BBC's The Big Questions addresses MW2

By Robert Purchese Published 17 November, 2009

Are games damaging us, asks Campbell?

BBC presenter Nicky Campbell has hosted a debate on UK television programme The Big Questions about violent videogames and their affect on society following the historic launch of Modern Warfare 2.

Aired at 10am on Sunday, 15th November, the debating show invited experts and public alike to offer their opinions on the topic.

Miranda Suit, member of Mediamarch (a voluntary group aiming to "reduce the harmful effects of the media on our children, families and society") opened the discussion: "The role-playing element of these games makes them very, very potent... We've had a lot of anecdotal evidence from parents and teachers saying how they make children more violent."

She said "academic research" showed games - grouped under "violent media" - are making people "more violent". But, asked Campbell, this is adult entertainment, and surely we can decide what is wrong or right?

"Well no...It depends on the individual you're dealing with. If you've got a stable background you might be able to deal with it [but] then you get desensitised and you become one of the bystanders - and we know we've got a problem with bystanders," she said.

"If you're a vulnerable young person, and this is the scary bit, if you're already involved in anti-social behaviour - and you're probably the one getting hold of a game like this at the age of thirteen - it will reinforce your violent behaviour and you'll go and commit crime on the streets where you live."

Agony aunt Jenni Trent Hughes was disgusted after watching the controversial airport scene in Modern Warfare 2: "I started to cry," she recalled, "I felt sick to my stomach and I was frightened." She said she sat there with her 15 year-old son and he had to shield his face from the screen. "You and I both know - you more than I - that there's more children buying it," she added, perhaps explaining why she had shown her underage child the scene.

Alex Goldberg, Jewish Chaplain at the University of Surrey agreed: "We fudge this issue about children time and time again throughout this debate. Let's face it, it's children playing this game. "

Fazan Mohammed from the British Muslim Forum offered a shocking historical argument: "A lot of people make the excuse that this is just entertainment, but Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister of the Nazi Germany said, 'My entertainment did more for the German people in terms of creating this psyche for war and hostility towards other people than the speeches of Adolf Hitler'. Using this idea that this is just entertainment is no justification whatsoever." Campbell quipped that holy wars had claimed far more lives than computer games.

The microphone then passed to Giselle Pakeerah, whose son Stefan Pakeerah was brutally murdered in 2004 by a youth "obsessed" with violent videogames (Manhunt).

"The fact is that the greatest consumers of these games are between 11 and 17 and they play the games for hours on end," said Pakeerah. "And we know there's a lot of evidence - theoretical and empirical - that repetitive exposure to violent media alters a child's perception of life and how they deal with conflict resolution. That's the crux of the matter."

Professor Haim Bresheeth from the University of East London said the same videogame companies that produce titles like Modern Warfare 2 are producing "military games to train soldiers to kill" in the US and Israel. "They think it's effective - I think they're right," he stated.

Simon Jay, a community and youth worker, said the children he looks after were "hyper" after playing a violent game or watching a violent film, and would "beat" and "tackle" each other on the street. Apparently some youths went boxing for real on the streets after playing a "violent" boxing game and got hurt.

"What worries me though about this whole debate is that the fact remains: we have a system whereby these videogames should be properly censored - they've got an 18 certificate," said Right Reverend Stephen Lowe, the former bishop of Hulme, who plays World of Warcraft. He said MW2 has material that "shouldn't have got past the censor" and should have been "cut out"; regulators should have "dealt with that properly" and that is "unacceptable".

Videogames were defended by a few, and even Nicky Campbell on occasions. Some chap in a nice blue shirt said videogames are being used as a "scapegoat" in the same way people targeted films in the 1980s.

"Well, millions of people play computer games," said another, older, gentleman. "Say someone does kill someone, you have to judge that against the millions of people's enjoyment. If you want to ban cars you'll save hundreds of lives. Or ban football - you're certainly not going to have football hooligans if you get rid of football, and I've seen plenty of people get very stressed out even watching the game."

The full programme, The Big Questions - Series 2, Episode 41, can be watched on the BBC iPlayer.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (163) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • cianchristopher #1 2 years ago

    Can we have more articles on this "Modern Warfare 2" game please?

  • wizlon #2 2 years ago

    Games killed my father and raped my mother!

  • jim1975 #3 2 years ago

    stop clicking on the stories then. nobody's forcing you

  • hardtech #4 2 years ago

    ...If a game is rated 18 then surely its the responsiblity of the parents to ensure that minors are not actually playing it...

    RETARDS!

  • solidSnake04 #5 2 years ago

    clearly there is a case of bad parenting going on there. do not allow your children, under the age of 18 to play the game.

  • Orange #6 2 years ago

    Does annoy me to see people like Miranda Suit and Giselle Pakeerah stating things as fact and as truth when they are not.

    Bit worried a tory government would use games as a scapegoat like they did with "video nasties".

  • Zomoniac #7 2 years ago

    Fucking bystanders. It's always the fucking bystanders.

  • JimWest #8 2 years ago

    I've been playing Mario for years. It encourages me to go jumping on turtles then kicking them across the ground.

  • ZuluHero #9 2 years ago

    the older gentleman speaketh sence... listen to him more and less to the raving ramblings of paranoia.

  • SleepyDeathFred #10 2 years ago

    What is this bystanders thing? Are they arguing that people desensitized by violent media are unlikely to step in or call the police when an assault or murder or something is happening?

  • lennon #11 2 years ago

    Or ban football - you're certainly not going to have football hooligans if you get rid of football

    No that is true you would just have to call them hooligans then!

    I say ban smoking and alcohol we would save many more lives.

  • joephish #12 2 years ago

    Broken link? (the bit that's meant to go to iPlayer)

  • BabyJesus #13 2 years ago

    The tories will crack down on this next term. :/

    Despite all their shite about how we have to care about the industry you know they will subscribe to popular daily mail opinion as soon as they are in the door.

    Reading that transcript there it also seems there was very little debate, just an organised attack on videogames. Shockingly bad by the BBC if that is the case.(I will watch it later to see if that truly is the case, if it is, I will be making a complaint of one sided arguments to the BBC,not that it'll make a difference)

  • MCF #14 2 years ago

    Shame they didn't get Charlie Brooker on to talk about how video games are not the devil. Then again, this is from his Screen Burn column in the Guardian in 2005: "You know that weird "thing" about Nicky Campbell? That indefinable "thing" that makes him ever so slightly creepy, like you wouldn't want to get stuck in a lift with him, because you half suspect he might suddenly pull a Stanley knife from his sleeve and start wildly slashing at you with a terrifyingly blank expression on his face? Well Jeremy Kyle's got that same "thing" about him, but amplified by a factor of 12."

  • Whizzo #15 2 years ago

    Perhaps there can be a level in MW3 where you shoot up a TV studio full of self important muppets?

    Or just maybe Nicky Campbell, he's a twat.

  • aldo_14 #16 2 years ago

    Why does the Pakeerah thing keep coming up in these, given that a) the game was owned by the victim and b) the police thoroughly dismissed any connection with games? I'd be happy to see a debate if it wasn't for the overriding sense that the 'anti' camp is driven by blinkered prejudice and idiocy.

