Posts Tagged ‘Video Game Legislation’

So after going to gamepolitics.com last night, I looked in the legislation tab to see if any state had drafted Anti-Violent Game Legislation. Surprisingly, My own state of Massachusetts, was among those states, that drafted draconian anti-video game bills within the last 6 years. Back in 2007, HB 1423 was drafted, it would apparently “restrict violent games to minors”, but that’s not all… No No… That’s not all..

The Bill is so ridiculously draconian that is scares me just as much as the Bill that California Drafted that got Defeated for Unconstitutionality in Brown VS EMA. Like that bill, this one uses the greatly subjective obscenity clause to determine what games would be restricted…. Basically, if the game is offensive to the public, and the judges of the content find it lacks scientific, educational, or literary value, it would be restricted. The problem is if a game is so offensive that it offends the Judges (it seems any violent game with gore would do this, hell even guns in a game offended a co-worker years ago, Doom none the less), they would be so offended that they would say it lacks those values anyway, and therefore would use it against the game and then restrict it to minors.

The real issue is not this but the fact that it uses the restrict word in the wrong way, or in an unclear way. Restrict means to ” to confine or keep within certain often specified limits or selected bounds” according to an online dictionary, so if you use this definition,  the bill makes it illegal to sell games to adults now…. Even worse, the bill fails to even mention the punishments, who will judge the games, punishment (if any) for false judgement based on faked evidence or incorrect evidence or abuse of the judging process. Even if these issues are my imagination, it still uses a subjective system to determine what games are restricted and what ones aren’t.  How would the stores know which ones not to sell…. Like Brown VS EMA, they might end up taking all games off the shelves to prevent losses or lawsuits coming from violations of the law. So therefore this bill would create an effective ban because since stores don’t know what games get restricted till to late, they then end up having to take ALL violent games off the shelves to prevent damages, especially if the bill is abused..

Text of the Bill in question for people wanting to read it In case it gets deleted later for any reason. (a lot of the stuff like this gets deleted suddenly, as of late anyway, such as the Brown vs EMA Amicus Brief, etc)

As of now the Bill is in the House Committee being stalled, but who knows for how long?  This could come to bite my state and my freedom of choices  in the Ass later. I am an Adult! I have the right to choose WHAT GAMES I Buy. I don’t want this bill to backfire and make retailers get rid of violent games in fear like it could.  And since I use online retailers mostly now, who knows how it will effect online retailers in MA, or the gaming industry here. This could be, in theory, Disastrous for gaming in my state…..

This is MY STATE we are talking about here… We don’t do shit like this, uber save the children conservative nonsense here. Not till one of the hack psychologists crazy unproven theories invaded the minds of people like our Mayor,  did this nonsense start, with the Banning of GTA ads on subway systems that don’t have kids in them anyway (from my experience, their too dangerous for kids)…  IF our Mayor ends up allowing this to pass, I will fight it tooth and nail with regular emails to ALL the Representatives and Senators in my State…. I won’t let this go quietly and with out opportunity. I will start a campaign to get people to write EVERYONE in office in MA to oppose this and hopefully it will flood their Mailboxes so bad that they find it unconstitutional.

As of now, the bill is in committee, and who knows if it will be taken out for a vote anytime soon. But still I urge ALL Gamers in Massachusetts to email the Rep’s about this. This is danger waiting to happen for Gaming here… Don’t let this pass, gamers, spread the message, email your Rep’s, send the message below to them to make them see that this is WRONG!!!

Text to email (please us this, don’t write your own)

“As your constituent and as an avid Video Game fan, and also as an anti-censorship person, I oppose HB 1423  due to it’s vague use of the phrase “restricting” in it’s text, and other issues. I know this is an old  bill, but according to gamepolitics.com, it’s still being worked on, and hasn’t completely died, according to  them.It claims to be a bill that will restrict Sales of certain violent video games to adults, but when I didgoogle searches for similar bills in other states, only a few were restrict to adults type bills. Many were  ills to restrict violent games to children… Since I oppose any form of Censorship, I immediately looked  at the Bill’s text, and compared it to others in other states. When looking up the definition of Restrict  online, It seems this bill is actually designed to Restrict sales of violent games to adults, as in a ban  of violent games to adults only. Since the bill’s text is so vague, there is no part that clearly states “stores must not sell games to minors”, so which way is it? Banning games from being sold to minors, or  to Adults…. Based on other bills, it looks like the writer of such a bill Purposely left it out to abuse it for such a purpose, to make it illegal for stores to even sell games to adults…. Thus killing the video game industry in this state.

