25 to Life gets more flack

All publicity is good publicity? After all, look what happened when they stopped stocking 'Manhunt'.

/meh!

All this fuss over a game that will undoubtedly be a wee bit shite...

"flak"

Taser Foundation? Charity? What next, Heckler and Koch Care in the Community? Smith and Wesson Puppy Salvation Society?

Besides, games have been killing cops since the first GTA (the 2D ones and probably even before that), it's not exactly new or shocking.

"Games such as this actually dehumanise police"

It's a game of cops and robbers - doesn't that enforce the ideals of good and bad in society? He's just pissed off because they have unlicensed tasers

Jumping on the bandwagon methinks. Even San Andreas didn't take this much flak, and that's a much more prolific title, and it's actually out to buy.

Yeah, for all the uproar before San Andreas hit, you never heard of stuff like this being levelled at it. You get the feeling people won't bother accusing Rockstar of anything anymore 'cos it'll just slide off their backs and help shift more units.

Well, I doubt Jack Thompson will shut his hole anytime soon.

how many of the under age kids are gonna get their older brothers and sisters to go out and buy it for them. i should think quite a few and in my experience with kids who have disruptive personalities that is going to be one of the answers to getting hold of this game for the under 18's

oh no, it's another episode of "minority of people vs freedom of expression"

Alecsander Kalasnikov Foundation - Suppporting skewls after Columbine incidents.

Xerx3s - we've had that joke already and souljah's was more funny.

It seems clear to me that playing the media can make you a lot of money

Announce you're going to make a game based on killing famous people like Princess Diana, Lincon, John Lennon, JFK and George Bush... (bugger ain't got round to him yet , he's a little further down the list)

After you ride the tidal wave of media attention, slap a crap flash game in a cornflakes packet and put a logo on there.

Laughing all the way to the bank and the only ones to suffer are the gaming public

I think we're getting a news item like this every week.... should adopt a name for them.

Despite all the Daily Mail-stylee sensationalist tosh spewing forth at the moment I must admit I do feel it's got to a point where developers do actually have to start acting with a little less immaturity. As a 25 yr old relatively well adjusted human bean I found GTA III a breath of fresh air to the video gaming world. It had attitude, style and was genuinely original in its execution (although obviously the first two had set the ball rolling). But, to be honest, I'm getting sick of this teen-angst immature 'fuk da police' stance that games are taking. Ironically these games are 18s when the real market they are aimed at is spotty 16 year olds who think it's 'cool' to 'pop a cap in the ass' of Police officers. I wish more game makers would grow up, get some balls and make some games that don't rely on the 'violence rocks' teen market but actually go out there and make quality games solely for the post 18 market. I can't help thinking that the 'we're old enough to choose what we play' argument is a bit of a red herring because a lot of the hype and gameplay is still appealing to 14-17 year olds. Example: GTA: SA - Some workmen make lewd comments about your sister (name any workmen that don't?!) and the answer to your problems is mowing down all their buildings and then burying the foreman alive in concrete. Now I may sound like a square but someone's got to - that's really rather malicious! I didn't enjoy getting involved with that and it seriously turned me off the game. What I'm saying is this - no, we shouldn't start using bully boy tactics to stop games like this being made - after all it's a free country. But I do think it's up to the both the public and the critics to actually make some noise about all this malicious 'isn't it cool to kill police...snort, snort' attitude and just not buy into it. The video games market is still so young and there is so much further that it can go but I still have a nagging feeling that game makers have moved from the pre-teens market to the teens market and are still stuck there. And let's be honest here - do we really think that the '18' certificates are there to stop 16 year old kids buying their products - hell no! They're there to say - 'look at me aren't I adult - play me, 'cause that'd be, like, totally cool'.

25 to Life isn't a "fuk da police" game. It's a multiplayer shoot em up where you choose to be either the cops or the robbers.

Besides, if you don't like the crime genre, then why play it? I don't like Dungeon and Dragons style RPGs, doesn't mean they don't have a right to exsist.

And at age 16 you've already seen it all, it won't mess you up to play an 18 rated game. Infact most games rated 18 in one country are rated 16 in another. It's just a matter of where they drew the line to write down that particular law.
We're all gamers here, most of us have been playing Mortal Kombat at age 12 and we are not homocidal maniacs. It doesn't matter.
And before it was video games it was horror movies that kids watched for the gore, diden't mess them up either.

Is that THE Gerry Anderson...?

In answer to Freek's comments:
"25 to Life isn't a "fuk da police" game. It's a multiplayer shoot em up where you choose to be either the cops or the robbers."
- I don't think I ever specifically claimed that 25 to Life was a purely "fuk da police" game. However at least 1/2 of the game, so to speak, is concerned with eliminating police officers and yes, there is a choice but a what stage does a game where the idea of making an active choice to murder police officers become something worthwhile putting out. The argument people make is we should be free to make that choice but if people actually stick to their guns and real beliefs then no - why not not provide that choice? What would somebody say if they made, for example, an adult mystery adventure-style game where you played a kid who was being stalked by a paedophile - would you then demand that you were able to play the game from the point of view of the paedophile - of course not! If you present the choice then you are presenting people with moral choices with little consequence. If you just don't present the immoral choice then people playing make the assumption that the immoral choice is unthinkable. So I'll say it again: why don't developers show some real balls and take some sort of moral stance in their games.

Freek's second comment: "Besides, if you don't like the crime genre, then why play it? I don't like Dungeon and Dragons style RPGs, doesn't mean they don't have a right to exsist."

Firstly, what on earth is the 'crime genre'. There is not a 'crime genre'. In computer games the genres describe the style of gameplay as that is the overriding concern e.g. RPGs, Adventure Games, FPSs. The crucial element that links these games are the gameplay mechanics (Mercenaries is the same genre as GTA but certainly isn't crime). I play these games because of the mechanics, not because committing crime appeals to me! I really genuinely worry if you play these games merely because they let you commit crimes. Finally you state that if one doesn't like something that it doesn't mean it doesn't have a right to exist. Correct - I never said that, I merely said that critics should be more critical and demand something more intelligent and creative than generic copycat titles that exhibit a 'fuk da police' attitude. We have a right to speak our minds but certainly not to inhibit others.

Freek's final comment:
"And at age 16 you've already seen it all, it won't mess you up to play an 18 rated game. Infact most games rated 18 in one country are rated 16 in another. It's just a matter of where they drew the line to write down that particular law.
We're all gamers here, most of us have been playing Mortal Kombat at age 12 and we are not homocidal maniacs. It doesn't matter.
And before it was video games it was horror movies that kids watched for the gore, diden't mess them up either."

I'm sorry - am I missing something here? An 18 is an 18, which means it's an...18. So it shouldn't be played be kids under....you guessed it....18! These rules should always be observed because they're there for a decent reason. Yes most kids can deal with these things with relative ease but I work in the education sector and have worked with a number of kids upon whom these games really do provide 'inspiration'. These games can actually have a negative impact (much like other stimulus materials such as books, films etc) and the point is we try to monitor this as a society and protect children until they really do reach an age where hormones and the like have stopped playing their part. Finally the statement "And at age 16 you've already seen it all" - this just quite simply is not true. The average age for children to lose their virginity, for example, is 17. You've never been married, you've never raised kids (unless you really are a lost cause) etc, etc....