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #17 2 years ago

    /iPlayer

  • Paperghost #18 2 years ago

    not to be an arse, but with regards

    "The microphone then passed to Giselle Pakeerah, whose son Stefan Pakeerah was brutally murdered in 2004 by a youth "obsessed" with violent videogames (Manhunt)."

    ...did they mention the copy of the game was the victims and not the killers, and that "Leicestershire Constabulary stands by its response that police investigations did not uncover any connections to the video game, the motive for the incident was robbery."?

    I'm guessing no.

    / edit - good to see its not just me that this annoys when endlessly brought up.
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 13:56

  • darleysam #19 2 years ago

    But the police, in their investigation of Stefan Pakeerah's death, confirmed that his murderer wasn't obsessed with Manhunt. That it was Stefan who owned and played the game lots.

    But hey, let's go rewriting history if it helps us prove our point, eh chaps?

    Seriously.. this looks like a good, valuable debate. Both sides well represented, as long as 'both sides' are bellowing about how bad video games are and how they will be the end of society. There can't possibly be any consideration to the angle that games might actually not be Satan incarnate, because that is the opinion of communists. And you don't want to be a filthy pinko commie now, do you?
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 13:58

  • BritishBlue1 #20 2 years ago

    The way they go you'd think MW2 didn't have a clearly labelled 18 rating, of course they don't mention movies because they "get" movies. I've seen worse violence in the SAW franchise.

  • Retroid #21 2 years ago

    Big Questions badly phrased to people with tiny awareness.

  • MattRobson #22 2 years ago

    At no point have i had the urge to kill another being in the manor depicted in Manhunt, nor do i now desire to go to an airport or heavily populated area and open fire with a fully automatic weapon.... i do have a strange habit with jumping on mushrooms though for some reason.

    I wonder how many people jumping on this band waggon have actually played it and know that your an under cover agent who then gets found out at the end of the level and the events in this mission lead to the rest of the game and the fictional Russian's launching war on the world? yes the scene was over the top and you are forwarned about it TWICE when you first stick the game in the console, but i dare say any sane member of society will not suddenly become a cold hearted killer just from MW2.

    also agree that its parents not sticking to the age restrictions thats part of the problem.

  • sebsal #23 2 years ago

    So as an adult i'd be unable to play this game because it might be played by some mentalist kids?

    Kids are mental anyway. Action Man was all about being a solider and killing

    The airport scene is a stupid, a way over the top, publicity stunt that has worked for IW. The level is crap, the civilians all look alike and they are graphically cartoony.
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 13:58

  • RedPanda #24 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • ColdShoulder #25 2 years ago

    As long as they're called games, there will always be those who miss the point that some scenes aren't meant to leave you with a smile on your face.

    @redpanda
    Spot on dude, only the official body count is over 1.3 million now.
    Edited by 2 at 17/11/09 @ 13:58

  • ZuluHero #26 2 years ago

    I don't know about you guys, but i wouldn't subject my own child to violent media just to prove a point. Regardless of how passionatly i felt about the subject.

  • Retroid #27 2 years ago

    Prime example:

    'Alex Goldberg, Jewish Chaplain at the University of Surrey agreed: "We fudge this issue about children time and time again throughout this debate. Let's face it, it's children playing this game. "'

    Just because he *believes* in something with no facts to back it up, it doesn't automatically make him correct.

  • bad09 #28 2 years ago

    "Miranda Suit, member of Mediamarch (a voluntary group aiming to "reduce the harmful effects of the media on our children, families and society";) opened the discussion: "The role-playing element of these games makes them very, very potent... We've had a lot of anecdotal evidence from parents and teachers saying how they make children more violent.""

    Anecdotal evidence, ah that's always right isn't it? Like the anecdotal evidence they use to keep cannabis illegal and sack scientists who tell the government the taxable stuff is actually worse for the public.....


    "Agony aunt Jenni Trent Hughes was disgusted after watching the controversial airport scene in Modern Warfare 2: "I started to cry," she recalled, "I felt sick to my stomach and I was frightened." She said she sat there with her 15 year-old son and he had to shield his face from the screen."

    15 YEAR OLD you STUPID BLOODY COW!!!! Seriously if you start crying at a video game you should not give people advice about their adults lives as clearly you have no clue.....


    "holy wars had claimed far more lives than computer games."

    End of. Ban Religion first then we talk.
    Edited by 2 at 17/11/09 @ 14:01

  • kinky_mong #29 2 years ago

    "We've had a lot of anecdotal evidence from parents and teachers saying how they make children more violent."

    Anecdotal evidence you say? Why that's the best, most factual kind of evidence! Case closed I think you'll all agree!

    @aldo_14: You said exactly what I was going to. Still it's easier for her to use the game as a scapegoat to avoid the real issue that she allowed her son to play a game unsuitable for his age.

  • Eraysor #30 2 years ago

    I lol at complaining that children shouldn't be watching a certain scene, only to have your own child watch it with you. How unbelievably retarded.

    They also, of course, miss the point that the game is now the video game equivalent release of Titanic and is regarded as one of the best ever made, and not because it involves this one particular scene.

  • RedPanda #31 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • SleepyDeathFred #32 2 years ago

    What's annoying, watching the programme, is the idea that these people all seem to be espousing, that any emotional reaction whatsoever is somehow inappropriate. The woman saying that she "started to cry" and "felt sick to [her] stomach" is having an extreme version of what the level is meant, presumably, to provoke. You're not meant to enjoy it.

  • Whizzo #33 2 years ago

    Just because he *believes* in something with no facts to back it up, it doesn't automatically make him correct.

    Indeed, the real fact that most gamers aren't kids always seems to be ignored too.

  • berelain #34 2 years ago

    ridiculousness, once again. Where is all this "evidence"? The anecdotal responses given in the programme amount to absolutely nothing- the kids tackle each other after playing violent games. Does the same happen when they watch an action cartoon? Quite likely, or when they do anything that could be construed as mentally stimulating. Hell, we used to play turtles at primary school and beat each other up, but it was part of growing up. In fact, I think pretty much every species on earth has playfights when they're young. Except maybe woodlice. What, do we force lions to play violent videogames in the wilds of Africa?

    Although, with regard to the MW2 airport scene, I did find it utterly pointless- given that you're supposed to be infiltrating the organisation so you can kill Makarov, and he's right there next to you throughout the entire level. But if you shoot him, you die. Robs the level of any point, since you could just end it all right there and then. He only has a handful of bodyguards, too. But thats not really the issue here, really. Whoops.

  • maguire12 #35 2 years ago

    BBC are frustrated that nobody watches the mindless crap they make +
    People start to play video games to keep em selves entertained, realizing that interacitve entertainment is far more fun then eastenders
    = BBC doing everything in its power to destroy the reputation of video games and video gamers, hoping the lost generation of ex-tv viewers will be forced to return to the mindless tripe that is bbc tv programming


  • darleysam #36 2 years ago

    It's a problem with the media in general. Far too much credence is given over to opinion, anecdotal evidence and personal views. We can commission reports and investigations, fund experts to scrutinise and pore over details for month and reach valuable and informed conclusions, and it'll all be countered by a wailing mother blaming video games for her son's death.

  • mingster #37 2 years ago

    The only thing damaging is how incoherent the plot of MW2 is and it damaged my intelligence.