Other issues I have with it, are how it uses an incredibly biased Obscenity clause that states that if thegame is lacks scientific, literary, or educational value for minors, it is harmful to minors and can’t besold, but since the the people who are deciding this (which it does not state), could simply use theirstandards of what offends them, they can simply say that the game offends them, so therefore it lacks those  standards, and ban it to adults or children…. I feel Indecency and obscenity clauses are to vague and  subjective to use as a test of what should be restricted, banned or both… It’s too easy for someone  else to abuse this, and IMHO, that’s why the author wrote this bill to get an “effective ban” in MA  passed… I just wanted to share my concerns…”

So I was browsing the net looking for a certain candidates views on violent game bans that I was writing about last week, when I  came across this lovely right wing Conservative site that is spreading utter BS about violent games to people, claiming to be a trustworthy source. Now I will add a disclaimer,  the site may not be Intentionally doing this, but many of the PRO side points are quite suspicious at best, and down right fabrications or bad misinterpretations at worst… Anyone looking at this will believe the points debunked below, because most people believe what they hear: Here is the site I am talking about.

http://videogames.procon.org/

Now on  to the debunking, shall we.. After all, this IS what I do here, debunk BS spread about violent games by ANYONE!

“97% of 12-17 year olds in the US played video games in 2008, thus fueling an $11.7 billion domestic video game industry. In 2008, 10 of the top 20 best-selling video games in the US contained violence.”

Really, 97% of 12-17 year olds played video games? Shocker. Notice it said video games, not VIOLENT ones…  It then tries to claim that this is the reason that the gaming industry made so much money. Then it immediately tried to assume this 12-17 year olds must have played  the violent ones!!! So  “10 of the top 20 best-selling video games in the US contained violence” Shocker!!!
Let me tell you one thing. Most violent games aren’t even played by such “young kids”… The target demographic is 18-35, according to the ESA. They also say that the average age of gamers are 30 years old… They even did a study proving this, unlike the article linked above, which tries to imply that 12-17 year olds are playing “violent” games. Now Let me define violent game. A game with Combat in it, and killing. Not neccisarily a Uber Violent one like GTA where you run over old ladies, or games where you decapitate people, BLAH BLAH BLAH. The media for years has been using examples of rare tastelessly violent games as a way to say most games are like this, but it’s more than wrong because, according to a study I did using a wikipedia list of 605 FPS games released since 1986 on my other blog, only 4% or so were what I think most people would  consider “tastelessly” violent. That’s 21 out of 605. Not even 1/10! The real number of tastelessly violent games is actually lower than this because FPS games make up only 1/5 of total violent games and tastlessly violent games, at least to me, seem quite rare… Now on to the more severe lies…

Increasing reports of bullying can be partially attributed to the popularity of violent video games. The 2008 study Grand Theft Childhood reported that 60% of middle school boys who played at least one Mature-rated game hit or beat up someone, compared to 39% of boys that did not play Mature-rated games.”

The sample size is not mentioned here, 60% of anything less than  5000 people means nothing… A lot of studies  that try  to prove this stuff use small sample sizes to make it look like it’s an serious issue, and by possibly manipulating the results to show high percentages of people pre-chosen to show the result they want they can fudge the study. Recently a study was done saying that 1000 people all supported violent game legislation. 1000 people may seem like a lot to the untrained eye, but 1000 is TINY, like in 625 times smaller than the Population of Boston, MA in 2011, 625,000 or so. So finding 1000 people who support legislation ignores the other MILLIONS who do not. It’s statistically insignificant, and the fact that such studies, more than likely pick and chose 1000 people who support it anyway, means that they should not be trusted. Not saying the study above isn’t trust worthy or the one mentioned in the article but you have to learn how to critically examine such studies…




Video games often reward players for simulating violence, and thus enhance the learning of violent behaviors. “

Most violent games don’t even do this at all. Ones that do are things like GTA, Sure, and uber violent games like blood, but many games don’t even make dead enemies drop items at all these days. Very few actually force players  to even kill any enemies, notable exceptions are quake 2, and serious sam type games. So much for rewarding violent behavior. Yes, killing is part of many games, but to kill, in order to survive hostile opponents trying to kill you, isn’t really rewarding anything but survival. Very Few FPS games that I have played (and I have played 100’s), really give you substantial rewards for killing… The whole realism thing in modern shooters (a BIG thing today) prevents significant rewards because realism requires minimal rewards per kill… A lot of these games focus on puzzles and missions to accomplish as well. Killing enemies is secondary. You can beat 90% of shooters without killing enemies. Just because killing is part of these games doesn’t mean they reward “simulating violence”. Also the claim that games that “reward simulation of violence” enhance the learning of violent behaviors is crazy. Most people who play violent games won’t go out and kill people because they have been rewarded in a game to do so in the game, not in real life… These points mentioned completely ignore that real life violence is different than simulated violence in a game, on purpose many times, to make it look like people who play violent games will want to kill for real… 




Violent video games desensitize players to real-life violence. It is common for victims in video games to disappear off screen when they are killed or for players to have multiple lives.”


