Talk About GTA


Gta..... i remeber my first experience with it.

It was GTA3, ps2.

First thing i tried was beating up a random peds with a baseball bat, to my surprise an ambulance arrived, so i beat them up too, then i took their ambulance, and started driving on every sidewalk i came across.

Oh the irony :p
 
Won't speak for the rest of the world but we currently have the most realistic horror films/violent games ever to exist in the entirety of civilisation as well as access to forms of violent art/books which are grouped together in convenient "horror" sections coupled with the internet..

And yet the crime rate in England and Wales is the lowest in 29 years (40 years for any Scots in here). 

Let's be honest though if video games did have an affect on our youngsters they'd all be running around dark rooms in neon colours munching pills to repetitive music.

Oh.. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10645702

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/2874-scottish-crime-rate-falls-to-lowest-level-in-40-years.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think video games makes people more voilent. However, I do suspect that it gives confidence to those already inclined to be voilent.
 
Gta..... i remeber my first experience with it.

It was GTA3, ps2.

First thing i tried was beating up a random peds with a baseball bat, to my surprise an ambulance arrived, so i beat them up too, then i took their ambulance, and started driving on every sidewalk i came across.
Foxgod - beats virtual people up for no reason

GTA3 - sends an ambulance to help them

I see no evidence that it's a violent game!
 
Let's be honest though if video games did have an affect on our youngsters they'd all be running around dark rooms in neon colours munching pills to repetitive music.
...Brigstocke  :)

I see him and Jimmy Car on the stand up circuit at my local pub just before they were on the telly, funny.

I remember the original GTA, great game, with its slightly altered car manufacture names.

Not been tempted to repeat the violence from the GTA series myself, but have to admit after playing some GTA3 I was more observant to 'vantage points' shall we say. Around town I would notice nice spots which, had life been a game of GTA3, would be prime spots to plot up and rocket launch some helicopters... nothing more than daydream fantasising though
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I first saw this had been split a thread about "GTA" I thought it was very nice, maybe there was gonna be some discussion about the game mechanics and what you could do with it.

But instead I got 6 pages of morality wars... Quite disappointing.

I think that no game should have to defend its right to exist and be enjoyed by mature adults.

I like GTA, Carmageddon and many other games that people are offended by.

These games should not be forbidden. Neither should violent or sexy movies nor any other artform.

The only responsibility of the game publisher is to provide clear information about what the game offers so you don't get unpleasant surprises.

The responsibility lies with parents to keep track of their children and set personal limits for what is ok in their own family.

Before you get any game, make sure you know what's in it.

If you don't like games simulating criminal behaviour, you're free to not play.

I don't like DRM, so I'm using my freedom to not play DRM protected games, that's my moral stand.

Vote with your wallet, it's the strongest vote you have.
 
If you don't like games simulating criminal behaviour, you're free to not play.

I don't like DRM, so I'm using my freedom to not play DRM protected games, that's my moral stand.

Vote with your wallet, it's the strongest vote you have.
Same here. That's why I am such a fan of gog.com and why I did not buy Fallout: New Vegas although I am a very big fan of Fallout.

Hopefully Wastelands 2 will be DRM free.

Vote with your wallet, if you do not like violent games (some people here are right: Mario is a violent sexistic killer)

unskippable movietrailers or not everywhere playable DVDs/BDs (try watching baught new Disney DVDs on your PC...),

Food with animal products from aweful living conditions (animal products at all if you are more like me...), etc...

But I do not hope think, that Kumaki and the other haters here actually buy loads of violent games just to see them burn.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, you really can overreact. Again, I'm not suprised by this. I did not attack any of your moderator decisions, I stated that because of your bigoted views and desire for censorship it was worrying that you are in fact a moderator - you're unable to be impartial over this issue and that is not a good quality for someone who is to moderate others. Your reaction over what I posted is proof you are not, in my eyes, a good choice to moderate.