  • andywilkie35 #38 2 years ago

    How to make a mountain out of a molehill in one easy step:

    1. Keep banging on about the non issue in Daily Mail fashion, refusing to let it die down.

    Seriously, do people still really care about this? The only reason I care is that I find it baffling that so many people were apparently offended by it, and its frustrating from my high horse to see so many plebs still bleating on about it.

  • systems #39 2 years ago

    Games made me violent. I'm always in front of the telly being violent.

    So in summary, young kids are being bought violent 18-rated games by their parents ("I had to shield his eyes" my arse), who play these games "all the time". But they still have extra time to go out as well being violent?

  • WJF #40 2 years ago

    @maguire12

    Add to that the lack of a centralised and powerful pressure group for the videogames industry and you've got one hell of an easy target to kick.

  • glaeken #41 2 years ago

    The way the Pakeerah case keeps being raised when those raising it as an example know that it was the victim that owned the game not the aggressor really shows where some of these people are coming from. This is a political agenda and has nothing to do with the actual truth of the situation.

  • Shotaro #42 2 years ago

    So which game did Adolf Hitler get influenced by? All a load of bollocks, nutters are nutters, games are just a scapegoat!

  • jonsaan #43 2 years ago

    'Apparently some youths went boxing for real on the streets after playing a "violent" boxing game and got hurt'
    That really did make me laugh out loud.

  • jonsaan #44 2 years ago

    I watched the Exterminator when I was about 8 and have spent my life stabbing people in the back with weeding forks.

  • Retroid #45 2 years ago

    maguire12: "BBC are frustrated that nobody watches the mindless crap they make"

    You're confused. Programmes like this *ARE* the mindless crap, and they're mindless crap because they appeal to the Morally Outraged But Unfettered By Knowledge

    I can only presume you think the ITV & Sky public discussion programs are much better (they're not).

  • kangarootoo #46 2 years ago

    Hmmm. The show didn't seem very well balanced did it. Hard to say just from quotes, and I would say I should watch the show, but if I watch the show I'll probably just end up being annoyed with no other tangible result.

    I really don't consider this type of "tv lite" version of a debate to be even remotely likely to teach me something new. Since when did a person with a vested interest in something automatically get considered to be an expert in it? I find it tough to watch even 30 seconds of this sort of TV programme. Boiling down life's complexities into one big fat question that everyone can either say yes or no to, agree or disagree, good and heavenly or kitten punching evil.

    The really big question that should have a whole season of programmes dedicated to it is "What is more improtant, finding out the truth about how life actually works, or just picking the 'evidence' that lets you say you are right?"



    On a brighter note :)

    I'm not worried on the whole. As was mentioned in the same article, video games are just in a long line of creative products that the "people of the time" get all grumpy about, with no real long term effect. A few worried ignorants won't change the path of anything, because the rest of the population aren't so bothered and the aformentioned grumpy people will get bored after a while and get their fame hit by being quoted about some other subject of moral outrage.

    So nothing to worry about really. Ignore the show and the nimbys that inhabit it, and just play the huge range of great games available that aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

    /high five :D
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 14:13

  • kangarootoo #47 2 years ago

    "So which game did Adolf Hitler get influenced by?"

    What?

  • hardtech #48 2 years ago

    While I've not watched this yet, I'm pretty confident this will be along the same lines as the 'Dangerous Game' episode of the Tonight show on ITV...Which means that we're pretty much screwed for a fair opinion from a gamers POV on terrestrial Television aren't we?

  • Shill #49 2 years ago

    I blame PacMan, he started all this.

  • bad09 #50 2 years ago

    @ RedPanda

    Yeah let's report her to social services or something :)

    At the end of the day watching Strictly Come Dancing for 5 minutes gives me the huge urge to cry then walk into an airport and mow down innocent people, violent games actually stop me doing that.

    / pictures Bruce, thinks about killing spree, turns on GTA instead

  • StooMonster #51 2 years ago

    Newsnight Review was better, can we have an article about that please?

    [link url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b 00nxbyv/Newsnight_Review_13_11_2009/
    ]http://ww w.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00...[/link]

  • superteddy #52 2 years ago

    Giselle Pakeerah must carry most of the guilt because she bought the game for her son , it was played in her home with her blessing, and the poor lady would like someone to blame in place of herself. The media and certain mp"s have capitailizes on this women grief.
    To put this show in perpection, it as people of very strong views about things and does not invite moderates on anything. the next subject was burning synagoges,

  • darleysam #53 2 years ago

    X-Factor you mean.

    John and Edward. Oh dear me, here comes the rage!

    You think if I bleached my hair, projected it upwards, dressed as a ghostbuster and started murdering people, I could get that miserable popularity contest taken off-air?

    I'd do it.

    edit: x-factory? Why, I guess that's the most appropriate typo I'll ever make.
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 14:19

  • jonsaan #54 2 years ago

    @Kangarootoo

    Hitler didn't need games, he had WW1 to influence him. That had wicked graphics according to eyewitnesses. Although it was a little muddy.

  • Mkwone #55 2 years ago

    I forget the mp's name but he made the point which we all seem to agree on that is along the lines of 'Lets not try to ban games for adults because kids might play them, but ban kids from playing adult games'

    How do we get him to be PM?

  • iamian #56 2 years ago

    'Alex Goldberg, Jewish Chaplain at the University of Surrey agreed: "We fudge this issue about children time and time again throughout this debate. Let's face it, it's children playing this game. "'

    Just because he *believes* in something with no facts to back it up, it doesn't automatically make him correct.

    I think just by profession this chap likes to believe without facts or evidence

  • StooMonster #57 2 years ago

    BabyJesus: "The tories will crack down on this next term"

    Errr... wasn't it the Tories who spoke up against Keith Vaz, i.e. the Labour Party, and in support of the British games industry last week?

  • Edwin #58 2 years ago

    ecstasy, lager louts, alco pops, binge drinking, knives, guns, asbo's.. now add games into Media Hysteria...

  • BabyJesus #59 2 years ago

    @Stoo Monster, Tom Watson (Labour) did so and the tories did aswell, if you read the rest of what I said you will see what I meant.

    I.E As soon as they are in the door they will pander to the daily mail lot.

  • jonsaan #60 2 years ago

    I haven't even played the single player of MW2 to be honest. The MP is no worse than playing war with your mates in the 70s.

  • BlueDot #61 2 years ago

    Can we invoke Goodwin's Law ?

    http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

  • kinky_mong #62 2 years ago

    Does anyone else find the most depressing thing about this non-issue is that there seems to be an unwritten universal belief that anyone under the age of 18 is an overly-suggestible idiot who can't separate fictional computer games from reality? To be honest I would credit most under 18's with a better grip on reality than any of the contributors to this farce of a show.

  • bad09 #63 2 years ago

    @ iamian

    Awesome. That really made crack up, cheers! :)

  • hardtech #64 2 years ago

    +1million to Kinky_kong

  • Freelancepolice #65 2 years ago

    Her kid sounds like a pussy

  • jefranklin18 #66 2 years ago

    Irresponsible parenting is to blame for kids going off the boil, not games but you can't say tell that to neo-liberal pratts that want to restrict people's choices by banning anything they don't agree with.