There is actually no real evidence to support the idea that violent games desensitize people to real life violence. Define Real life violence, then look at what desensization really means. It means that people who consume violent entertainment get more used to the violence in it. Real life violence is Completely separate from  this, Period!  There is evidence to suggest that consuming said violence entertainment, or anything really, will make a person more used to it. That’s all the evidence is really saying. Saying it proves that people get used to a completely separate, different thing (real life violence), is a willful, stupid, and deceitful misinterpretation of studies that prove something different. If there is any study that says violent games desensitize people to real life violence, then I seriously doubt that it isn’t flawed like all the other video game “aggression” studies being linked as proof of violent games causing real life violence by anti-gaming morons everywhere for 10 years. 


Now on to the claims that there are lots of games that have multiple lives, and disappearing characters. Where the hell did they get this from? Only Extremely KIDDIE games like Super Noah’s Ark 3D have Disappearing characters that completely disappear. Only one recent game series features this, that’s serious sam. Most games have corpses that NEVER disappear. Making Dissapearing characters is way to make a game seem LESS violent to kids, and is only done in KID type games to prevent the game from showing off VIOLENT DEATHS… HELLO!  And the idea that people in games have multiple lives. I can name all the popular games in FPS history that conform to this. Wolf3d, Descent Series, and Serious sam. THATS IT. Most FPS games ditched the whole lives thing because it made it too easy. The change was made in 1993 for gods sake, with Doom, which revolutionized  the idea that players who die don’t get to come back without restarting the level or loading a save game. Lives in FPS games are almost non-existent.




2000 FBI report (187 KB)  includes playing violent video games in a list of behaviors associated with school shootings.”


Ok… So there is this study that lists risk factors for school shootings, and it listed being obsessed with violent entertainment. So a bunch of anti-gamer DickNozzles starting purposely interpreting it as proof that playing violent games is the risk factor, not being obsessed with any form of violent entertainment. Since I couldn’t actually quote the study, I screenshotted it below. Lo and Behold, this proves it again. The people who made this site committed this crime.

Nowhere here does it A) Single out violent games B) Make it so simply playing them is a risk factor like the article linking to it says.  The article above is Purposely misinterpreting the facts to create a moral panic. Plain and simple.   The FBI study finds that “themes of hatried, violence, weapons and mass destruction Recur in virtually all his activities, hobbies, and past times”. So simply playing violent games will make this happen? WTF! Sounds like these people who posted the article Don’t know people who play violent games mostly Do NOT obsess over real life violence. The study also says “The student spends inordinate amounts of time playing games with violent themes and seems to be more interested in violent images than the game itself”. Where does this equate simply playing violent games with school shootings. NOWHERE.   Then it says “On the internet the student regularly searches for web sites involving violence, weapons, and other disturbing subjects. There is evidence the student downloaded and kept material from these sites”. Where does this equate playing Violent games, with school shootings? NOWHERE. It equates being Obsessed with Real violence, Hatred, And wanting to commit real violence, as a risk factor. This whole paragraph DOES NOT simply link playing violent games with school shootings. It links OBSESSION WITH VIOLENCE IN GENERAL. These people are making up BS about this…. The FBI wouldn’t actually link simply playing violent games at all. They aren’t pro family enough to do  that… Only right wing nutjobs who want violent games banned do that..





Violent video games cause players to associate pleasure and happiness with the ability to cause pain in others.”


Looking at  the source of this proved that it came from one of the “hack psychologists” going around on talk shows in April 1999 claiming the military uses violent games to break down the inhibition to kill, all while selling his book, a big batch of lies… If a blog run by an actual person who was in the armed forces debunks the claim, then this claim sounds suspicious as well.. I know for a fact that even though I played wolf3d for the first time at age 13, duke3d at age 16, etc, I did not “associate pleasure and happiness with the ability to cause pain in others”. The whole idea that this happens, is using the same analogy as people misinterpreting desensitizing studies to prove that violent games desensitize people to real life violence, not the fake video game violence. This makes it look like games that make people want to cause pain in a virtual environment make people want to do it in real life. It’s BS… Just trust me on that… If it were true, you would have a LOT more cases of gamers hurting real people. I don’t see that, or any evidence that that is actually happening… So this is more than likely bunk too, IMHO.


A 1998 study found that 21% of games sampled involved violence against women (165 KB) . Exposure to sexual violence in video games is linked to increases in violence towards women and false attitudes about rape (47 KB)  such as that women incite men to rape or that women secretly desire rape.”