You are not getting an apology, you are certainly overreaching yourself and I welcome discussion with the other moderators.

D.
OK. Here's my final word on this whole deal:
I hold and maintain that a Mod, any Mod, myself included...does not give up the right to have or to voice strong, even unpopular opinions.

You should know that these opinions do NOT come into play when I am in a Mod capacity.

There are several safeguards we have put in place to prevent this very thing.

For one, we have a very uniform set of "rules" among the majority of Mods...as to what sort of stuff warrants immediate action from any Mod who sees it. Anything else, which is questionable...is brought to a discussion among many Mods, where decisions are then made. In the meantime, the offending post may be Hidden, but not deleted - and if it is later decided such post should not have been Hidden - it will be Unhidden.

Generally, no warning points or other action short of Hiding posts is done unilaterally. and Hidden posts are still usually brought for general discussion - unless the Hidden post violates one of the basic rules we have in lace which are no-brainers - for example, ad spam, pornography, mention of any illegal item or activity.

Furthermore, some Mods, myself included...have a certain list of people whom they will not Mod...because of the possible appearance of any personal bias/grudge. Just as Supreme Court Justices in the United states recuse themselves from cases in which they may have a personal interest, or a conflict of interest...so we Mods, as professional people...recuse ourselves from such things.

What angered me was I felt you had implied that I had, would, or could...abuse or misuse my position as a Mod...or over-reach in my position as a Mod. I can assure you that my own sense of fairness, would prevent me from doing this. I felt you had attacked my integrity, and this angered me more than you can know...and I had all I could do to even remain fairly civil and eben-handed in my response to you...the whole "I have nothing further to say to you, sir" was an attempt to convey to you exactly how much you had angered me.

Your position regarding GTA being opposed to mine is not what angered me. As far as I am concerned, everyone has a right to their opinion, and everyone who does not match my view certainly has the right to be wrong...and to express that. What angered me was that I felt you implied that I had, could, or would...Moderate in a manner that was not fair and balanced.

You can be assured, because of the rules we have in place, that most Mods have agreed to...prevents such a thing. That and my own sense of integrity. However, I will state, and for the record...that one who is a Mod does not give up the right to have, hold or express, strong personal opinions...even when those opinions may be unpopular.

And to insinuate that one would Moderate in a manner that is not fair...because of those strong opinions is uncalled for - because now you know how Modding is done behind the scenes. There are safeguards in place to prevent the sort of thing that you seem to feel could occur.

If you oppose GTA because it glorifies thugs and thiefs, you should also be opposed to any war game, because that glorifies war. War is much worse than thugs and thiefs: the latter are mostly poor people committing mostly small crimes and violence to try to improve their own miserable personal situation, whereas the former are waged on a much larger scale and with many more casualties, by very rich people, for their own economic interests, and they're paid (both in money and lives) by the public. At least a thug does his own dirty work, the rich elite (e.g. the oil industry leaders) let others (e.g. soldiers) do the dirty work for them, and don't even pay them themselves, but manage to directly pay them with tax payers' money (which they contribute very little to). They even manage to legalize their crimes; for normal people it is illegal to steal a loaf of bread when you're hungry, but for the rich elite it is no problem and perfectly legal to get an entire village bombed to ashes if that's what it takes to get access to (i.e. steal) that country's oil reserves. That's hypocrisy on probably the largest scale humanly possible.

Anyway, I can see why you would oppose depictions, interactive or not, of socially or morally unacceptable behavior. However, in my opinion it is rather naive and philosophically idealistic to assume that you can significantly change reality by changing or outlawing these depictions. In my opinion, it is better to try to take away the real underlying causes of the unwanted behavior, and while violent video games or movies may or may not be a cause of them, there certainly are more important and significant causes: unemployment, poor education, lacking social security, bad health care (including mental health care), capitalism and its morals, etc. This is of course a much more daunting task than a relatively easy ban on violent video games, but it is what is needed to get rid of (or at least significantly reduce) thugs and thieves and wars. It requires a social-economical and political revolution, if it's up to me, a revolution that removes capitalism and replaces it with democratic socialism.
 I think, sir, we agree on far much more than we disagree on!