    And the stuff about Goebbells is absolute bollocks. 1920s/30s Germany, as with a lot of countries at that time, was a hot bed of Nationalism. Goebbells had zero charisma compared to Hitler and spent his entire sycophantic time in Hitler's shadow, if he did indeed make that quote then he was delusional and Hitler would have no doubt had something to say.

  • NorUraeus #67 2 years ago

    @Retroid: "Just because he *believes* in something with no facts to back it up, it doesn't automatically make him correct."

    He is a chaplain, believing stuff with no facts to back it up is his job

  • StooMonster #68 2 years ago

    BabyJesus: "As soon as they are in the door they will pander to the daily mail lot."

    Yeah, coz it's not like Labour have done that every day for the last twelve years is it? Wait a minute ... ID cards, state sponsored spying on citizens, "think of the children" knee jerk reactions and assumptions that every adult is a paedo unless they prove they pay for a check, reclassification of drugs against scientific evidence and advice, etc. etc. Back in February Liam Burn had to actually state to MPs that "Daily Mail no longer sets government agenda" but I don't see any evidence of change.

    So what you're saying is ... no change.

  • NGCes26294BIV #69 2 years ago

    I hate this programme. How can you possibly answer 'the big questions' with a 15 minute timeslot and a random selection of Britain's finest rent-an-audience?

    "We've had a lot of anecdotal evidence from parents and teachers saying how they make children more violent"

    Key word there, anecdotal.

    "She said she sat there with her 15 year-old son and he had to shield his face from the screen"

    Why was her *15* year old son watching footage of an 18-rated game?

    "The fact is that the greatest consumers of these games are between 11 and 17"

    No they're not. they're actually between 18 and 25. It's called 'expendable income', and 'university loan' ;-)


    "And we know there's a lot of evidence - theoretical and empirical"

    I've got me some 'theoretical' evidence. I just made it up. It's complete garbage, but it's a 'theory', therefore I can use it in the same sentence as the word 'evidence'.

  • BabyJesus #70 2 years ago

    No, not really.@StooMonster. I believe there will be change, for the worse. If labour can be accused of pandering to any paper it would be The Sun not the Daily Mail. Thats the tories job.

  • Rodchenko #71 2 years ago

    I love it how that one guy singled out the 'US and Israel', whose mentioning alone usually triggers all the 'right' reflexes among a generally left-leaning, morally-high-grounded audience who still think that the BBC is a source of totally unbiased information.

    Plus, we all know that before simulation software was utilized within the armies of those evil, imperialist and racist countries, and soldiers had to practice with straw men, sandbags, and flipcharts, the world was such a lovely, cozy and non-violent place...

  • Retroid #72 2 years ago

    Shill: "I blame PacMan, he started all this"

    He's why the kids of the 1980s were obsessed with popping pills and repetitive beats.

  • Ninja_Tino #73 2 years ago

    If my 15 year old son covered his eyes during that scene I would disown him.

  • gjgjg #74 2 years ago

    cool. intelligent, mature and informed debates rule..... but hysteria? even better.

    go ahead BBFC cut it out. it will increase demand for the German version. oh wait no, Austrailian version...wait

  • Schmove #75 2 years ago

    This is an issue that can only truely be settled in an episode of Brass Eye!

  • Retroid #76 2 years ago

    NorUraeus: "@Retroid: "Just because he *believes* in something with no facts to back it up, it doesn't automatically make him correct."

    He is a chaplain, believing stuff with no facts to back it up is his job"

    I know, that's why I phrased it like that ;)

  • JonFE #77 2 years ago

    "Simon Jay, a community and youth worker, said the children he looks after were "hyper" after playing a violent game or watching a violent film, and would "beat" and "tackle" each other on the street."

    I used to do something similar after watching the Rocky movies; I actually punched a hole on the back of the wooden seat in front of me the moment Rocky drew first blood on Ivan Drago's face :) Ban sick films I say...

    Come to think of it, Russians were portrayed as the bad guys on that film also...

  • rickimalone #78 2 years ago

    Simple don't let 'children' or 'kids' play adult rated games. I'm pretty certain that these same parents would not but their children a bottle of Jack Daniels and a copy of Friday the 13th for their 11th birthday, the same should apply to gaming.

  • Bravestinsane #79 2 years ago

    "Agony aunt Jenni Trent Hughes was disgusted after watching the controversial airport scene in Modern Warfare 2: "I started to cry," she recalled, "I felt sick to my stomach and I was frightened." She said she sat there with her 15 year-old son and he had to shield his face from the screen. "You and I both know - you more than I - that there's more children buying it," she added, perhaps explaining why she had shown her underage child the scene."

    Don't buy if for your son then stupid bitch!

    Im seriously sick and tired of this crap IT IS THE PARENTS FAULT.

    Christ im 19 and the only reason i don't get id is because i know the people who work in my game store, i still get asked for ID everywhere else. Kids can't get hold of them as easy as people make out and the parents shouldn't allow them to play it in the first place.

  • Moz #80 2 years ago

    I'm getting really tired of these debats, the problem is not the content of the game, but that children are getting a hold of it.
    If a child is found to be playing a game that are underaged for then the parents should be prosecuted.

    I get really fed up with parent's complaining how their kids plays to many computer games and that it's effecting them in bad ways. Well then don't let your kid play the game then.

    Why should responsible adults be denied such things because parents cant control their kids.

  • jonsaan #81 2 years ago

    I'd rather my kids played some video games than watch utter drivel like Eastenders or some Cowell related shite.

  • MightyMouse #82 2 years ago

    Ah it's only a daytime tv show. It's no excuse I know but these things are moronic by design no matter what they're 'debating'.

  • CosmicGypsy #83 2 years ago

    THIS, is how we stop kids playing violent games

    [link url=http://www.vhemt.org/
    ]http://www.vhemt.org/
    [/link]

    JUST STOP BREEDING

  • keano #84 2 years ago

    as many have said, the fact she said she was watching an 18-rated game with her 15yr old son really does say it all....we have developed a society where we ourselfs are no longer totally responsible for our actions. there will always be someone else to blame.

    i feel events like the airport scene are so beyond normal interaction with the real world tht most people are detached from game events to reality. of course those that are "at risk" by influences surely should be in a monitoring situation in the first place.


    broken britain

  • Jasugun #85 2 years ago

    Some poeple can't handle football games and just get violent because their team lost but everyone agree such persons, adult or not, are responsible for the trouble they make, no one really blames football! Why is it different with games? Games are evil and strip people of all common sense so they're no more responsible for their own attitude?

  • Fletche #86 2 years ago

    "The fact is that the greatest consumers of these games are between 11 and 17"

    Is it? I thought the 25+ were now the biggest purchasers of video games?

  • Jasugun #87 2 years ago

    I say soccer games should be either banned or censored when a goal is scored, so no one gets too touchy about it... :)

  • Moz #88 2 years ago

    "The fact is that the greatest consumers of these games are between 11 and 17"

    Is it? I thought the 25+ were now the biggest purchasers of video games?

    The average age of gamers is around the 35 mark.

    Shame we didn't know about this in advance we could have gone along and balanced the argument.