Number 1, the (probably) flawed study was done in 1998! More than 10 years ago! Number 2, since then most FPS or violent games, don’t even have women to kill in them. And if they do, that’s not saying they do this on purpose to single violence against women on purpose. Then the thing makes up the claim about sexual violence. Like all the other claims of “rape simulators” in violent games, this is also BS, because the last time a game actually had a scene where there was a controllable rape scene where a woman was a victim and the player was a perpetrator was, Custer’s Revenge, in 1989, an ADULT only game not sold in normal stores!!!! Since then only 3 games have even had rape in them, Phantasmogoria, which features the player being raped in a cutscene, and Fear 2, which ends with the evil chick villian Alma, Raping you in arguably  the most fucked up ending any game has ever had, but get this, it is most likely a dream sequence….  Not once has there been a game that had virtual rape in it where a women was a victim, and if a guy was a victim, well, I have never heard of it. And the claim  that violent games lead to “increases in rape” came straight out of a moron Fox news put on their “bullshitting” on Bulletstorm 3 years ago, which they tried to say bulletstorm causes real life rape, with this analogy “Since Rape is a violent crime and violent games cause violence, then violent games have caused rape”… It’s Fucking bullshit. The person saying this had NO proof that violent games caused real life rape, just said they did without actual evidence.




Violent video games can train youth to be killers. The US Marine Corps licensed Doom II in 1996 to createMarine Doom in order to train soldiers. In 2002, the US Army released first-person shooter America’s Army to recruit soldiers and prepare recruits for the battlefield. “


Nowhere here, did they mention that the first was a training for group tactics, and was a Modification of the game not the game itself, with HEAVY REALISTIC changes to gameplay, and graphics, almost nothing from Doom in it at all. They want to make it look like the military uses real games like Doom 2 to train soldiers to kill on, but the blog ran by the military dude linked above “design synthesis” disproved that, didn’t it?  Now the thing about americas army is true, it WAS a recruitment tool. But it’s the only game that ever was a recruitment tool, period. That’s out of THOUSANDS of violent games, most of which aren’t tastelessly violent..




California passed a law in 2005 that would have required violent video games to include an “18” label and criminalized the sale of these games to minors. On June 27, 2011, the US Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Association (485 KB) that the law violated free speech rights.”


What they don’t say is that this law would have used a really subjective Obscenity clause like language to determine what games would be fined, by saying that games that are morbidly violent and “lack literary, scientific and educational value” are targeted for fines. This would allow them to fine any game they got offended by, period, causing many tame games to be fined, causing stores to pull any game that could be fined under the law off  the shelves, causing most violent games not to be sold in stores, causing the companies that make lesser known games go out of business at the least. That’s what the BS article REFUSES to tell people…  It claims to be a trusted source on the points made by the experts…  All it is is spreading plainly debunkable lies to fuel censorship… It’s stinks, like most of the polished turds that get released by the anti-gamers…

DOOM iPod

DOOM iPod (Photo credit: scottkellum)

My last 2 posts went into 3 very questionable newspaper “articles” written by 3 different newspaper writers in 3 different newspapers, and how they claimed Eric Harris had modified Doom to allow him to train for Columbine on it, with features that (surprise!) Doom Could not do in 1999.  The newspapers, Denver Post, The rocky Mountain News, and Times Magazine, all mentioned the same hate site tracking group, but differed in the “quote” said by (virtual) dying students in the mod supposedly found, and had different features in each article, but some were the same between them. Denverpost mentioned nothing about Infinite Ammo, Extra Weapons, a Second Shooter, but did mention the “quote”. Rocky Mountain news said the mod had “Infinite Weapons” (how the hell is that even doable in ANY shooter?), “Infinite ammo”, dying students in certain places that say a quote (but it was a different quote than the denverpost article). The Times article failed to even mention the quote, but mentioned a second shooter, infinite ammo, and the shooter running out of  (the infinite?) ammo  first dying automatically.  The times news article was quoted by an APA paper on media violence, but the running out of ammo and dying part was left out. Later on the Paper was cited in this thesis on Video Game Violence, claiming to prove violent games cause real life violence, done by a college student in some Biology class.

serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1723

When reading this “Thesis” for the first time I was shocked to see how many lies it contained. It mentioned how the Military used Doom as a training tool (debunked by the Design Synthesis Blog article : “Training our kids to kill”), mentions all the “Hate site tracking group found a modified version of doom” claims minus the ammo kill one, and worse. I wanted to see how many articles “cited” this as proof violent games cause real life violence. I was in for a shock.

Searching on google using the URL for the site revealed 15+ pages of results with at least 28 articles demonizing violent games among them. Searching with the title of the thesis revealed 10+ pages with 31 articles all demonizing violent games, and finally, searching with the quote claiming the hate site tracking group found the modified version of doom revealed 10 more pages with 11 articles attacking the games. All these results cited the search choice and I decided to study how many of each type there were.

