offensive. The senator’s complained about this all the time. Now FPS games are much more realistic but they don’t have the offensive content they used to. Bulletstorm, Serious Sam games, DNF, Postal 2,  and GTA games really are the only exception, out of all the COD, Halo, UT, Bioshock, countless First Person RPG’s (Fallout 3/Oblivion/Deus-Ex, etc) games out there, nevermind all the tactical shooters, Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6, etc.

But over the last year, the amount of games released like Duke3d is double of what it was. It’s coming back. The anti-gamers are bound to take notice. These games are offensive enough to get the idiots to want them banned. Both DNF and Bulletstorm got attacks from FOX news. I never saw them attacking anything but maybe GTA games before, and it’s alarming to see this happen, when the humor in both, although crude, and maybe sexist, isn’t really that offensive. Then you have all the comments  by anti-gamers whining about the games calling us ‘depraved souls’…. There is a definite shift back to what it was like in 1997-2000.

It’s alarming… Anyway.. enjoy your july 4’th, while it lasts…

Miss Teacher Bangs a Boy

Image via Wikipedia

Kids are aggressive. They get into fights all the time. The reasons are so varied that it’s really not fair to label one thing the media keeps leeching itself on to : Violent games.  How do you know it wasn’t bullying? Child Abuse? Drug Abuse? Mental Illnesses?  Bad Parenting? Stupidity? the list goes on. The studies themselves, that seem to show that violent games lead to aggressive behavior, however are a complete farce… They just are.

The methods used are designed to incite the result the anti-gamers want. That result is that violent games always increase aggression. You can’t take several kids, measure their aggression in any way and determine it’s result without careful study of all the factors involved. These hack psychologists don’t do that..  They engineer fake results in many of the studies, (not all, but many).

This is the process used to get that result…

A) Take Half of your study group and make them play ‘non-violent games’ like sports games and puzzle games.

B) take the other half, subject them to electroshock therapy (I’m not kidding you there, I read it off a PDF of a study I cannot find the link to, because the article I linked was on my old blog, which I shut down to avoid libel.), And make them play ‘uber violent games, GTA, Killzone 2,etc…

(From this article)

C) They now select the kids and make them all look at violent imagery or ‘normal imagery’. Then they measure the brainwaves while this is happening.  Problem 1, lack of a reaction  to an image doesn’t mean the game caused the lack of a reaction! It doesn’t prove Aggression at all! All it proves, is Apathy! The lack of caring for a subject… People are offended by different things. Person 1 could find violent image 1 disturbing but person 2 will not. If person 2 played violent games, how the hell do you know it isn’t some other issue causing the ‘lack of brainwaves’, which to me is quite the hack method in determining reaction. It sounds like a very flawed science to measure brainwaves, to determine a response. How do you know the result of the brainwave drop? Out of all the possible results? They don’t test for these results do they? No they don’t. Now the other  problem, is that the kids are going to be aggressive for a time being after being pumped up. They test for  the ‘aggression’ immediately, they don’t wait till later when the levels drop… Now the other, less obvious problem, is that they don’t know what causes the brainwave drop, they don’t know the source. They want to make the games look like the source.. So

(Also From this article)

D) They subject the kids who played violent games to compete against eachother in a game where one kid gets to blast loud noise in the losers ears for a certain amount of seconds. But the time values involved are so small, that it’s not much of a result. The time lapse is literally less than a second in some cases. So the more ‘aggressive’ kid holds down the button a millisecond longer. Yeah… Nice proof there. The point is, is It doesn’t prove aggression… Which is always mixed up with VIOLENCE, by the anti-gamers. Like these kids are at risk of being the next Eric Harris. BS.

E) Fail to even do basic research to eliminate other causes of aggression!  No investigation is done on the kids to see if they might have problems that could lead to aggression, from factors such as bullying/drug abuse/child abuse/etc. It’s not even brought up.

To bring up another point, “desensitization” to violent games doesn’t prove much. All it proves is that your brain has become more accustomed to the violence in the portrayal. It doesn’t mean you will act it out. Watching CSI does the same thing. But another thing bothers me about these studies. What games are the ‘violent’ ones chosen by psychologists. Are they games with violent combat but not disgustingly violent or are they the ones where you gun down people and chop their heads off like GTA. The choice will determine the result. Likewise do they choose sports games or kiddie games. I think they purposely chose ones that will set up the biggest difference between brain scan results and blast test results. Why not? Fudging the study for results isn’t a new thing. I think they should make the kids play 10 violent games OF DIFFERENT violence quantities, not the same one per kid! Same thing with the non-violent ones. How do you trust a study that purposely chooses the least violent game for group 1 and the most violent game for the other group. You don’t.

Another issue is the background of the ‘subjects’. You make a kid who plays violent games (do they check that first?), and make him play Killzone 2, or Modern warfare. He will like it more and become more ‘aggressive’. Then you take someone who plays a lot of puzzle games and he won’t. Do they choose these kinds of people on purpose as well. It’s really flawed if they put in the GTA loving kid to prove aggression when he plays GTA…. Isn’t that biased or what?

All of this will make it so that the aggressive result favors the kids who played the violent games… It’s biased… It’s dirty. It’s a fraud. And it’s being used to create fear mongering among anti-gamer circles that eventually will lead to full Bans on violent games… It has to stop. Prove tendency of violence by other more obvious factors such as mental illness, drugs, etc, not violent games. Millions of kids and adults play violent games. Some of them, the less mature ones, will be more aggressive, but that doesn’t prove they will go on school shooting rampages at all, it just proves they can’t control themselves well enough to stop the aggression. (Aggression =/= Violence!). According to a poster on the article linked above there is not ONE study that proves a casual link between gaming and violence. NOT ONE!