  • Ninja_Tino #89 2 years ago

    I'm 19 and I got ID'd for a 15 the other day. Retailers are strict about selling age rated products. There's only a couple of ways kids get hold of age rated products and it's normally through someone older - normally a parent. Thick parents. And thick parents produce thick kids who become scum and because they own a game that is where the blame lies when they stab some innocent teenager or beat to death an elderly widower etc.

  • el_pollo_diablo #90 2 years ago

    I blame the atheists.

  • Madafunkola #91 2 years ago

    I have an idea - rather than relying on a Playstation as a babysitter/parenting tool - take your kids out to a park, teach them to read, play a musical instrument, visit a museum...

  • Gecks #92 2 years ago

    giving time for reactionary bullshit like this just serves to take the argument that videogames *might* have a negative affect on children and straw man it to fuck.

    it's like watching 'loose women' for your daily insight into the feminist movement.

  • skillian #93 2 years ago

    When it comes to kneejerk responses and unqualified statements, this comments thread sounds worse than the BBC studios.

    Rise above it people, or debate intelligently. You do yourself no favours.

    /bows out

  • kangarootoo #94 2 years ago

    I vote for rising above it.

    /bows out

  • Azazel #95 2 years ago

    Violent games stuffed my dog.

  • Lunatic4ever #96 2 years ago

    the point of that one man mentioned at the end of the article are really good.
    yozu got mio. enjoying it and yeah cars DO kill more pople...we cant always BAN what is dangerous.
    games in fact arent dangerous. a game is as dangerous as a knife. if u use it in a unstable psychological state
    it can be really dangerous but as it is...it is only an object.as useful one in the hands of someone who has good intentions.

  • geeza2020 #97 2 years ago

    Sigh.... this is very very simple and doesnt require any debate. Fucking idiotic parents who dont want to accept the responsibility of looking after their children need to realise that if a game has an 18 certificate, it is for fucking ADULTS. It is not for you to plop your kid in front of while you go and natter with your trashy friends about the most recent celebrity scandal. HOW MANY TIMES DOES THIS HAVE TO HAPPEN BEFORE THESE FUCKING RETARDS WAKE UP AND REALISE THAT THEIR KIDS ARE LITTLE SHITS AND ITS NOBODIES FAULT BUT THE FUCKING PARENTS. NOT GAMES, NOT MUSIC, NOT FILMS. BAD PARENTS = BAD CHILDREN.

  • Redeye #98 2 years ago

    I wouldn't trust Nicky Campbell to make me a sandwich, let alone host a reasoned, balanced debate on any subject whatsoever.

    Videogames discussions where opinion and misplaced anger masquerade as fact = instafail.

  • paulf #99 2 years ago

    just another in a long line of

    [link url=http://en.wi kipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic
    ]http://en.wi kipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic
    [/link]

  • keyboardmonkey #100 2 years ago

    BAN THIS SICK FILTH!!!

    No more Die Hard 2 for you...

  • Monkey_Puncher #101 2 years ago

    You're left disturbed by the images on screen so they should never have got past the censor?

    I guess we better ban Schindlers List, The Pianist and all the other Holocaust films out there.

    While I would say the airport scene was rather clumsily handled and over the top, I think it's a stupid narrow minded view that games as a medium cant handle this sort of material if done right. It seemed out of place in Call of Duty and didn't really convey any kind of message at all, which I think was a bit of a let down and only enforced the fact it was done for shock value. They had a real chance to take the industry to another level of mature story telling, but chickened out and went back to the big dumb blow everything up style of Michael Bay blockbuster.

  • Doctor_What #102 2 years ago

    In fairness: "Some chap in a nice blue shirt said videogames are being used as a "scapegoat" in the same way people targeted films in the 1980s."

    Well true, but society does seem to have been screwing itself further into the ground since the 1980s. Maybe violent films and games are perhaps something to do with it?

    It's fine to decry the whole thing, but we've got to ask whether we are blameless first. I'm not so sure. I wouldn't want the game I'm making to be played by kids, but I'm sure they'll get it anyway. Yes, parents need to control it, but if the games industry was further regulated (and films too) would that be so bad?

    A good game is a good game, even if it doesn't have so much blood and gore. Why do we need such violent games? What is all the violence for? If it appeals to some carnal aspect of ourselves then maybe we need to ask if it's a great idea to be targetting that.

    It's not just a question for games, but for all of society. As games developers we need to take responsibility for the games we make and the way that they can change people. Saying 'it's not our fault - it's the parents, the teachers, the films, blah blah blah' is just as bad as the people pointing the finger at games. They're not being fair in doing it, but we're not being fair in saying we're entirely blameless either.

  • sickpuppysoftware #103 2 years ago

    Come on boffins!

  • butler` #104 2 years ago

    can't remember the last time I heard someone speak on MW2 on Live whose balls had actually dropped tbh

  • Embattle #105 2 years ago

    While I would never claim that such games ae perfectly ideal I do find it lsightly annoying how many parents keep shirking their own responsibility, the sheer amount of parents who totally ignore age ratings is just shocking.

  • Monkey_Puncher #106 2 years ago

    ^ This is true

    So many squeaky children on Live with 'Blunt Trauma' as their logo. The parents deserve to be slapped, not for buying adult games for their hell spawn, but for buying them a mic to communicate with while they're playing.

  • SpaceMonkey77 #107 2 years ago

    These kind of media witch hunts are insulting, and frankly the BBC are ending up like Fox News.

    Notice that there's no games industry representatives on their panel, to give the audience a balanced view. I wonder why? No mention of the fact you can censor the game at the start. The noose has been placed clearly on the games neck before the thing even started.

    The reason for this is obvious. The BBC would prefer that you didn't buy and play games, and just watched their mostly dull nanny tv programs instead. They are losing their audiences to games, so such a witch hunt is never going to be fair and balanced.

  • Eighthours #108 2 years ago

    You're all missing the most important thing in the article: it's "effect", not "affect".

  • JusticeMoses #109 2 years ago

    Take a look at this: Call of Civic Duty 2. Spot on in my opinion.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #110 2 years ago

    The BBC used to air a daily programme like this that was hosted by Robert Kilroy Silk.

    As such, this nonsense is probably a step up. However, I find myself being supremely irritated at this program whenever I catch a few seconds snippet of it regardless of the subject matter.

    I think we can rest assured that serious politicians will no more take this programme's viewpoints on Modern warfare 2 seeriously than their viewpoints on "Should the body be sacrosanct after death?" from the week previous ( http://www.b bc.co.uk/programmes/b00np2g9 )

  • local_celebrity #111 2 years ago

    I used to live next door to Nicky Campbell in South London. He had a big old townhouse with bloody great big bars on the windows. My fondest memory from that time was throwing a half-eaten doner into his front garden. IDNSHC.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #112 2 years ago

    Take a look at this: Call of Civic Duty 2. Spot on in my opinion.

    Somebody at the BBC seems to have Charlie Brooker mixed up with Lawrence Fishburne.

  • GreyBeard #113 2 years ago

    Ummm wasn't the primary entertainment produced under the third reich predominantly musical comedies and lightweight fluff?