Types included articles that asked whether games lead to real life aggression, articles that said that they definitely do, articles that asked “should violent games be banned”, articles that said they should, articles asking if games lead to real life violence, articles saying they do, articles asking if there was a link to real life violence, articles saying there was, articles saying violent games change the frontal lobes brain in brain scans of people who played them, articles claiming violent games were a “danger to society”, articles complaining about the EMA vs Brown decision by SCOTUS in 2010,  and finally one forum which basically said, “Violent Games breed Psychos!”.

URL Used in URL Search: serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1723

Title Searched in Title Search : Video Games: A Cause of Violence and Aggression

Quote used in Quote Search : “The Simon Wiesenthal Center, which tracks Internet hate groups, found in its archives a copy of Harris’ web site with a version of Doom. He had customized it so that there were two shooters, each with extra weapons and unlimited ammunition, and the other people in the game could not fight back.”

Here is a screenshot of the spreadsheet I used…

Out of all 31 articles found while searching with the Thesis Title, 22% asked do violent games cause aggression, 32% said they cause violence, 22% asked if they did, and 16% said they cause Aggression. Pretty high totals for such a small sample size, yet it’s still quite alarming due to the questionable and even fabricated evidence cited. Out of all 28 articles found while searching with the Thesis URL, 32% asked if violent games cause aggression, 32% said they cause Violence, 22% asked if they did cause violence, and 14% said they cause aggression.  Notice a pattern? More people think violent games cause real life violence than mere aggression, even though the studies “prove” the former…. Just goes to show you how believable the hack psychologists claims on the talk shows in the 1997-2002 period were….  Now this is not true for the search done with the quote. I got a lot more extreme stuff with those results. 27% of the search results were the same page saying the following quote in it’s title :  “is violent games bad for childrens brain?”. I had less articles found in the results that said or questioned if violent games caused violence. That’s a good thing. But here’s the bad thing. Out of all the search results with the quote, 11 of the articles were from LAST YEAR… The quote came from a times news article done right after columbine. The BS was still being brought up in 2011!!!! How is that for ridiculous. I ended up debunking it recently but still a lot of it is really obviously “questionable” and no one questioned it even after 10+ years? It is so insane that no one ripped this one journalist from Time Magazine for posting these impossible doom features  in an article, yet they get cited by over 50 pages, once by the APA, and even a college Essay Writer cites them? How improbable is that? To show you how impossible these are, lets first look at the program dehacked.

Dehacked was made by Greg “Tree” Lewis in 1995 to edit the thing,frame,sound, and sprite data tables found in the Doom EXE (main program). These tables allow people to drastically change how the games enemies and weapons work. To do any kind of modification to Doom at this time, dehacked would be required, IF it allowed the editor to do them…. BIG if in this case, for the thing table has no property for friendly AI, whatsoever. Impossible in 1999. PERIOD. Later on a source port called MBF would develop such a way to do this in dehacked patchs but No one did it till 2000, and no documentation was released till then, at the earliest. So that’s not going to work either. Even if I am wrong there… The next 2 claims are still impossible at this time, with the normal Doom or MBF. The photo below shows the thing table property list for all things (they all share it) on the bottom pane.

The next claim is that this modified  version of doom added extra weapons + infinite ammo for both shooters.  Another bogus statement. The weapon table has 9 entries in it and the total number of entries depends only on the game (Doom, Doom 2) that is being used. Doom lacks one gun Doom2 has so Doom 1 has only 8 weapons. There is no way in dehacked to even add extra weapons without replacing others… And to make them work with the second shooter would also be impossible for weapon switching code for AI is FAR beyond ANYTHING dehacked can do, so is any 3rd party AI fire coding needed to even make this work. These things are not doable in dehacked, PERIOD. The photo below shows the weapon property screen with no  “Add Weapon” Button or Key at all.

So now we come to the most stupid quote ever uttered in an article attacking Doom.

“Harris’ customized Doom game was programmed so that the shooter who runs out of ammunition dies first. “

1) How can you run out of ammo in a mod with INFINITE AMMO? You can’t. Assuming that is possible…..

2) Even if you could run out of ammo, there is no variable in dehacked weapon table (image above) that tracks your current ammo. Dehacked does NOT let you edit these variable because it’s in Memory and always changes. Dehacked also cannot let you do anything that involves doing a certain action (killing the player/or the “shooter” when a variable meets a certain value. So this whole quote has been invalidated even if the infinite ammo COULD allow you to run out of ammo.

The screenshot below shows NO way to kill the player if he runs out of ammo for any gun, or health (that happens automatically anyway), or any statistic, whatsoever. The players properties are his max health, speed, whether he can even be hurt (how GOD mode can be done in dehacked), etc.

