MP criticises Rockstar's Bully

By Ellie Gibson Published 27 October, 2005

Asks Tony to consider ban.

Following a record dry spell during which no Rockstar games were the subject of any controversy for approximately 18 minutes, Labour MP Keith Vaz has hauled Bully into the spotlight for its representation of violence against schoolchildren.

Speaking in parliament yesterday, Vaz asked Commons leader Geoff Hoon: " Do you share my concern at the decision of Rockstar to publish a new game called Bully in which players use their on-screen persona to kick and punch other schoolchildren?"

And he didn't stop there: "Will you ask the prime minister to refer this video to the British Board of Film Classification? If they don't make any changes will the government use its powers to ban this videogame?"

Hoon replied that Rockstar has yet to submit the BBFC for rating, adding that the exact contents of the game - "disturbing as they sound" - are "not yet known."

However, there is already a screenshot doing the rounds that depicts a shaven-headed, fingerless youth kicking a poor unfortunate up the backside - and it's likely that this is what has got Vaz riled.

It's also angered Liz Carnell, director of the charity Bullying Online. "Our view is that bullying is not a joke. It is not a suitable subject for computer games," she said, adding that an 18 rating wouldn't stop children from getting their hands on the game.

But ELSPA director general Roger Bennett reckons it's too soon to start talking about a ban: "Every game published in the UK carries an age rating on the box, providing guidance to ensure that consumers can make informed choices when buying games, in the same way as one would buy a film or take guidance on post-watershed TV viewing.

"As Mr Vaz knows, any game can be automatically referred to the BBFC for a rating. It is disingenuous to suggest any game be banned when the content has yet to be finalised."

Rockstar's response was as follows: " We support and admire the groups who are working hard to address the long-standing problem of bullying. We all have different opinions about art and entertainment, but everyone agrees that real-life school violence is a serious issue which lacks easy answers.

"Bully is still a work-in-progress, but when it's finished we believe most people will agree it offers an exciting experience and tells an engaging story.

"More and more people are beginning to recognise that the stories in video games have as many themes and plotlines as books and movies. Just as books aren't judged by their covers, videogames shouldn't be judged by their titles or individual scenes."

This isn't the first time Vaz has taken on Rockstar - last year he raised questions in the Commons after 14 year old Stefan Pakeerah was murdered by an older friend who was said to have been influenced by Manhunt.

At the time, Tony Blair said the issue of videogames classification was "worth looking closely" at the issue of videogames classification but that the UK had "Europe's strongest system for controlling the sale of computer games that are not suitable for children."

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (107) Latest comment 6 years ago

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

  • rinoaMW #1 6 years ago

    is this article broken? i can't get it to display....

    first tho! :)

  • rinoaMW #2 6 years ago

    ahh.. fixed now...

    second! :p

  • Artemus #3 6 years ago

    At the time, Tony Blair said the issue of videogames classification was "worth looking closely" at the issue of videogames classification but that the UK had "Europe's strongest system for controlling the sale of computer games that are not suitable for children."

    That might be true but it still doesn't work!

  • Merefield #4 6 years ago

    You know, i think they MIGHT have gone a step too far this time ...

    ... or is it just mi'old age??
    Edited by 1 at 27/10/05 @ 17:27

  • Fatfish #5 6 years ago

    I'm afraid I agree with this one - personally I don't think there's any need for this kind of game. It is a serious issue for many and it shouldn't be promoted in this manner - not even if you're awarded for being good. The use of this kind of imagery in a game is not necessary. I always thought one of the main concepts of video games was the suspenion of belief? And yes, I don't particularly like the 'historically correct' FPS (such as CoD or BiA) either. Just a little too close to a kind of realism I abhor. Doesn't matter what rating the reviews give it, I for one won't be buying it.........and no, I'm not Jack fucking Thompson!

    @ Merefield - No, I totally agree with you. It's not old age (although I am starting to creak in my joints too!), I think it's morals and ethics. Don't see many of them these days, although when I was a boy........

    /sucks on Werthers Original and gently sways back and forth in rocking chair/
    Edited by 1 at 27/10/05 @ 17:34

  • AHiFi #6 6 years ago

    Aye, it is a step too far.

  • Darren #7 6 years ago

    I agree with Merefield.

    Considering some kids commit suicide because they're bullied, can't Rockstar find some other controversial subject to make a game out of... or better still can't they make a game that ISN'T in some way controversial?

  • Fatfish #8 6 years ago

    Bet we won't see anyone boycott Rockstar games by not buying any more of them though! They've always walked a fine line, and I think they've pushed the snotty nosed, spod with the anorak off it this time.

  • rinoaMW #9 6 years ago

    hmm controversy for controversy's sake? Watch it Rockstar, this could have an adverse effect on all game development...

  • Derblington #10 6 years ago

    If you *actually* bully kids physically then I agree it's not a clever idea for a game, however, R* seem to agree with that too so I'm interested to see what they're doing. At the mo nothing is known about the game so you guys are all acting a little premature, unless you know something the rest of the world doesn't?

  • prettyboytim #11 6 years ago

    It's all very well saying that it's okay because it's got an 18 certificate, but you've got to wonder who it's aimed at in that case. I mean, if you're over 18 and you want to play a game where you get kids to hit each other, isn't that a bit weird?

    Of course, it could all be smoke and mirrors by Rockstar. Perhaps it's some game where you have to bravely fight *against* the bullies... Somehow that doesn't seem so bad...

  • Senor_Sanchez #12 6 years ago

    shut up and give us your mobile phone, your trainers and your dinner money!!!!!!

  • Ghetto-lapin #13 6 years ago

    Damn.... So torture (in Punisher or True Crime) is ok, but kids fighting is not ? A bit off topic, but I haven't read any single comment judging those games, and I find that way more disturbing.

    For all we know, this game is some kind of revenge story where bullies and abusive teachers get bullied back, and I think I read something along those lines somewhere.

    I also remember Rockstar stating once that they never included kids or pets in the GTA games precisely because they didn't think it was fun at all. I think they deserve a bit more moral credit than they're usually given (ok, just a bit).

  • Teeth #14 6 years ago

    Need to see what they're doing with the game first but after manhunt I'm not holding out any hopes of this being even remotely cerebral.

    And if it remotely glorifies bullying I'd personally take a hard line with the game. Fitwers Meyide.