    Edit for proof below:

    From Wikipedia: ( http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_G... )

    "With the German film industry now effectively an arm of the totalitarian state, no films could be made that were not ostensibly in accord with the views of the ruling regime. However, despite the existence of anti-semitic propaganda works such as The Eternal Jew (1940) - which was a box-office flop - and the more sophisticated but equally anti-semitic Jud Süß (1940), which achieved commercial success at home and elsewhere in Europe, the majority of German films from the National Socialist period were intended principally as works of entertainment. The import of foreign films was legally restricted after 1936 and the German industry, which was effectively nationalised in 1937, had to make up for the missing foreign films (above all American productions). Entertainment also became increasingly important in the later years of World War II when the cinema provided a distraction from Allied bombing and a string of German defeats. In both 1943 and 1944 cinema admissions in Germany exceeded a billion,[1] and the biggest box office hits of the war years were Die große Liebe (1942) and Wunschkonzert (1941), which both combine elements of the musical, wartime romance and patriotic propaganda, Frauen sind doch bessere Diplomaten (1941), a comic musical which was one of the earliest German films in colour, and Wiener Blut (1942), the adaptation of a Johann Strauß comic operetta. The importance of the cinema as a tool of the state, both for its propaganda value and its ability to keep the populace entertained, can be seen in the filming history of Veit Harlan's Kolberg (1945), the most expensive film of the Nazi era, for the shooting of which tens of thousands of soldiers were diverted from their military positions to appear as extras."

    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 15:50

  • poopmonster #114 2 years ago

    Nice to see lots of calm, collected posts :)

    Really, anyone who expected a well-rounded and well-founded debate on this topic has never been exposed to media coverage before.

    The second they let Giselle Pakeerah speak, it entered the realms of pure fiction. I feel genuine sympathy for Mrs Pakeerah, moreso because she has been led to still believe that a game was responsible for her son's death. The people pushing this crap aren't a whole lot better than the idiots performing the crimes.

  • Rirekon #115 2 years ago

    "She said she sat there with her 15 year-old son and he had to shield his face from the screen."

    FAIL

  • jambo74 #116 2 years ago

    Hello?

    Films

    Books

    TV

    Music

    ...so why pick on Games?
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 15:58

  • Avaloner #117 2 years ago

    "If you're a vulnerable young person, and this is the scary bit, if you're already involved in anti-social behaviour - and you're probably the one getting hold of a game like this at the age of thirteen - it will reinforce your violent behaviour and you'll go and commit crime on the streets where you live."

    If you are involved in anti-social behavior it means you will look for media which will reinforce that personality. It does not mean, in any way, that playing violent games will make you anti-social.

    Research has shown that criminals tend to consume less media than average. So it could be argued that playing video games reduces your risk to get involved in criminal behavior.
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 16:03

  • Fur_Cough #118 2 years ago

    Forget some fat spotty kid who hits his keyboard a bit.

    There is going to be a LOT MORE violence and anger on our streets as a result of combat stress in RL Iraq and Afghanistan than there will be from video games. These poor chaps, trained and already experienced in killing, are going to be living with the effects for the next 20 years. And some of them are barely old enough to buy the game over the counter.

    But we can't mention the *real* war.....

    (EDIT: Noticed how all the "Join the Army" adverts make war look like a game? That is more worrying to be honest.)
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 16:11

  • TheJuriel #119 2 years ago

    If parents would stop buying their kids games marked 18, there'd be less kids playing them. Maybe? Perhaps?

    Who cares. I've been shooting virtual people and watching porn since I was 8, never did me any harm.

  • TheJuriel #120 2 years ago

    "Well true, but society does seem to have been screwing itself further into the ground since the 1980s. Maybe violent films and games are perhaps something to do with it?"

    Perhaps people like to pretend things used to be better in the past, when they never were?

  • Paulie_P #121 2 years ago

    I love all the people on this thread calling the people on this show "retards" and using the f-word. The comments are as hysterical as some of those on the show and I'm fairly sure some of the people didn't watch the whole show just as a lot of the people on the show didn't understand the context of the airport level in the game or that it was an 18 game.

    Don't you see? when you point at someone, you point 3 fingers back at yourself? Unless you point in a messed up way or even use a pointer or stick or something

  • local_celebrity #122 2 years ago

    @Eighthours

    Agreed, that 'effect'/'affect' typo is a real howler. Even worse than that 'battle of attribution' we had yesterday.

    Is no-one proofreading this site anymore? This shit matters. If this carrries on, they'll be committing the 'alot' crime before too long.

  • deli2000 #123 2 years ago

    @kinky_mong

    Amen.

  • zuljin #124 2 years ago

    Oh man that show royally pissed me off. It was about ten minutes in until someone used the reducto ad hitlerum argument.

    Hitler used entertainment for propoganda and evil, hence video game entertainment is evil.

  • Wolverfrog #125 2 years ago

    It is not Infinity Ward's problem that some people are unable to tell the difference between video games and reality. People like that need to see a psychiatrist, rather than having others exploiting their naivety as a basis for an argument against Modern Warfare 2.

  • M_of_the_sys #126 2 years ago

    London Transport makes me want to kill people.

    BAN LONDON TRANSPORT!

  • deli2000 #127 2 years ago

    seriously. i am almost 13, and I've played halo 3. there is no fucking way i could mistake that for real life. people are acting like people like me are idots who have NEVER swore or seen scenes of violence or sex. it's so fucking annoying.
    it's the " i blame Mario. he makes our children jump on turtles." generation who are even less intelligent than a 10 year old that ruin it for everyone else. I say lets make a stand to these lazy arse monkeys who have nothing else to complain about than video games.
    why the hell can't they talk about i don't know lets say. THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN or maybe THE BLOODY RECESSION! the only way we can stop these self important, whining, lying, little daily mail reading, wine drinking, come dine with me watching, douche bags is if we can create our own argument and make it public

    whadda ya say.
    /rant over

  • hardtech #128 2 years ago

    Well, at least Deli understands...

  • TruSmiles #129 2 years ago

    Can't be bothered to read through the comments (I'm supposed to be studying) but it bothers me that they talk of 'facts' for example "The fact is, kids play this" and yet no actual facts or statistics are presented.

    Unless they are in the show itself? I'll watch it soon and see.

  • el_pollo_diablo #130 2 years ago

    Calm down.

  • rebelradiouk #131 2 years ago

    I actually went to see my parents on Sunday and my mom brought this up, and she agreed with a lot of views that were expressed in the show, i got pretty annoyed at her and said you bought me violent video games (resident evil 2, Thrill kill and grand theft auto 3) she had no argument to back that up but still feels modern warfare should be banned. Its really annoyed me that my own mum could be swayed so easily by a TV show. Ive watched the program now and made notes to say this is wrong, that's wrong and emailed it to her to show how biased it was.
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 17:37

  • M_of_the_sys #132 2 years ago

    It appears that gaming has more of a negative affect on society than it does on kids. Turns everyone into blithering idiots who can't tell the difference between fact and... well... bullshit.

  • Yaz #133 2 years ago

    Doctor_What wrote: "Well true, but society does seem to have been screwing itself further into the ground since the 1980s. Maybe violent films and games are perhaps something to do with it?"

    Come now :), every generation is convinced that things are getting worse ("the youth of today... why, in my day *chews gums*) and therefore point the finger at the latest scapegoat(s) available, however I really don't think you can make a connection between violent films and games to declines in society (what ever you feel they may be).