Now to discuss this “quote” supposedly said by dying students. Number 1, nowhere in the Times article is it even brought up. This article was done BEFORE the denverpost article and also BEFORE the rocky mountain news article. So the quote is most likely  bogus. But not neccisarily. This idea CAN be done in doom. I’ve tested it several ways and there is nothing stopping this idea from being real, but the 2 differing quotes, and the 2 different ways of saying it (Shouted in Denverpost vs Cried in Rocky Mountain News) should make it questionable at the very least. It’s weird that the denverpost article  cut out all the stuff that Doom Can’t do. Too Weird. This stuff would invalidate the article completely by fans of the game who would all call in complaining. Did Denverpost know this ahead of time? I don’t know…. But it’s very odd. Why not publish that stuff to add to the “controversy” if it’s not questionable…. The only way that it makes sense is that it IS questionable feature wise and they knew it… But that’s not something I am certain of.

Now for the most Bullshitic ™ response to the whole “paper”…. I quote:

“Of course people who create, sponsor/support gaming industries, and those who love playing the games will say it has no affect, just as tobacco companies said there was correlation between cancer and cigarettes! But we now know just how wrong they were on that don’t we!! Let’s just put it on a simpler note. DOOM WAS CREATED TO TEACH SOLIDERS TO MURDER EFFICIENTLY…. THIS SAME GAME IS BEING PLAYED BY THE MASSES……SO WHAT ARE THEY LEARNING???? I have never used a gun outside of the shooting range, but i learned how to load and shoot one before i ever had a real one in my hand….how? Video games….. Say what you will but the thought that there is no correlation between the two isn’t holding water!”

Number 1 : DOOM WAS NOT CREATED TO TEACH “SOLIDERS” TO MURDER EFFICIENTLY!!!!!! That’s Complete Fucking BS. This moron makes it look like Doom was created as a military training tool first and nothing more, by the military, BLAH BLAH BLAH.  The military training Modification by the Marines, was not even done till 5(!!!!) years later after Doom was created… Doom was created to be fun, nothing more. There is no MURDER in the game because murder requires Intent. Combat with a hostile enemy force (demons in the game are not innocent, they qualify as that) is not murder. Marines modified doom to train soldiers group tactics in such combat with enemy forces, not to “TEACH ‘SOLIDERS’ TO MURDER EFFICIENTLY”.   Obviously this peon has been believing the media lies and BS WAYYYY Too much…

Number 2 : People who play violent games end up having violent tendencies… There is not ONE study to even back this up. Aggression (which as been “proven” by “millions” of FLAWED Studies), is NOT the same as a real violent tendencies. To say gamers have violent tendencies ignores all the obvious issues that REAL Killers like Harris had, Racist Thoughts, Uncontrollable Anger,  Serious Mental Issues, etc. No normal gamer has any of these… Period!!!

Number 3: Comparing the gaming industry to the Tobacco industry (More BS!!) Is more proof this person is a moron. The tobacco industries ads went to the length to entice kids with Joe Camel. I don’t see that in Violent game ads, at all, hell I’ve never seen one of those  Violent game ads on billboards in public that everyone keeps whining about, outside of 1 bus in Boston 5 years ago. Number 2 there is actual scientific evidence to prove Tobacco causes cancer. There is NO Scientific evidence to prove violent games cause Real life violence. A bunch of right wing game hating morons purposely misquoting studies that prove “Aggression” to make it look like they cause real life violence does NOT COUNT…. PERIOD.

Number 4 :  The claim that you can learn how to “load” and “shoot” any gun by playing video games is BS. Video games lack realistic firing physics (recoil, etc) in many cases, and the older FPS games teach BAD tactics like hold down the trigger until all enemies are dead. They don’t work in real life due to recoil making the gun fire higher and higher and they do not force the player to adjust because of the lack of recoil in many games. Anyone who says they learned how to handle a gun through a video game is a LIAR.

I’ve been avoiding blogging on this one blog for one reason…. There hasn’t been any anti-gaming news stories of note lately… Until now.  On my first blog post I utterly debunked a hoax claim that was used to attack video games on many sites, ranging from medical journals, to newspapers, etc, the infamous “Doom will become reality hoax”. This is the first post  I am referring to. That hoax has been used to justify attacks on violent games, Doom specifically in at least 100 different “attack” sites.  Of course it wasn’t something the real school shooters said on their website, it was obviously fake.   Which brings me to this article.

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/shot0504f.htm

This article was written on May 4, 1999, right after columbine by 2 denverpost writers. They claim that on Harris’s AOL site there was a modified version of Doom that had begging students saying a certain quote, “god mode”, etc…. Among other things.  Similar stories with a similar “modified” version of doom had been popping up in other newspapers around then… I find this problematic that this hate site tracking group has to be the only group that even had knowledge of this “modified” version of doom.  Number 1 the hate site tracking group would have to know the EXACT Web path and file name to get this file if He did have such a modified doom version on his site. Since no one else has any corroborating evidence this mod exists (Harris’s Doom levels are freely available online, you’d think someone would have found this too…), then how the hell did some hate site tracking group (who by the way has no business tracking video games related stuff at all) find the file in the first place? If there is no link to the file at all, this is impossible.. PERIOD. They’d have to log onto his site to get a site file listing..  And without the password that is impossible, without hacking.  The article also goes into a claim that his school was made as a level for doom and duke3d. But this snopes article completely debunks that completely. There were never any CHS maps lying around on his site, nor was there any indication he was building one.  That disproves that… But what about the begging students supposedly found in this “modified” version of doom?