  • SlackMaster #15 6 years ago

    It's like Manhunt and the like but possibly a step to close to reality than is needed. Just shock value to sell games, and it'll be amongst the 11-16 yr olds that this game will be the most popular. Every time I'm in a Game or a Gamestation there is some 30-40 aged woman buying some 18+ Rockstar title... Kinda guess it's not for them.

  • optimusprym8 #16 6 years ago

    BAN THIS SICK FILTH! EVEN THOUGH I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT! BAN IT ANYWAY!

  • paulf #17 6 years ago

    Once again politician's getting on some moral panic bandwagon, I just hope the next screenshot doesn't show a teenager in a hoodie. While we are on the subject lets ban the classic seventies film If! and the novel 'Tom Brown's Schooldays' which both have graphic depictions of bullying while we are at it

  • skillian #18 6 years ago

    Hah, all the bitching about JT and now you're all coming round to his side.

    We have a game classification system here to help ensure games don't fall into the wrong hands.

    Does anyone think that Todd Solondz' movie Happiness should have been banned because it mentioned pedophilia? Or Aronofsky's Requiem for a Dream because it dealt with issues of heroin?

    In my mind, movies and games should be treated the same. They are artistic expression and we shouldn't be censoring them unless we really have to.

  • ecureuil #19 6 years ago

    Bleh, the game is fine. I'll probably never play it, but the government is really f*cking everything up. We should be legalising more things, not banning them... the smoking ban is disgraceful, and I don't even smoke. I'll decide what I want to play, not the government.

  • w00t #20 6 years ago

    Sooooo...

    Bullying is not a subject for videogames, but murder's OK? Let's get some perspective, people!

    In the words of a great man, WTF?

    OK, here we go. If the game will be 18-rated, bollocks to worrying about kids getting hold of it. That is a problem for the parents and the retailers, not the developer. If bullying shouldn't be depicted in games, what about Hitman? Punisher (as mentioned above)? Any FPS ever?

    Is bullying worse than murder? Fuck, no!

    This stinks of political manouvering more than any actual concern for the kiddies little minds.

  • dsmx #21 6 years ago

    Yet more igorance. Before you assume the worst about he game go read previews and actually play the game before saying that it should be banned. Why do people always assume the worst when they see pictures and hear titles.

  • w00t #22 6 years ago

    I'm assuming congenital stupidity.

  • Lothar Hex #23 6 years ago

    Last time I read about the game, you're actually fighting against OTHER school bullies. Not just being a bully yourself.

    Thing is, nobody knows what the game is actually about, I don't think R* are THAT daft.

  • SlackMaster #24 6 years ago

    But lets face it games about murder are more more in the realms of fantasy for kids than say bullying is... I don't mind a lot of stuff TBH but I think games about bullying are a bit too much considering the age of gamers that Rockstar titles tend appeal to... Yeah it may be an 18 title but the majority of gamers playing Rockstar games will be 11-18yrs.

    Not remotely interested in this game personally... the only stuff I've enjoyed out of Rockstar is the Max Payne games.

  • meggsy #25 6 years ago

    Maybe the industry should stop refering to "video games" and instead some other name, the connotations of the word game are negatively affecting how people recieve news of new titles such as Bully.

    Films/novels/comics all shocked and dismayed contemporary audiences, but were all eventually accepted in some form or another.

    The main problem at the moment is that these titles are made for the purpose of pushing the boundaries, rather than any artistic value...but while there is a market what's to stop them from making them?

  • Xerx3s #26 6 years ago

    Quick! Quarantine him! Hes been exposed! We musnt let him infect other MP's with the jack thompson virus! They will all turn into self righteous twats that want to look important!


    ......
    Edited by 1 at 27/10/05 @ 18:18

  • Lost_in_Darkness #27 6 years ago

    this game would have stayed shit and out of the charts just like manhunt on release. If these retards just didn't bother interfering things would be okay. But no, they gotta bring it up all the time and then give the piece of shit game more publicity causing people to be interested and want to check it out. It sounds like it's gonna be a complete piece of crap, if they just ignored it, the game would have stayed out of the charts. But no, see what happened with that shit with manhunt, that piece of crap went for a month or 2 with horrible sales and then some twat started raving off about it and trying to get it banned and other shit...then it started selling.
    anyway, sorry if this was completely nonsensical......but these people piss me off. if they just ignored it and didn't give it so much publicity the game would never sell well in the 1st place.

  • Ghetto-lapin #28 6 years ago

    Ok, so from 3 screenshots and about 2 lines of info on the gameplay you know it's going to be crap ?

  • skillian #29 6 years ago

    Calm down - no-one knows if the game's gonna be shit, all you've seen is a screenshot. The graphics look like shit, perhaps we can agree on that though :p

    Lets just let the BBFC or ELSPA or whoever arte it when it comes out. If it's not suitable they will let Rockstar know - not some MP who knows nothing about video games and probably knows less about this game than I do (and that's not a lot).

    LEAVE IT TO THE PROFESSIONALS!

  • Lost_in_Darkness #30 6 years ago

    I did say i may be a bit nonsensical did i not?

    but to be honest, since the only good team out of R* is Rockstar North, no; I don't think this is going to be anything other than a piece of shit, just like manhunt.

  • paulf #31 6 years ago

    Next production by Rockstar - Bird Flu -The Game, apparently

  • Kiigan #32 6 years ago

    Fatfish said:

    I'm afraid I agree with this one - personally I don't think there's any need for this kind of game.

    You're on form today Fatfish!

    Whether you like the premise of the game or not is not relevant. Banning the game outright, and preventing the people who do want to play it and are mature enough to interpret the content appropriately from ever seeing it just to appease your own goddamn morals is clearly the path to stupidity.

    The game could be shit, and sure bullying in schools is bad etc, but that doesn't mean it should be pulled from the goddamn shelves. Thankfully in the UK we have a pretty decent ratings system. End of motherfucking discussion.

    The silliest aspect of all of this is that most of the people screaming "ban this sick filth" don't know squat about the game apart from the title. Y'know, because it hasn't been release yet.

  • Kiigan #33 6 years ago

    Artemus said:

    That might be true but it still doesn't work!

    I actually disagree. I think the British videogame system for classifying videogames works perfectly well. However, there is little the industry can do to prevent lazy / ignorant parents from undermining the system entirely.