    I understand the point you're making regarding blame, however we can't escape the fact that if a film or game is targetted at an adult audience, then they should not be watched/played by those who are under age, and therefore the fault does not lie with the creators, but with the access to their creations.

    Now I'm not going to single out parents, teachers, shop owners, government, the media, etc, and say it's all the fault of one or the other, since I believe it's down to society (i.e. all of us) to get it's act together over such issues and take responsibility, it's not for game developers or film makers to censor their products for an audience they're not targetted towards.

    A good friend of mine is a excellent father of 2, however in conversation with him early this year I discovered that his youngest son (8 or 9 years old) had a laptop in his room, connected to the internet with NO content protection at all, and it didn't even occur to him that it should be protected! Now we all know what can be accessed over the internet, even by accident. So upon hearing this, I got him to download and install a free web protection program (K9 I think it was), which filters out sites featuring porn and other inappropriate material, and so he is now in control of the level of access his son has to the internet, the times he can browse, and he can easily access a history of the sites his son has visited!

    So can I blame my friend for not realizing such software exists to protect his son? Maybe, maybe not, but there are countless number of kids out there who have unrestricted access to the internet (and worse still, in their own rooms), just as there are kids who play games they shouldn't be playing and watch movies they shouldn't be watching. The problem is how to stop them gaining access to such material, not to stop the material from being created.

    Until responsibility is taken by ALL to address these issues (instead of pointing the finger at others), and until it can be done in a FAIR and objective manner, then kids gaining access to inappropriate games, movies or whatever, will continue to be a problem.

    I wonder what what the *next* scapegoat will be in future? :)

  • sparkymark75 #134 2 years ago

    I watched this on Sunday and there was nobody there actually offering facts. It was also opinion and suggestion. Nobody mentioned that you get the option to skip the scene or that there's no requirement to shoot anybody in the airport scene. It was fairly obvious that none of them had actually played it and had only watched videos (probably from YouTube).

    If topics such as this are to be discussed, they need to handled correctly and have balanced panelists to offer differing sides to the story.

  • Retroid #135 2 years ago

    I hate the fact that there are parents who're so bloody ignorant that the 18 rating logo on games boxes have to be twice the size of the usual ones, and yet we *still* have them buying them for their kids.

    Because they're games, aren't they? And games are for kids. So if they're rated 18 that won't mean they have the same type of content as a film, obviously!

    I once saw a mum tell her little boy (must've been around 7 or 8) off for picking up a PG-rated DVD in Woolworths, only for him to pick up a copy of one of the Medal of Honor games for PS2 (rated 15 or so) and she was perfectly happy with that and walked him over to the cash register.

    Yet I bet people like her would be the first to join in on a MORAL PANIC about it.

  • RobotRocker #136 2 years ago

    I wonder what what the *next* scapegoat will be in future? :)

    The internet is the next thing to blame our decline as a civilisation on.

    Parental responsibility is kind of a moot point when many parents are technology illiterate though. Unless they play games themselves, they wont really have a clue about what their kids are playing even if the basic content is visible on the cover and most will even just give you a blank stare if you mention that consoles have parental controls if they try borrow it from a mate. MW2 just has a lot of visibility. Plus since they are playing as British soldiers most of the time, there is patriotism at play since being a British Soldier is more of a role model, even when mowing down the evil terrorists en-mase than a Black American or east European gangster so parents wont be as objected to them playing the game either, even with the "No Russian" level. Support our boys etc, etc.When the majority of EG users generations become parents, then we will be more aware of the medium and be able to discuss it better but for now, all we can do is try educate instead of screaming at them and proving their points.

    But then the same could be said of all media. There's the new Twilight film this week. Seems innocent and parents believe that having their kids read it is benifical because its a book and its not objectionable as a video game but Twilight has some amazingly disturbing beliefs that are read by young women like how its ok for your boyfriend to mentally abuse and manipulate you on a psychological level simply because he is "perfect". Frankly, I am more horrified at that than No Russian would ever make me. Your mileage may vary though.
    Edited by 1 at 17/11/09 @ 18:16

  • Tetsuo_Shima #137 2 years ago

    I'm watching a program about violent videogaming on my PS3's iPlayer with MW2 in the disc drive. i feel good.

  • Malacath #138 2 years ago

    Wasn't that the program with those religious nutter?
    Those religious nutters who think games are bad for society should take a good look at their own beliefs.

    Religion is more harmful to society than video game, movies, tv, or anything else.

    How many people have died because someone plays video games?
    not many.
    How many people have died because of religion?
    In recent years thousands. Over the centuries millions have died because religion warps peoples minds and causes people to go on killing spreas.

  • YourMessageHere #139 2 years ago

    CosmicGypsy: That's a superb website, thankyou.

  • Climhazzard #140 2 years ago

    The chap in the nice blue shirt clearly knows more than all the rest combined. Well done for being one of the few sensible people in the world.

  • spiny #141 2 years ago

    I read as far as "We've had a lot of anecdotal evidence from parents and teachers..."

    Anecdotal evidence is an oxymoron, c/f MMR scare. Stupid Woman.

    http://ww w.scientificamerican.com/articl...

  • Emmit_Assassin #142 2 years ago

    That fucking idiot Pakeerah's at it again! Will you just fuck off woman?!!!!!!
    I feel for her loss, I really do. Just even contemplating either of my boys getting hurt...christ it makes me feel sick.
    But she really didn't listen to the inquiry. That copy of Manhunt was her own sons, not his killers. The police said there was no connection.
    I will watch this shite BBC propaganda bollox, but I doubt it will make any sense.

    Games do not influence people. People influence people.

    'You must be the change you wish to see in the world'- Ghandi.

  • minimong #143 2 years ago

    I have played games for near on 20 years now so i should be use to violent games, yet i found the airport scene in MW2 slightly disturbing.The first time a game has had that affect on me.The conclusion i come to is games DON'T sanitise you to violence, but a bad parenting does wonders for a future nutjob.

  • Bonders99 #144 2 years ago

    "...If a game is rated 18 then surely its the responsiblity of the parents to ensure that minors are not actually playing it... "

    I had a right to do with my sister last week after she bought my 13 year old nephew Modern Warfare 2. I actually asked her if she saw the airport level to which she gave me a blank look. I have one unhappy (I can live with that) nephew now it's been taken away from him. I have started to educate her about games, since I am in a fortunate enough position of being a gamer since the.... ahem.... late 70's, and I know what my kids can and cannot play. I have no problems in my 19 year old son playing MW2 but the 14 and 13 year old lads know it's well out of bounds.

    The problem is a lot of parents get asked by kids to get them games...and these parents think games must be just.... well Games, so no harm can be done.

  • President_Weasel #145 2 years ago

    Nicky Campbell is a far greater evil than games.

  • innokenti #146 2 years ago

    Hmm... lots of Bad Science going on there. *sigh*

  • skullstorm #147 2 years ago

    I think I'll go with the very best evidence I have for the matter. Me. I've played violent games and watched violent films as long as I can remember and as far as I'm aware I'm not a murderer yet nor has it damaged my life in any way at all. I'd have no problems letting my kids do the same if they wanted, granted they arent diagnosed with severe mental health issues and can understand right from wrong and reality from tv.