I have been literally playing AND editing doom in every way possible since 1997. I KNOW what is doable in doom with each source port. Since the source code for Doom was released online there have been multiple source ports that are basically souped up doom programs with new features. I know in 1999 the only major source ports out were Dosdoom, Legacy, Boom, MBF and some others.  If these begging students could be done in doom, I was going to find out. Using a doom Exe Editor (dehacked), I decided to run a test to see if Doom could even do what the articles claimed. I tried to debunk this claim through using dehacked  to see if it was possible and it was,  however upon searching for more info I came across This forum posted an article that was written in another newspaper 1 day before…  The first thing you notice is that the quote is         COMPLETELY DIFFERENT in this article. Also the denverpost article mentioned how the quote was “shouted” while this article says it’s “cried” out.. Hardly consistent. It’s like multiple writers all decided to write the same article but couldn’t get the details right, makes both articles very suspicious, in the truth department.  As a doom fan, reading the second article made me realize how impossible some of the claims are because, they mention the modified game had “Unlimited” weapons and ammunition right from the get go plus “God mode”. 2 out of these 4 are doable, but “unlimited” weapons are something that no game did in 1999, nevermind doom. And starting with unlimited weapons and ammunition is not even doable in doom.  The engine isn’t THAT customizable. It’s close but still could not be done back then.  What’s even worse is that another site brings up this hate site tracking group with further “evidence” a doom version like this exists (even though there is absolutely no evidence to support it’s claim), with completely DIFFERENT features:

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1723

This is a paper on violence in video games, a thesis. In it the same hate site tracking group claimed to have found a modified version of doom. In this version infinite ammo is brought up again as well as enemies that can’t fight back (students, probably), and this time it brings up the claim the mod added in a “second shooter”.  The second shooter thing could be multiplayer. But I don’t think the hate site tracking group is an expert on how to set up multiplayer games. So what else  could it be. Friendly AI? Not quite. Doom can do that, but here’s the catch. The first source port (altered doom program with more features) available to allow friendly characters to be made was called Marines best Friend, and was released in 1998. But… here’s the thing. The text file included in the port didn’t even mention what code pointers are needed in MBF to create a friendly “second shooter” using a dehacked patch (needed to make a “friendly” second shooter – it’s the only way). Not till 2000 did wads (doom addons) come out that even used this concept. The problem is that the paper then claims that the “second shooter” had extra weapons just as the player did. ANOTHER thing doom could not do in 1999. The whole “begging students” screaming out “lord, why did you do this to me?” thing has bothered me since I got my life threatened on the denverpost messageboard back in april 1999, by some moron (apparently a lawyer), who responded to my post on the forum basically ripping the columnists who wrote the article from denverpost, which I had read for the first time 5 minutes before posting.

So who is behind this nonsense? People might think the hate site tracking group is behind it, but I doubt it. For one there is not a SINGLE corroboration from them that they found this on ANY site. Number 2 searching for more info only lets you see news articles and other anti-gaming articles quoting the said news articles that end up quoting the same person from the hate site tracking group, but make that person say different things, and  at least one of those things wasn’t doable by doom before 2000.  I don’t know if the articles are fabricated or not my gut feeling tells me this “modified version of doom” is unlikely to be real. Who would gain from such articles?  We obviously had a ton of idiots who wanted violent games completely  banned since 1997 and even before that, merely for the fact that the games “offend” them. Of course they have to bring up the “save the children” card because saying “ban the game, it offends me” doesn’t work in this country for the most part.  Something like this could (and has) been used against ID Software for lawsuit purposes. Some people DO blame ID for the mere ABILITY to make such a tasteless mod. These articles,  Their being cited like wildfire in arguments to attack violent games. If you search for sites on google that quote the thesis article linked above you get these search results. At least 15 different sites are using the article to attack games. One post, which was obviously done by an anti-gaming moron, was posted  in a message board for an article condemning the SCOTUS decision on Brown VS EMA links to it to use it as “evidence” that violent games lead to real life crime, all while saying “SCOTUS doesn’t care about kids!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA”, basically, citing some case where the supreme court ruled in favor of “surprise!” not the kids…