    I'm sure we've all seen the scenario: Dad is buying the latest GTA gorefest for little Johnny, and when advised of the adult content in the game by diligent sales staff the response is invariably "oh, but it's only a game". I wonder, what kind of fucked up shit do we need to start putting in games before parents get off their arses and start taking an interest in how their kids spend their time?

    There some areas that could be done better... simple leaflets explaining the ratings system clearly and unambigiously to parents could be included with each sale for example. And, people like Rockstar / Take Two should be "encouraged" to market their games in a more responsible manner - for example, no more GTA ads on MTV, or in magazines where the average reader age is 8-16 years old.

    Tons of typos edit.
    Edited by 3 at 27/10/05 @ 19:05

  • PearOfAnguish #34 6 years ago

    Nobody has even seen this game yet, let alone played. We don't know what the content will be like. Seems as though this cretin has latched onto the Jack Thompson bandwagon and is using it to further his career. Try waiting until you actually play the game, eh?

  • Freek #35 6 years ago

    People are just giving some knee jerk reaction to a few screenshots befre the game is even done yet.
    In the previews released so far it discribes a game in wich the character enters a school for juvinile criminals. A school run by a corrupt teachers and the player has to fight gangs and the teachers in order to climb up the social ladder. It's got nothing to do with real life bullying.
    Rockstar doesn't make realistic games, they always present their worlds in a stylised comedy, often a bitt on the dark side but so far removed from any reality that it's silly to get upset about.

    They could easely clear all this up by pointing that out but rather going with the mysteriouse "just wait untill the game is done and you'll see", as if they're talking on some forum to generate hype amongst gamers.
    Obviously it'll sell allot of copies but does nothing to clear up the situation or putt the hyperbolic nonsense surrounding Rockstar to rest.

    And they woulden't have it any other way. Great developer but their marketing team are a bunch of fucking cunts who think damaging the industrie and putting gamers in a dark light is a good way to sell games.
    Well, fuck them.
    Edited by 2 at 27/10/05 @ 19:47

  • Sko #36 6 years ago

    Beating up kids in school? Old news - Spectrum, in 1985 - Skool Daze.

  • Bates #37 6 years ago

    No doubt if it had been an Xbox exclusive it would have been "The best game ever" in your opinion, eh Dilldong.

    Meh, no point arguing taste with an Xboy, they think Halo is the best thing since sliced bread, rather than generic FPS no. 123235

  • Xerx3s #38 6 years ago

    /agrees with kiigan

    Bates, GTA1 was ace....on the PC. 4P dm was a real blast (not even mentioning the 'paralel worlds' thing that occured once in a while). Everything that followed was avarage and far from original. On top of that, the golden feeling from the original was gone. And it just got crappier and crappier after that. The sequels are some of the most overhyped titles in the history of games imo. It is an textbook example of sequelirites imo. Dont get me wrong, they arnt bad games. They just lack the golden feeling from the original and they are far to overhyped imo. Then again, id recon that thats just a matter of personal taste.

  • PedroStereo #39 6 years ago

    sounds like they a cashing in on their reputation to me. but banning stuff is never the answer. do we really want to end up like the us/aus when it comes to video game censorship? and don't get me started on the propsed smoking ban. GGGRRRR it makes me angry.
    and yes halo is overated
    Edited by 1 at 27/10/05 @ 22:54

  • Zomoniac #40 6 years ago

    We should be legalising more things, not banning them... the smoking ban is disgraceful, and I don't even smoke. I'll decide what I want to play, not the government.

    Quite. I should also get to decide who I rob from, who I kill, where I walk around naked and I should be able to whack off in the middle of town in a Saturday afternoon if I see fit...

  • smelly #41 6 years ago

    "... the smoking ban is disgraceful, and I don't even smoke"

    Dont talk crap. Im all for people harming themselves if they wish. But smoking harms those around you. IMHO.. It's VERY selfish to smoke publically harming those around you, when they dont even get the benefits of said fag.

    If you want to smoke, and enjoy it .. fine.. dont subject the rest of us to it.

    I personally am addicted to alcohol, you dont see me leaving work for 15 mins every hour to have my beer fix. Nor do you see me wearing an alcohol patch. And even if i did.. i'm only hurting my oiwn health not others...

    Public smoking ban = good thing.

    Banning games which you CHOOSE to buy/play = nanny state = bad thing.

  • Fatfish #42 6 years ago

    Kiigan - Exactly who the fuck do you think you are?

    Quote:
    "Whether you like the premise of the game or not is not relevant.".

    ....er, yes it is. It's very fucking relevant - that's what the post is about - the moral implications of this game. Read the title of the thread!

    Quote:
    "Banning the game outright, and preventing the people who do want to play it and are mature enough to interpret the content appropriately from ever seeing it just to appease your own goddamn morals is clearly the path to stupidity."

    So let me get this straight, you want to have the option of playing a game because the content (at least on initial inspection) appears to be immoral and controvertial? How else do you interpret this game - it's called BULLY for fuck sake?!? Are you telling me that as a 'mature' gamer, you are able to somehow elevate this to something more than it appears? Perhaps it's an expression of one's inner angst and ensuing struggle against the system?!? Fuck off you twat. On the basis that our assumptions about this game and it's gameplay are correct, this is nothing more than a crass and pathetic attempt to appeal to sick and impressionable individuals - not to mention scraping the bottom of the gaming genre barrel. To me, this is far from an entertaining prospect in the gaming calendar.

    And if everyone was apparently like you mate, then no-one would have any fucking morals at all - so explain to me how appeasing not just mine, but several individuals morals on this forum leads to stupidty? Our whole fucking society is based on them - and it's by (almost) everyone adhering to them that we manage to keep this frail structure held together. I'm not some church going, right wing, anti-abortionist do gooder, I just know where to draw the line (or at least where I think it should be drawn). That is my view (which every one of us is entitled to have), and that was what I was expressing in my post above.

    And don't ever try to justify an argument to me again by saying "End of mutherfucking discussion" as if you are the final word and everyone should bow to your opinion. Exactly how long did it take you to formulate a summary like that? It's obviously another well thought out and quantified point to your argument. You need to wind your neck in sunshine and learn some manners. I hope to god you never procreate, we could do with less people like you in the world.