    Oops, I almost forgot my /flamesuit. Cue bad parenting warnings and such.
    Edited by 2 at 17/11/09 @ 22:02

  • Lawlost #148 2 years ago

    bunch of middle England dailymail readers. I shudder when I see these people, their utter conviction of their unfounded views is genuinely scary, thankfully they will never be able ban videogames :-)

  • FortysixterUK #149 2 years ago

    Some of these people are truly liberal aimless cretins.
    Let me explain:-
    Liberal ( middle of the road , lets try and work this out by hugging a hoody types)
    Aimless ( Middles of the road, no real opinions on anything that anyone takes seriously )
    Cretins ( see Liberal attitude or anyone who thinks video games cause people to go and do bad things)
    This post is not an entirely sweeping and innaccurate comment because I am ill informed or under educated about the subject I have an opinion on. Understood?.... ........**sigh**...give me a break........

  • Fido128 #150 2 years ago

    I really hope Brooker tackles this crap in his next Screen Burn column.

  • Nephirion #151 2 years ago

    Comeon MW2 isn't that realistic I mean who would have a war these days with an army of 9 ppl per side ^^

  • Spekingur #152 2 years ago

    I shot everyone I could shoot in the airport scene. Does that make me evil? If not, buggerit!
    If so, YESH!

    Silly little humans with their silly little minds. Kids were playing cops and robbers/cowboys and indians long before videogames came into being. With toy-guns. But I guess that's just kids being kids, right?
    I would much rather think that putting your child in front of a screen (tv or computer) to keep it occupied was the worst thing - no matter what's on the screen. Your TV is not a proper babysitter, silly humans!

  • i_saw_dasein #153 2 years ago

    I actually think the airport scene is one of the more redeeming parts of the game. It's realistic violence in that it isn't exciting or fun, it's grim, boring, and unsettling. I'd rather see more games seek to portray violence as uncomfortable and unglamorous.

    Of course the rest of MW2 is pretty hoo-rah go marines garbage so that point probably gets lost.

  • o_ci2007 #154 2 years ago

    The blame culture continues. If someone kills or is violent they should feel the full wrath of the law and send out a clear message that we do not condone any crime under any circumstances.

  • butler` #155 2 years ago

    I have played games for near on 20 years now so i should be use to violent games, yet i found the airport scene in MW2 slightly disturbing.

    i've largely kept my mouth shut on this scene but I'm glad I'm not the only one that felt this way

    i just found it a bit .... much

  • o_ci2007 #156 2 years ago

    @Dusttodust
    If its kids playing the game then its not a matter of violence its either a matter of grossly irresponsible parents letting kids play inappropriate games or a matter of retailers selling games to minors. The xbox has settings which can be used to bar kids from playing games above a set age limit, even if they sneak in a copy there are still ways of protecting them from the grotesque violence of the airport section. Its high time parents took responsibility of their own kids and not rely on a capitalist money making company like Infinity Ward or the Government to do it for them.

  • funkateer #157 2 years ago

    The one thing that surely kills everyone and his dog is life itself.
    I say: Ban life or stfu

  • captain_chris #158 2 years ago

    So, not surprising Mediamarch have their point of view they are basically the new Mary Whitehouse. But her academic evidence regarding games has to be called in to question since that section of the website is not telling the truth regarding Stefan Pakeerah murder. It reads "Stefan Pakeerah murdered by another teenager who was obsessed with the ultra-violent PC game "Manhunt"." But this has been categorically denied by the police investigating the case. And it was Stefan not his murderer who owned and played the game - obviously didn't make him violent enough to fight off his attacker.

    If both of the speakers gave the impression that the murderer was obsessed with the game then the BBC should probably issue a retraction. Any chance of getting the daily mail on to this, they normally like having a go at the beeb.

  • skullstorm #159 2 years ago

    Sorry, parents being irresponisble is a rash generalisation. What exactly makes it irresponsible? Is it because the other parent is doing something different from you so it must be wrong? Bollocks. If a parent understands their child and has raised it well enough to know what is right and wrong and what is real and what isnt and functions 'normally' on an emotional and psychological level then there is no harm in letting them play something above their age. It is for the parent to decide what is best for their children. It isn't neccesarily irresponsible if they know no harm can come of it.

    As it has been said a million times already and I think most of us should be able to agree to some extent (hopefully, at least) that games do not make criminals and murderers. Neglect, abuse, lack of morals etc and negative experiences they are exposed to in REAL LIFE can, however.

    A person with homicidal tendencies does not need a game to push them over the edge. They already have those tendencies. It's a matter of time.

  • Cronan #160 2 years ago

    I greatly enjoyed the "No Russian" level in the excellent Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, as did my children, Marmaduke, Cecil and Roger, aged 4, 9 and 15 respectively. How we chortled as little Marmaduke wrestled with the Xbox 360 controller; his hands are small, but he did quite a good job of executing stray civilians.

    Afterwards, we all trooped down the stairs into our basement dungeon, to play with our latest toy. It says its name is "Nicky" and it keeps begging for us to let it go. I'm so proud of Cecil, my middle boy, he wiped the smile right off Nicky's lying face - with a belt sander.

    I'm so glad that companies like Infinity Ward are finally making games that all the family can enjoy.

  • Emmit_Assassin #161 2 years ago

    "I actually think the airport scene is one of the more redeeming parts of the game. It's realistic violence in that it isn't exciting or fun, it's grim, boring, and unsettling. I'd rather see more games seek to portray violence as uncomfortable and unglamorous.

    Of course the rest of MW2 is pretty hoo-rah go marines garbage so that point probably gets lost."

    Too frickin right. It was a bold move for IW to portray violence in this way. I felt horrified and uncomfortable as well as helpless and appalled. Normally it's only films and books that give me those kind of feelings. It does nothing to glamorise violence, in fact it made me feel unwilling to partake in any violence whatsoever.

    And as for that poor excuse for a 'debate'....there was no debating, it was just a public flogging for a video game. Thank god no actually listens to these ranting idiots. It would be a scary world indeed if they did.

  • Emmit_Assassin #162 2 years ago

    "Sorry, parents being irresponisble is a rash generalisation. What exactly makes it irresponsible? Is it because the other parent is doing something different from you so it must be wrong? Bollocks. If a parent understands their child and has raised it well enough to know what is right and wrong and what is real and what isnt and functions 'normally' on an emotional and psychological level then there is no harm in letting them play something above their age. It is for the parent to decide what is best for their children. It isn't neccesarily irresponsible if they know no harm can come of it."

    This is the problem with today's media being obsessed with the 'soundbite'. It is easy to make generalisations and allow people to generate misconceptions if there are little facts to go on, and this is what feeds the public imagination into buying more and more tabloid media.
    Whilst most parents are indeed able to decide what is best for their child in the way you described, a great many are not. I'd even go as far as to say that there are a great many people who should never have been allowed children. These people do not even take an interest in what their children are doing, and therefore are allowing them to be exposed to violent media that is not appropriate.

  • Gecks #163 2 years ago

    @skullstorm
    we're lucky enough in the UK to have a classifications system that is informed, consistent and fair. if they think a game/film is not suitable for a particular age-group, i'd be inclined to take their word for it. i think the "i am a parent so ..." argument is just used to bespokely override any professional opinion.

    this is NOT about games making children 'homicidal' - this is a ridiculous straw man that both sides of the debate use to their assumed advantage.