Murde rate in the USA 1900 1.2 per 100,000. In 2010 4.6 per 100,000

Rape stats in USA . From 1960 to 2010 the population doubled. Rape went up 5x.

Yep things have got worse.

Putting our heads in the sand doesn't help.
 
Rapes reported went up x5. That is different from actual rapes. Where do you get your statistics?
 

I can post statistics that support my argument too

United States 2003 --> 93,883 reported cases of rape

United States 2009 --> 84,767 reported cases of rape

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics
Rapes reported went up x5. That is different from actual rapes. Where do you get your statistics?
 
Devil's advocate:

between 2003 and 2009, the number of REPORTED rape cases went down. This does not mean fewer rapes happened...just that fewer of them were reported!

You can't have it both ways, dude.

At this point, since the discussion seems to have been fairly well hashed out, and it is obvious that I will not change anyone's opinions...nor will they change mine...it is time to move on and leave this topic behind.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Devil's advocate:

between 2003 and 2009, the number of REPORTED rape cases went down. This does not mean fewer rapes happened...just that fewer of them were reported!

You can't have it both ways, dude.
The argument is not that the reported rape cases could have gone down up. The argument was that they did go up. And while it wasn't directly presented the reasons why are kind of common knowledge.
You'd have a really hard time supporting an argument that rate of report went down from 2003 to 2009.

Incidentally, I'd draw a meaningful correlation between society's relaxed tolerance towards previously "taboo" material in the media and society's increased willingness to report rape.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You'd have a really hard time supporting an argument that rate of report went down from 2003 to 2009.


Incidentally, I'd draw a meaningful correlation between society's relaxed tolerance towards previously "taboo" material in the media and society's increased willingness to report rape.
I hadn't actually thought of that, but now that you say it, it's obvious. Darn.  :blink:
 
Wow, you really can overreact. Again, I'm not suprised by this. I did not attack any of your moderator decisions, I stated that because of your bigoted views and desire for censorship it was worrying that you are in fact a moderator - you're unable to be impartial over this issue and that is not a good quality for someone who is to moderate others. Your reaction over what I posted is proof you are not, in my eyes, a good choice to moderate.

You are not getting an apology, you are certainly overreaching yourself and I welcome discussion with the other moderators.

D.
What angered me was I felt you had implied that I had, would, or could...abuse or misuse my position as a Mod...or over-reach in my position as a Mod. I can assure you that my own sense of fairness, would prevent me from doing this. I felt you had attacked my integrity, and this angered me more than you can know...and I had all I could do to even remain fairly civil and eben-handed in my response to you...the whole "I have nothing further to say to you, sir" was an attempt to convey to you exactly how much you had angered me.
Your position regarding GTA being opposed to mine is not what angered me. As far as I am concerned, everyone has a right to their opinion, and everyone who does not match my view certainly has the right to be wrong...and to express that. What angered me was that I felt you implied that I had, could, or would...Moderate in a manner that was not fair and balanced.
Final word or not, your actions there was exactly what I was talking about.
I will be expecting an apology for that attack. And if I do not get one, I will report it for other Mods to deal with
I maintain in full public view that you are unable to moderate in an unbiased manner, that you cannot be trusted to moderate without bringing your own agenda to the table. I assert my opinion that you are unfit to moderate and that as a moderator, and indeed a member of any sensible society, you are not worthy of my respect.
Yes you, madam, have lost any respect I may have had for you. And you're still not getting an apology.

D.
 
And now that both sides have had their say on the issue of Moderating , I'll ask that we keep the rest of the discussion on topic.