    /edit typos/
    Edited by 2 at 28/10/05 @ 00:42

  • Talha #43 6 years ago

    @Fatfish: Totally with you on this issue and it is refreshing to see this kind of vibe in an EG forum. Honestly I think that is controversy the only way Rockstar can make money? I mean, can't they come up with ONE decent game without pushing ethical and social boundaries? They're fresh off the San Andreas fiasco but I guess they will never make a 'normal' game 'cos ... (whisper it)... it won't be good enough!

    Come to think of it, does Ubisoft have to rely on shock tactics to sell their games? If no, which developer is better regarded? Make no mistake - I am not dissing GTA in any way - I am just dissing Rockstar who are trying to make millions by slapping a taboo on every below-average product they come up with, and allow people like Jack Thompson to rattle against gaming in general. Are they doing us any favours?
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 07:09

  • Moogrose #44 6 years ago

    I think everyone needs to chill the fuck out. or else i'll come over there and beat you!...

    er... yeah.

  • deepmenace #45 6 years ago

    i did think this should have been banned until i looked at the screenshots....

    its not 'real' bullying at 'real' schools, its all about beating silverspoon toffs up at a school called Bullworths.

    "Come hither Tomlinson-Smythe, i am going to box your ears you frightful cad"

  • JackThompsonsAnArse #46 6 years ago

    So Keith Vaz is putting his head over the parapet again at last. Turns out the public have forgotten all about him (judging by this thread).

    I wouldn't place too much worry in what he says, I doubt Tony is particularly keen to give him any public spotlight, as it'll highlight the fact he kept his job.

  • Talha #47 6 years ago

    +1 !!!!

  • deepmenace #48 6 years ago

    hopefully its just going to be an updated School Daze....

    that was a bully-sim, kick pupils, kick teachers, get other people blamed for stuff.

    actually, that game was alright. now that the gfx are better is the concept wrong?

  • Psi #49 6 years ago

    Rival Schools are a great game!! lol

    Agree with Fatfish on this one, Rockstar need to get a grip and stop releasing games that add to social decline. How long till someone releases a fucking Chav game eh? Where you ram raid for tracksuits shiv ordinary people for their mobile phone and are against the clock till the post office shuts and you can't pick up your gyro?

    When you're pissing off the people that supported you Rockstar you should know you've gone too far...

  • peterfll #50 6 years ago

    Fatfish, Talha... whoa, can't really add too much to what's already been said by you guys, but I'm in total agreement.

    I've never had any first hand experience of murder a la GTA but I was bullied like f8ck in school. Such is the nature of bullying, its something a lot of people can easily relate to so it’s not a case of it being better or worse than homicide. The thought of this game (should the content glorify bullying in ANY manner) in teenage chav hands makes my blood boil.

  • Flightrisker #51 6 years ago

    If there was a film coming out called Bully and all that anyone had seen was a publicity still of a kid outside a school do you think the government would care? Violent films find there way to kids just as easily. Games are too easy a target. And with the free publicity Rockstar keep getting, they must be loving it.

  • Furbs #52 6 years ago

    Some of you are as shallow and presumptious as the Daily Mail or Jack Thompson. Had this game been called "School Life", would you be so worried? Like others have said, the object of this game is NOT to be a bully, you're someone who IS bullied.
    Look beyond the name, its used for one simple reason: marketing, and as can be seen by the amount publicity its getting, its obviously working.

    Should we ban Grange Hill because that often has bullying in it by the way?

  • deepmenace #53 6 years ago

    huh, on another EG post someone said that this a "get-back-at-the-bullies" game where you play pranks on the evil schoolyard terrors.

    Can anyone else confirm?

  • Talha #54 6 years ago

    @Furbs: agree with you on the publicity point. But again, why? It is like naming the next release of Prince of Persia as Motherf*******g Spoiled Brat , just to get publicity. If the game is that good, why not name it for what it is?

  • Furbs #55 6 years ago

    Because it ties in with the game content. "Bully" sounds alot better than "Get back at the bullies" no? Grand THEFT Auto had a dubious word in its name, still a pretty decent game though, and hinted about what would be involved.

  • Wobble #56 6 years ago

    where was the outrage when this when this was released??

    BAN THIS SICK FILTH etc etc :p

    /hopes you can do links in comments...

  • tengu #57 6 years ago

    Whoa... twat central...

  • Fatfish #58 6 years ago

    @ Furbs - I appreciate that we may well have got the wrong end of the stick with regard to the content and gameplay. Until it's confirmed, I will keep an open mind - but it doesn't detract from the point Talha (and many others) have made. It's the way that they are garnering publicity. I, like peterfll, was subjected to violent and racist bullying for the majority of my school life (my grandfather was German and I was made to pay for what others grandparents had suffered during the war, despite my grandfather being and officer in the RAF!!) - this continued until I turned 16 when suddenly 6'1" and 16 stone didn't seem like such an easy target to them anymore! I also agree with peterfll in that this kind of content should not be glorified in any manner.

    Psi - quote: "Rockstar need to get a grip and stop releasing games that add to social decline."

    I couldn't have put it better myself - well said that man (sorry, I'm assuming you are a male?!?) :)

    @ wobble - I see your point, but I think one major difference between Virtua Fighter Kids and this game is that this is clearly attempting to achieve a much higher level of realism. Not only is the premise of a bunch of honk-kong-fooey, magical-ninja kids duking it out in a ring a little far fetched, but the artistic style also distances it further from reality. The same can't really be said about Bully though.

    @ Furbs - one other thing that comes to mind (and I think may have been mentioned in this thread already somewhere) is, if you were to take away the morally dubious elements of GTA that, in essence, make it so fun to play (effectively the entire gameplay), then what are you left with when you look at the graphical and technical content and achievements? Ok, so they were one of the first developers to release a (nearly) completely free roaming expansive and semi-realistic city, but that claim to fame was some time ago now. Since then, they have simply been releasing rehashes of the same concept (all be it slightly more polished or tweaked) told from different gang-land beginnings. Personally, I don't see this as innovation, so much as it is re-iteration.

  • Bitkari #59 6 years ago

    *There are games for adults, and this is a good thing. We don't want all games to be thought of as childrens toys, and people should be educated to be aware of the fact that many games these days are adult entertainment.

    *These adult games should remain adult. Publishers need to stop pushing R18 games at youngsters, and parents need to be aware of what their children are playing in the same way that their TV and DVD habits are monitored.