You add in the troll on the denverpost message board who threatened me for merely saying one line he didn’t like “games shouldn’t be banned just because kids were killed”, and you end up getting possible motivation for the “lawyer” to threaten my life… I had posted the contents of the above denverpost article on their forum, said I was pissed off at the media. Since then I’ve been wondering just who this moron was.  I don’t know. He was basically  a “lawyer” troll with a pseudonym, who basically kept on insulting gamers over and over again calling us “gamer shitheads”, threatening to kill me, saying I should have been aborted, “crawl up your mothers fly infested c**t”, and much worse. What makes me think this moron was a lawyer?He had a justicemail.com email address, justicemail, email for the “law community”. Yeah. He even posted at the end “I have enough evidence to prove gamers get violent…” but that was deleted 5 minutes later. The suspicious thing is that 1) that last quote on evidence was deleted 5 minutes later 2) The justicemail.com account he used was deleted 5 years later, that entire forum doesn’t even exist online now. There is NO evidence but my word that this happened, and believe me it did. It basically made me absolutely despise morons like this who are (unfortunately) behind the anti-gaming movement. We have these questionable claims,  and the “doom will become reality” hoax that was “supposedly” written by Harris on his AOL site, and proven to be a hoax by the FBI. Yet literally hundreds of anti-violent games sites STILL Continue to use the articles, and the hoax as evidence that violent games make people violent, (and not being a racist, psychopath who wanted to be famous – the real reason!).Now we have these articles and even till this day, morons are still quoting them as evidence to attack SCOTUS, etc.

Even if this “modified version” of doom was REALLY found on his site by the attack group, it doesn’t rule out the idea that the modified version was NOT made by Harris, and was put online along with the fake “doom will become reality” hoax by unseen perpetrators who wanted to use Columbine as a reason to ban violent games. ANYONE with doom modding knowledge could have made this, just because HIS name was on a wall pattern doesn’t mean HE actually made it.  Hell even me, back in 1998 with crappy doom modding ability could have made something like this… In the 1999-2000 period there were at least 3 examples of “questionable” evidence being used to attack games. This is the worst. This whole thing is a shirtstorm that will never end.

Then you have the Attempted Violent game Bans in 1999 by two states. They failed. These would have banned violent games to everyone, not just kids. Everyone thinks just because our country has more freedoms then others, no one will attempt to ban things like this. It ALREADY HAS HAPPENED. Supreme court shot it down, thankfully. However all we need is another big tragedy like Columbine, with ties to violent games, and the morons have another excuse for the next complete violent game ban. It’s quite probable that stuff like the hoax and the MANY articles by newspapers all making up utter BS about violent games, lead to the government getting involved and attempting to ban violent games that year. You had at least 1 moron (the troll mentioned above) blaming ID software for the  “modified version of doom” being possible, not knowing that ID software had NOTHING to do with the modding for classic doom. It was several very dedicated fans with hex editors finding out the specs of the format of the game. Same for Wolf3d. ID software didn’t even release 1 EDITOR for the damn game. Not till quake (in 1996) did they do that (for quake not doom).  It keeps going on. It never ends. This stuff keeps fueling the fire of the anti-gaming movement.  It’s a never-ending cycle of BS.

 

The future defenders of the right to make/buy/play/own violent games has to be vigilant for the next wave of BS after a supposed video game related crime, of this degree. I wrote this article because 99% of the Gaming community does NOT know about half of this. It was swept under the rug by the media, and forgotten. Never forget the faked and “questionable”  evidence used to demonize games and the result (attempted outright bans of violent games).  This wasn’t the only major thing of this type where lies were used to try to legislate morality on this scale. Back during the SCOTUS Brown VS EMA thing in 2010, a certain violent games hating group submitted an Amicus Brief mentioning at least 3 known lies 1) Violent games are used in the military to break down the inhibition to kill 2) The “Doom will become reality Hoax”  3) Micheal Carneal became a better shot all because of Doom. They wanted the Supreme Court to believe this stuff and the Justices, not knowing these were NOT facts but absolute BS might have ruled the other way. You can be thankful they did rule the right way to prevent the badly constructed CA bill from being passed. You can’t use an Obscenity Clause (like the CA bill Did) to regulate what violent games to legislate in any way. Lacking “scientific, educational, or literary value” is not ground for fining companies who sell a game that the judges in the state find “offensive” because of these things, because those three values are…..Subjective!!!   Be on guard for the next attack when the censors will undoubtedly try something like this again with another game.

Addendum:

My work with dehacked to attempt to disprove the claim was done in the hope of a complete debunking of the “begging students” concept. I literally tried 2 times over the last few months to find SOMETHING in doom (a bug, an issue with 1 code pointer, etc) that would prevent this from even being possible. I failed. Twice. It sucks too, because I did come across a few bugs with the sound system but none of them really stopped the begging sound from being played, just partially obscured it. Without the internet search I would have found nothing to write about, really.