Well heck that won't probably happen, but please try.   :)  
 
Wow, you really can overreact. Again, I'm not suprised by this. I did not attack any of your moderator decisions, I stated that because of your bigoted views and desire for censorship it was worrying that you are in fact a moderator - you're unable to be impartial over this issue and that is not a good quality for someone who is to moderate others. Your reaction over what I posted is proof you are not, in my eyes, a good choice to moderate.

You are not getting an apology, you are certainly overreaching yourself and I welcome discussion with the other moderators.

D.
What angered me was I felt you had implied that I had, would, or could...abuse or misuse my position as a Mod...or over-reach in my position as a Mod. I can assure you that my own sense of fairness, would prevent me from doing this. I felt you had attacked my integrity, and this angered me more than you can know...and I had all I could do to even remain fairly civil and eben-handed in my response to you...the whole "I have nothing further to say to you, sir" was an attempt to convey to you exactly how much you had angered me.
Your position regarding GTA being opposed to mine is not what angered me. As far as I am concerned, everyone has a right to their opinion, and everyone who does not match my view certainly has the right to be wrong...and to express that. What angered me was that I felt you implied that I had, could, or would...Moderate in a manner that was not fair and balanced.
Final word or not, your actions there was exactly what I was talking about.
I will be expecting an apology for that attack. And if I do not get one, I will report it for other Mods to deal with
I maintain in full public view that you are unable to moderate in an unbiased manner, that you cannot be trusted to moderate without bringing your own agenda to the table. I assert my opinion that you are unfit to moderate and that as a moderator, and indeed a member of any sensible society, you are not worthy of my respect.
Yes you, madam, have lost any respect I may have had for you. And you're still not getting an apology.

D.
Well, guess how much sleep I will lose over not having YOUR precious respect?If you guessed "none" you're right.

You act as if your vaunted "respect" is something precious. It isn't. You are no better than anyone else.

You are entitled to your opinion that I am unfit to Moderate. Obviously, because I am a Mod...others feel differently.

And since I have never done anything inappropriate in a Mod capacity, there is no cause or reason to heed the call of your personal lynch mob.

You should know that, henceforth, I shall Mod nothing which involves you. This is because you would obviously have some reason to question any Mod activity taken against you - if I were involved. You would point to this little tiff between us and scream "foul - personal bias/grudge"

So now it matters not to you whether or not I am a Mod...because my actions will never impact YOU.

Now I truly DO have nothing further to say to you sir. Good day.
 
Kumaki I swear to whatever supreme being(s) there is/are ( probably my mom or sister :p ) that I WILL NOT EVER ( unless the fate of the multiverse depends on it ) force you to play GTA . That said please don't force others to change their gaming habits ( not that you would ) .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok stop fighting in public everyone please. Please dis each other in PM.

<3 from your friendly neighbourhood failing amateur moderator
 
Wow, you really can overreact. Again, I'm not suprised by this. I did not attack any of your moderator decisions, I stated that because of your bigoted views and desire for censorship it was worrying that you are in fact a moderator - you're unable to be impartial over this issue and that is not a good quality for someone who is to moderate others. Your reaction over what I posted is proof you are not, in my eyes, a good choice to moderate.


You are not getting an apology, you are certainly overreaching yourself and I welcome discussion with the other moderators.


D.
What angered me was I felt you had implied that I had, would, or could...abuse or misuse my position as a Mod...or over-reach in my position as a Mod. I can assure you that my own sense of fairness, would prevent me from doing this. I felt you had attacked my integrity, and this angered me more than you can know...and I had all I could do to even remain fairly civil and eben-handed in my response to you...the whole "I have nothing further to say to you, sir" was an attempt to convey to you exactly how much you had angered me.

Your position regarding GTA being opposed to mine is not what angered me. As far as I am concerned, everyone has a right to their opinion, and everyone who does not match my view certainly has the right to be wrong...and to express that. What angered me was that I felt you implied that I had, could, or would...Moderate in a manner that was not fair and balanced.
Final word or not, your actions there was exactly what I was talking about.
I will be expecting an apology for that attack. And if I do not get one, I will report it for other Mods to dea

l withockquote> I maintain in full public view that you are unable to moderate in an unbiased manner, that you cannot be trusted to moderate without bringing your own agenda to the table. I assert my opinion that you are unfit to moderate and that as a moderator, and indeed a member of any sensible society, you are not worthy of my respect.