    *As adults living in the wonderful liberal paradise that is Europe, we are free to express ourselves in almost any way we like, and make art and entertainment products with this in mind. Rather than censoring our works for fear of them causing some sort of derranged or anti-social behaviour, we should look at tooling people with some sort of critical faculty so that they may think for themselves about such matters that may arise from the media that they may consume.




    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 11:27

  • Psi #60 6 years ago

    yup fatfish 28 year old male body with the mind and common sence of a 12 year old child!

  • Furbs #61 6 years ago

    One other thing I'd point out is that yes, bully is traumatising, but then so is war. Shall we stop all the war games being made? What about death of a loved one? Horrible experience, get rid of FFVII...

  • Fatfish #62 6 years ago

    @ rdexeter - I fully admit that Kiigan did get me rather wound up. And yes, I probably shouldn't have used the language that I did. I'm not a bully myself (at least I hope I'm not!) and I don't enjoy using or experiencing violence in real life. I did used to work as a club doorman and as private security, but I always prided myself on being an amicable and approachable kind of person. In 4 years of doing that line of work, I rarely ever had to use any form of aggression - I always relied on persuasion and reasoning to calm a situation down. However, irrespective of my background, I have always maintained that respect is earnt and not given.

    Kiigan's initial response to my post was uncalled for and showed no consideration for me or my views (something I hope I do to others on this forum). To me, this is one of the highest forms of disregard - in essence, he was telling me to keep my opinions to myself as they were wrong and that he was right. There was no intellectual argument behind this, just statements. If anything, his tone initiated the aggressive approach. If someone treated me like that in the real world, then yes, I probably would react violently - despite our hectic and convoluted lives and all the issues that affect them, there is always time and space for consideration, respect for one anothers views and courtesy. Those that that don't show these traits do not earn my respect. I do have morals and I try to uphold them, but everyone has their limits - that is part of who I am and I'm only human.

    Your point is well taken though and I will try to keep things civil in future. :)

    @ Psi - likewise mate. 28 going on 12......sporadically interspersed with the morals of 60 year old!! ;)

  • kangarootoo #63 6 years ago

    @Fatfish

    "this continued until I turned 16 when suddenly 6'1" and 16 stone didn't seem like such an easy target to them anymore!"

    Part of me rather hopes that you smacked some heads together at that point, but I am guessing from your later comments that you didn't, which makes you the better man :)

  • peterfll #64 6 years ago

    This is a hypothetical discussion, we don't know the exact content of the game, true.

    I am as far from a Daily Mail reader as you could possibly get and I'm not even sure that I'm saying this game - SHOULD it glorify bullying in any sense - be censored by the government, the BBFC or some other body. But do I think its a good idea to have a game that glamorises bullying, allows you to control the actions of a minor (and we are talking about playing the role of a minor here) in a (relatively) realistic graphical setting? No I bloody don't, as whilst many adults could play such a the game and place it in an adult context, such a game would find its way into the hands of plenty of kids. And this could further trivialise bullying in the eyes of many younger folk. And that’s a bad thing.

  • Furbs #65 6 years ago

    Any 18 cert game could fall in to the hands of kids.
    And any 15/18 films whilst we're at it. And cars can since kids can get a hold of keys. I went to Tescos and they dont sell knives to 18 year olds, but they can get a hold of them in the home. Whats your solution to those issues?

    How do you *know* it glamourises bullying? Yeah if it comes out and you play a bully where you cant win the game without picking on some innocent child for no valid reason then I'll damn it with all the condemnation I can, but until we know the story, maybe its better to wait?

    It was peoples preconceptions that got Sensi Softwares "Rock and Roll Star" game banned, even though they felt it would be one of the best games they had ever put out.

  • kangarootoo #66 6 years ago

    "such a game would find its way into the hands of plenty of kid"

    I think this is at the root of all these type of discussions argument. I think there are two issues here.

    1. Whether adult games should be censored on the basis that they may fall into the hands of minors.

    2. Whether Rockstar should base their game marketing around controversy.

    The first is a point of law and industry regulation. The second is a point of morals.

    I am not suggesting that Rockstar should be forbidden in law from basing their marketing around the glamourisation of series issues and I don't think of the objectors present are either. But that doesn't mean we don't think it is a bit unreasonable and unfortunate all the same.

    No we don't know what the content of the game actually is. But its extremely naive to think that their choice of publicly released screenshots was somehow coincidental. I don't see much social justice being metered out in their screenies, so whatever the final game storyline turns out to be, their marketing strategy is pretty clear.

  • Stickman #67 6 years ago

    To quote Eric Cartman, what's the fucking big deal, bitch?

    If you don't like it, don't buy it, it's simple. Get off your moral high horses FFS. Recently, I've shot around 400 Nazis in the face, slaughtered defenceless bands of peasants, and spent a few hours wandering around looking for Hispanics to kill with a bat. I might spend a few hours kicking some kid up the arse when this game comes out too. It's a computer game!

    I know we're all vastly superior to your average peasant on this site, but do you honestly have so little faith in our society that you think this game will somehow make people think bullying is cool?

    Edit for unneccessary use of swearing.
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 14:49

  • peterfll #68 6 years ago

    Yes, Stickman, clearly you, I and the majority of others on this site are clever enough to have an adult debate on this matter, place such a game in the context you describe, but there's plenty of uneducated trash out there with PS2's. Do I have faith in them understanding that such actions in a game should not endorse or encourage such things in real life? No, I don't have that faith.

    I don't know Furbs if your question was aimed at me, but I have no solution to children that joyride, or carry knives to school., or watch films underage. Nor do I have a solution to this debate, I've already said I don't support censorship so that's not the stance I'm taking, I've already said its hypothetical as no-one knows the context of the game yet, but we are just having a debate ..... it is a forum after all.

  • kangarootoo #69 6 years ago

    @Stickman

    Errr.... did you actually read the posts here. I'm not sure your brand of anger is any more valid than anyone elses. Attacking those taking the high ground by shouting in a loud voice doesn't really help you make a point.

  • Fatfish #70 6 years ago

    @ stickman - yes, and that's what's concerning a lot of us. Not everyone has the intellect or maturity to see past it's appearance (assuming that there is more to the game than just bullying others). And the fact that you've shot 400 Nazi's and clobbered 'Latin Americans' with a baseball bat and not batted an eye lid is part of the issue - it desensitizes people to the imagery and makes people complacent to the real moral implications behind it.

    And to be honest, the fact that you've felt the necessity to highlight that you've shot 400 Nazi's "in the face" (only goes to further the argument that that kind of content really does affect people in much more subtle ways than you may realise.

    Without being too harsh about it, your comments have lead me to believe that you are actually one of these "average peasants" on this forum that you've written about and in fact fall far short of being "superior" to them! This isn't an argument about the maturity or intellect of other forum members.

    @ kanga - I'm ashamed to say, yes I did once "smack some heads together". Thankfully it was the first and last time it ever happened because of bullying. That marked the end of it - and more worryingly, their acceptance of me in to their social circles. People's reactions changed quite dramatically toward me over night - it makes me sick to think that was what was required in order to break free of it. I guess some people only understand one thing, and when you've tried everything else, that's all you have left.

  • Furbs #71 6 years ago

    "At the end of the day, your own argument defeats itself.. if "its a fucking videogame" then what justification could it possibly have for its subject matter? It needs a reason to exist beyond selling bucketloads if its going to offend some people."

    How about - "its fun"?

  • Rodafowa #72 6 years ago

    As a parent of three near-teenagers, I can't say that I'm wild about the notion of my kids playing the majority of Rockstar's output. But then, I can't say I'm wild about the notion of them watching the majority of John Woo or Garth Ennis' output, either. And since clearly the only way to make sure that children never see anything that might negatively influence them is to get that stuff off the shelves, let's ask Tony to ban The Killer. And The Sopranos. And Sin City. And everything Clive Barker's ever written. And Jamie Oliver.

    Okay, that last one might not be strictly relevant, but it's a good idea all the same.

    Calling for a ban on something just because it's not suitable for children and because you, personally, find it offensive shows a pretty startling lack of perspective. You think that stealing someone's lunch-money in a game's more serious than blowing someone's head off, well, that's fine and dandy. Opinion. Yours. Entitled. Plainly the (perceived) content of the game won't be for you, so don't buy it. That's your right.

    But hey - I'd appreciate it if you returned the favour and didn't try to force your prejudices, mores and morals on me.

  • Furbs #73 6 years ago

    FatFish, if you can find me one conclusive study which is accepted as being factual that violent imagery desensitises people to real life violence, I'll conceed this game should not be released. Congratulations though, you'd have done what Mary Whitehouse couldnt :)

  • Furbs #74 6 years ago

    Manic, you will always offend some people no matter what your subject matter. If I was a WW2 veteran, I'd choke on the idea of someone getting a kick out of a game of D-Day.

  • Rodafowa #75 6 years ago

    "Considering that video games exist in a realm of pure imagination, and can depict damn near ANYTHING, I find it very hard to justify any game that simulates a real, actual event in which real people died..."

    Couldn't you make the exact same argument concerning films or books? So, Platoon, Bridge On The River Kwai, Three Kings - Ban This Sick Filth?

  • Furbs #76 6 years ago

    Umm I know what she did. She was the subject of one of my uni modules a few years back. Maybe she did spend most of her time dealing with sexual themes, doesnt mean she never addressed the issue.
    "If violence is constantly portrayed as normal on the television screen it will help to create a violent society" is one of her more famous quotes funnily enough. And not backed by any conclusive study.

    Wow, she predicted societies relaxing of sexual attitudes? Hell an idiot could see that happening given she lived through the sixties.

    So are you saying that any event where people have died should not be made in to entertainment, even if its totally fictional? If so, kiss goodbye to the gaming and film industry. I could be offended by a football game if my brother had died at Hillborough or Heysel.

  • Psi #77 6 years ago

    Comparing this to war games etc didn't quite sit right when i read it.

    Thing is most teenage kids that play games don't have access to historical costumes and bayonetted rifles.

    However if they play a game where the point of the game is to kick the living death out of the school mates sitting in your class, everythings on hand right there!

    Come on, when i was at first school american wrestling came over to the UK and we all took part in kicking the living daylights out of eachother replicating the figure4 leglock the boston crab and anything else that would cause our class mates mild pain.

    Basically if this is designed to be immitable by regular school kids and set in their daily surroundings it's not sending out the right message. And that message is....


    ....stop fucking around with fireworks sniffing glue keying my fucking car and throwing shit at my cats.... i know you know i can't lay a hand on you for legal reasons but if i find out where you live im gonna fucking kill your fatha!... sorry not sure what game caused that :) bloody chavs

  • Fatfish #78 6 years ago

    @ Rodafowa - I think you may be reading too much in to some of these posts. We're not trying to force our morals on anyone - ultimately, this is still just a forum for people to air their views and feelings. It's not the House of Commons, Lords or the High Court. No one person can decree a law or moral standing - that's up to the duly elected representatives that we put in place (aka Memebers of Parliament). Now, I'm not saying that I have very much faith in MP's for the majority of issues, but I do abide by the laws and regulations placed on our society. Those laws and regulations (in the most part, and especially with regard to the more modern advent of media) are created through an initial request from the people. Admittedly this doesn't always hold true, but it is in the main the basis of our democratic society. As such, if people like us didn't air our "prejudices, mores and morals", then how do you suggest we govern our society in a fair and even manner? It's not possible to please all of the people all of the time (that's what Utopian ideals are for), so instead our society tries to please the 'majority' of the people based on their opinions. No one is forcing you to read or accept ours, just to listen to them as we listen to yours. Since the days of the greek philosophers, educated and literate arguments have been used to openly discuss issues and sway the opinions of the masses that have been unable to formulate a stance of their own, in a bid to set out moral standings, guidlines, laws and ways of life. Are you saying that we should no longer use this method and just all keep our opinions to ourselves? You can if you like, but personally I'm holding on to my freedom of speech thankyou very much! ;)

  • Furbs #79 6 years ago

    So on the "valid comparison" thing, you're assuming all the events in Bully will be true to life? If so it'll be very boring.

  • Furbs #80 6 years ago

    I used Whitehouses name as an example/avatar. Dont get hung up on her. As for your question, again the evidence is inconclusive as to if society is generally more violent or if its a case of better clean up rates. Tell you one thing, Victorian times were more violent than today, and thats before we had any form of popular media.