Yes you, madam, have lost any respect I may have had for you. And you're still not getting an apology.

>


D.
Well, guess how much sleep I will lose over not having YOUR precious respect?
If you guessed "none" you're right.


You act as if your vaunted "respect" is something precious. It isn't. You are no better than anyone else.


You are entitled to your opinion that I am unfit to Moderate. Obviously, because I am a Mod...others feel differently.


And since I have never done anything inappropriate in a Mod capacity, there is no cause or reason to heed the call of your personal lynch mob.


You should know that, henceforth, I shall Mod nothing which involves you. This is because you would obviously have some reason to question any Mod activity taken against you - if I were involved. You would point to this little tiff between us and scream "foul - personal bias/grudge"


So now it matters not to you whether or not I am a Mod...because my actions will never impact YOU.


Now I truly DO have nothing further to say to you sir. Good day.
Oh ... He's a bit of a troll . Don't take what he says to heart he is almost never serious .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There were maniacs before video games, there are proportionally the same amount of maniacs now that there are games like GTA. Its personal accountability, video games aren't the fault people lose their mind. As strongly as you feel they are the cause I feel they are not. It also boils down to poor parenting to be bluntly honest, I don't let my kids play games like that, but banning them so other fail parents that don't concern themselves with the hobbies of their kids, so they won't have to bother themselves with the interests of their kids. Play the games with your kids, or if you don't want to spend that time with your kids, at least research the game beforehand or rent it and play it yourself before letting them play. We filter and test drive movies and games before giving them to our kids. And I also keep an active part in my kids free time. My parents did that for me growing up and I didn't turn out to be a freak, or hate them, and when it was age appropriate me and my dad played GTA together, and I enjoyed it, it was fun. I never shot anyone or went on a raping or stealing spree afterwards either. I grow very tired of people pointing the blame of current events on external sources. Sometimes, shit just happens. And even when you can point the blame on a specific external source, it doesn't always need fixed. The risk that is being avoided needs to outweigh the impact on society, and banning violence in video games is not even close to being worth it. Similar situation, bullying is turning into a crime in america... Bullying.... Really???? Yea... Listen, just tell your kids to learn to deal with it. Jerks are a part of life. Its social pecking order in a small scale, prepairing you for real life. That's part of growing up. Eliminating bullies is like saying, here we are going to remove assholes from society. Unfortuneatly being a jerk isn't against the law, and someone is going to make fun of you as an adult, its unavoidable, you won't have any experience dealing with assholes and you'll end up punch them in the face, which is against the law, and then boom, you're the one in jail. Just saying. Teenagers offing themselves because they're picked on, I had a friend off himself growing up just because he was cheated on by his girlfriend... Shit happens, the guy was weak, so are those people, Darwinism at its finest.
Forgive me but you sound incredibly heartless.

I suspect YOU were never bullied when you were a kid.  I was.  And it's hell.

The goddam bully always gets away with it...and then, when you finally can no longer take it and you react then YOU are the one who gets in trouble.,  The goddamn teacher NEVER sees the bully.

Forgive me for wanting to idiot-proof and asshole-proof the world.  I believe MY right to be basically SAFE...supercedes your right to play violent video games that might inspire unstable people to commit those acts in real life.  But again, that is me.  I do not see why ANYONE needs or even WANTS to play horrible games like that...and I do not see why anyone needs or wants an assault rifle.  A hunting rifle?  Great.  A shotgun for home defense?  You got it!  An AK-47...what the hell are you gonna use that for, except hunting humans?