  • Furbs #81 6 years ago

    So is the Beano responsible for the bullying that happened in the 70's/80's?

  • Glitch #82 6 years ago

    I think this has gone too far, it is as if Rockstar are mocking the children who get bullied! This is a disgrace and I will never purchase a game like this!

    Whats next.. running round a hospital raping nurses??
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 14:58

  • Fatfish #83 6 years ago

    With regard to films being an influence - I think one of the main differences is that a film can only be played in one way. You only see what the director wants to show you. This in turn is governed by censorship. Therefore, the likelihood of these images being turned in to something they weren't meant to portray is less than those of a video game. In a video game (apart from spending literally hours sometimes transfixed by the thing), you normally have an option (especially in games such as GTA) as to how you will act and interact with the surroundings. Surely giving people the option to go and pick up a hooker, take her to a back alley, before slipping it to her and then beating her up to get your cash back is a little extreme?

    The argument about desensitisation to media is true in all forms. 20 years ago, Clockwork Orange was banned because of it's graphic imagery and because of it's political and anarchistic content. Not only is this now legal to buy over here, but it was recently shown on Channel 4 aswell - main stream TV. Rock and Roll when it first appeared was condemned as being the music of the devil and a disruptive and negative influence on the youth of that generation. It's now hailed as one of the greatest musical forms ever conceived. My argument is that not all desensitisation to media is a bad thing - but we do have to be careful not to become complacent about it and to make sure we still know where to draw the line. Ok, this is a slightly lighthearted take on it, but look at the Roman empire. Once on e of the greatest in the world - largely brought to it's feet by an incredibly decadent, immoral and hedonistic society that inwardly imploded over many years - not to mention the reduced gene pool due to incest and the sexually transmitted diseases spread through huge promiscuity!!

    /edit typos/
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 15:06

  • Furbs #84 6 years ago

    /pedant mode
    Clockwork Orange was never banned. Kubrick withdraw it, precisely because of the overreactive prejudice the film was about to receive.

  • Glitch #85 6 years ago

    "skillian - We have a game classification system here to help ensure games don't fall into the wrong hands. "

    Which doesn't work at all!

    Also to the people who say games like ManHunt and the like is worse, well you dont go around beating up defenseless kids, kidda a big difference, also if you think ManHunt is real then turn off the PC and get a life! Running round a school twating helpless dweebs is real life and happens, which isn't a funny matter.

  • Wobble #86 6 years ago

    *As adults living in the wonderful liberal paradise that is Europe, we are free to express ourselves in almost any way we like, and make art and entertainment products with this in mind. Rather than censoring our works for fear of them causing some sort of derranged or anti-social behaviour, we should look at tooling people with some sort of critical faculty so that they may think for themselves about such matters that may arise from the media that they may consume.

    Worth repeating.
    I don't think anyone arguing 'for' this game is 'on the side of rockstar' as they are undoubtedly damaging the reputation of gaming in return for profit, time and time again.
    I'm an adult, the people making this game are adults. We are presuming it is aimed at a market of Adults. No one is being hurt in the making/marketing or distribution of this game. (It's not EA ;o) ) I object very strongly to another adult attempting to control anything that I do, as long as I am doing it within the laws of the society to which we all belong.
    The issue is NOT that this shouldn't be made because kids could be adversely affected by playing it. If it's not legal for the kids to own/play it, but they manage to anyway then THAT is the Issue. IMHO obviously :)

  • Fatfish #87 6 years ago

    @ Furbs - Fair point that Kubrick may have withdrawn it because of the negative publicity, but I'm stil fairly certain it was banned over here - wasn't it? Not that I don't trust you, I will stand corrected if someone is capable of backing this up?

    Either way, it still highlights the way the views and opinions of the public have changed over the years - and this is largely due to desensitisation through increased exposure to all forms of media and the huge increases in global communication over the past 20 or so years.
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 15:13

  • Rodafowa #88 6 years ago

    "We're not trying to force our morals on anyone..."

    You're asking for a game to be banned/censored/edited/whatever because it offends your morals. If you got your way, I wouldn't be able to play that game unexpurgated even if its content didn't bother me. Therefore, you're asking for legislation to force me to comform to your ethics. See?

  • Furbs #89 6 years ago

    Manic, wheres the pic of the schoolkid in Bully doing drugs or using a knife? As for the consequences in the Beano? Dennis would get a hiding from his dad (promoting child abuse?) and the next issue he would go back to tormenting Walter. If this game does involve playing a bully (again you are assuming again) who is to say their wont be consequences? In GTA if you get caught, you are punished by the way...

    Big generalisation about kids thinking they are indestructable. My neice and nephews play all the video games imaginable (except 15/18 rated ones) and believe me, they dont go around inflicting violence on each other.

  • Fatfish #90 6 years ago

    @ Manic - I too have come to this opinion. I don't know that it should be banned - who are we to say. But from my perspective, it worries me that our society might find this entertaining. It really is plumbing the depths. I just hope that people use their own moral judgement to decide if they want to play this game and come to the same conclusion as us - no we don't because we don't agree with the content and don't perceive it to be entertaining. That really is the only way that Rockstar will get the message - poor sales. Unfortunately, I don't have too much faith in our society at times and especially when it comes to the younger generation being left to make their own moral judgements. Very few of them still know how to. Or am I being too pesimistic?

  • Stickman #91 6 years ago

    Can someone point out exactly how I'm on my high horse or where I shouted in a loud voice please?

    "And to be honest, the fact that you've felt the necessity to highlight that you've shot 400 Nazi's "in the face" (only goes to further the argument that that kind of content really does affect people in much more subtle ways than you may realise. "

    Don't talk rubbish. (Although I did have a hard-on while I was doing it...maybe I should see what shooting a kitten's like....)

    Without being too harsh about it, your comments have lead me to believe that you are actually one of these "average peasants" on this forum that you've written about and in fact fall far short of being "superior" to them! This isn't an argument about the maturity or intellect of other forum members. "

    It was a tongue in cheek statement, you overbearing smug twat. I was refering to many posters assumptions that while they, of course, will be able to see it's not for copying, the rest of the hoipoloi are just 'monkey-see, monkey-do' imbeciles, which they aren't.

  • Rodafowa #92 6 years ago

    No, that's just it.. my objection is ultimately because it will be entirely UNTRUE to life.. it will be comic book "biff him on the nose" jolly-hockey-sticks nonsense... it won't show ANY consequences from actions at all...

    In which case, let's ban The A-Team. Aparrently, when you unload an assault rifle at somebody, all that happens is that dirt gets kicked up at their feet. Or, at the absolute outside, their jeep rolls over until the two swarthy-looking blokes inside have to clamber out looking slightly dazed.

  • Fatfish #93 6 years ago

    @ Rodafowa - such is the way of a democratic society. I'm not forcing anything on you. I am merely stating that I feel the material and content appears inappropriate and that a through investigation is warranted. Likewise, I could put the same argument forward to you - why should I bow to you're apparent lack of morals because you want the right to experience this kind of content? I make my justification based on the kind of sociological ideals that I would like to see in our world. As does everyone else, including you. These ideals will often clash, but that's the point of debate - you can't tell someone they don't have the right to an opinion. Every man is free and his mind is his own. Material possessions can be seized and actions can be hindered, but free thought and will can never be taken.

  • Furbs #94 6 years ago

    Like Tom and Jerry then?

  • Furbs #95 6 years ago

    *Different* morals. Not *lack* of.

    And the reason Paedophilia is not tolerated is because it affects people who are below the legal age of consent and so could therefore not agree, even if they wanted to. Since this is an 18 cert game, and therefore not aimed people in school, its reasonable to assume they will not affect anyone else as a direct result of this game alone.
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 15:31

  • Fatfish #96 6 years ago

    @ stickman - If the tone was one of sarcasm in your original post then you have my apologies. Unfortunately it was somewhat lost on me and several others if I'm going by the posts that follwed it. I wasn't the only one to comment, and yet I'm the only one that get's called an "overbearing smug twat"?!? That's a bit unfair don't you think? If anything, I was the one that was being polite by saying "Without being too harsh about it..."!!

    Perhaps in future, when entering in to a what appears to be quite a serious discussion with a lighthearted comment, you should take the time to make this clear to the rest of the forum. Like I said, I wasn't the only one to miss the sarcasm in you post.

    @ Manic - It appears we seem to hold very similar views - I'm beginning to wonder if we shouldn't just head off to the hills and start our own survivalist commune away from the decadence of modern society. We could call it the Utopian Seperatist Socialist Republic (USSR for short)!! What do you reckon comrade?
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 15:39

  • Stickman #97 6 years ago

    Fatfish, you really are pretentious. The thing that's annoying people is your implied assertion that everyone is welcome to their own opinions, but any that don't match yours make them uncouth neanderthals who you can look down your nose at.

    You've got your opinion, I've got mine, this debate is pointless and just serves to raise the blood pressure of all involved.

    edit: Like you were the other day, I'm having a right pain in the arse day at work, and am touchier than is stricly necessary, so I apologise for the name calling. I must learn to not actually come into some of these comments sections on days like today! Still think you're pretentious though. ;)
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/05 @ 15:39

  • Furbs #98 6 years ago

    You think we're already fucked as a race and are worried about a videogame? Blimey!

  • Furbs #99 6 years ago

    Manic, its the fact they are conducting an offence in a public place which is the problem there. Its nothing to do with the morals of their sexuality. Again, its to do with protecting those who do not or cannot consent to something. The only law I can think of which is exclusively based around a perceived set of morals is the Obscenity Law, and even that has been increasingly overturned, to the degree that you can now buy hardcore porn in your newsagent.

  • Stickman #100 6 years ago

    "Then get lost, if that's the extent of your commitment to freedom of speech... "

    Oh, shut your hole, you tit. What's freedom of speech got to do with a pointless argument where the two parties are never going to agree?

  • urban #101 6 years ago

    *sigh.

    i'm sorry but if it gets an 18 cert, then thats who should be playing it.

    the fact that she just said 'kids will get their hands on it' proves the system is failing THATS what they should be focusing on.

    i'm a grown adult. i want to play grown adult games, whatever their content.

  • Fatfish #102 6 years ago

    @ stickman - not pretentious, I just have conviction in my morals. Everyone has to have their own set of standards to compare things with. And no I don't look down on everyone else - I just feel I have a point and I'm sticking to it. Again, conviction in my morals. And as stated to Rodafowa above, a discussion is about trying to persuade others that your opinions are correct and justified - otherwise, what's the point of discussing it in the first place? And just because I can put forward a good argument, does that make me pretentious? I'm not trying to force anyone to my way of thinking, just trying to convince them that my argument is also valid. People are allowed to disagree, but why discuss something if you are not looking for an outcome at the end of it?

    Anyway, I'm out of here for now people. My Friday afternoon has never been so thought provoking or interesting - thanks to all those who I've been chatting with. Hope you all have a good weekend - I'm off to get as high as a kite and as shitfaced as possible, without hurting anyone else in the process! A total disregard to most peoples morals and the society we live in. And if you think I'm kidding - think again!! ;)

    /edit typo/
    Edited by 2 at 28/10/05 @ 15:53

  • Stickman #103 6 years ago

    "a discussion is about trying to persuade others that your opinions are correct and justified - otherwise, what's the point of discussing it in the first place? "

    Fatfish, that was my point though! It was/is pointless to carry on this thread because I highly doubt that either camp will be able to get the other to come round to their way of thinking.

    Yet, here I am doing it! Ah well.

    Have a good weekend.

  • Fatfish #104 6 years ago

    @ stickman - I completely agree, but sometimes a good argument/discussion over issues like this are needed. It gets people thinking about things they wouldn't normally think about and get's your brain ticking! I realised from the start that this (like most arguments on forums) was going to be a stalemate between both sides - but you have to admit, it's been entertaining! Sorry if I seem a little flippant now, I'm in weekend mode!!

    Have a good one. ;)

  • kangarootoo #105 6 years ago

    @Fatfish

    "I'm ashamed to say, yes I did once "smack some heads together""

    Hey, no one is made of stone. Ashamed is too strong a word here I think.

  • peterfll #106 6 years ago

    Good debate guys, I've read all points with interest. And I think we all kissed and made up in time for the weekend too!

    (blows kisses to you all)

  • Krun #107 6 years ago

    Upcomming Rockstar games.

    Pimp my sister
    Kiddy fiddler
    No daddy no.
    Porn Star.
    Kitten smasher.