My point?  There are certain things that are acceptable to me, and some which are not.  If you get rid of all the wepons like assault rifles, so that someone can't re-enact GTA in real life...then maybe you can have GTA.  Otherwise forget it.  That is my attitude.  I am not a big one for censorship, but there comes a point where the general safety and welfare of society has to take precedence over some people's individual rights.

And, again, we are WAY off topic here.

I swear the next post about GTA is gonna get split off into a different thread.  I know you defenders of GTA will never be satisfied to let me have my opinion.
Kumaki , I respect you as a human and as a mod , but here I need to justify my need for " asualt weapons " A 1022 with a wood stock , weaver mounts and no pistol grip is just as deadly as one with a pistol grip , plastic stock , and pitcanny ( probably spelled wrong ) rails . The diference is just cosmetic . On the subject of bolt action rifles being more powerful than "assualt weapons" : ( bolt action the kind you don't mind ) most ( there are exceptions both ways ) bolt actions are chambered in higher power calibers than assualt rifles . So yes , they fire slower . BUT I COULD WALK INTO A WALMART AND KILL PEOPLE . It would take longer but the round would better go through armor , better and put holes in people better . We have 2 ak47 diratives in my house . Personally I would take a bolt action for general use . BUT sometimes it is offsetting to move your eye out of your scope to jack in another round . TO be honest I sorta understand the point of of the whole gernade launcher mount , but then you cannot legally buy grenades so ... , but my GOD ... plastic and pitcanny rails are some of the  things in the world for guns . Lighter carry more ammo . Pitcanny rails offer the abilty to switch acesories faster . Hi capacity mags . The more ammo you have the more weight you have stuck to your gun . YES IT IS that noticable .  Pistol grips ? of all the things you could restrict ? THEY ARE JUST FOR a better abilty to grip your gun . having shot both ( and having both in home ) an ak47 ( 2 , actually , sterotypical terroist gun ) and a 300 win mag ( Chris Kyle's gun of choice ) I feel I could do as much if not more damage with a 300 win mag . Why ? zoom in with my high power scope and snipe Bob Piden ( made up pundit ) . Instantly cause panic and still have more ammo . Ak47 : start firing and with hope I hit something ( most toughest gun , but hoover damn its inaccurate ) plus waste all my ammo because I keep pulling that trigger . SURE I COULD kill a whole buncha nobodys with an assualt rifle , but for some reason the feds seem to only show emotion over their own . OKAY I know you hate me because of my last sentence of hill billy redneck rant ( and proud )  but can you name off the all the people at Newtown , or the shooter who were killed ( without googling ) , yet I'm betting you heard he used a bushmaster for his deed ( I'm part of the camp saying the assualt rifle was in the vehicle and that he used pistols ) . Dadun . I think personally he still could have done it with a bolt action . Or a crossbow . Or a knife . Or hell he could have drove in with a bomb in a bucket . YOU are trained to recognize a gun . But You see a guy walking around with a bucket with a ticking noise and you laugh - a lol wtf moment for most people before its too damn late .

Thanks for putting up with my bad grammer , puncation , and spelling hillbilly rant . I get emotional I sincerly hope I did nothing to offend . Plus I live in a rural area where you have to drive through the ton of 2000 only k-12 school to get to the gunrange . YEAH BUDDY . And the neigboring town is holding a raffle to win an ar15 for benifit of their school . If it was up to me I would have mental health screenings tri annually for gun owners , mental health evaluation bi yearly in schools , and a gun safety class in school using dummy guns ( even if you don't like guns you can learn how to check to make sure its unloaded , what NOT to do with a gun , and how to handle one , how to field strip one ) . As a lat note let me say that if all guns were to be outlawed ( not happening ) then sudenly the cartels would have a new source of revunue . I'm sorry to say I'd then probably be good customer . As would plenty of Americans . also you may have heard of defense distrubuted .
 
lmfao, some Moderators are funny. I miss Prometheus and Gruso :(

29472_1_gta_v_official_cover_released_full.jpg

On topic, I love the GTA series and I can't wait till GTA V is released :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top