BF2S Forums Looking for some criticism.

Violence is a very common thing, not only in our culture, but in our genetics itself. Humans are violent by nature. So what makes one person more violent than another? Some say its state of mind, others say its genetics. But there are some people out there who have started to blame something that has been around for almost thirty years: video games. Why have video games come under recent fire? Apparently it’s their turn. Video games have become a scapegoat in many felonies. Anytime the media mentions video games within a ten block radius of a crime, it automatically becomes the fault of both the creators of such games and the retailers who sold the game, instead of the person who actually committed the crimes. The idea that violent video games cause violence in the real world holds absolutely no merit.
    As previously stated, violence is in our very being. Now ask yourself: did Hitler ever play video games? What about Stalin? Julius Caesar? Brutus (he killed Julius Caesar)? None of these people ever played video games, yet they were some of the most violent and genocidal people in the world. Since the creation of video games, these types of people are all but extinct (next you’ll hear about Saddam Hussein having played video games, and in turn murdering millions of his people).
    In a sense, video games have affected the way people act towards hostilities, and instead of making them violent and aggressive, it suppresses the thoughts of doing such things in real life by exercising them in a pixilated world. A place where people can express themselves freely in a false world that looks real. Whether it is a game that puts you on the front lines of World War II, or puts you into the shoes of a mobster, it’s all good fun. Plus, understanding the dynamics of a game and knowing what is right and not right in real life is half the fun.
    Now, with all this controversy surrounding video games, it attracted some “prestigious” lawyers, attorneys, and even some senators. A Miami attorney by the name of Jack Thompson, self-proclaimed “anti-game crusader”, got involved with some of the bigger court cases in which victims of crimes were filing lawsuits against video game manufacturers, publishers, and retailers. His most recent escapade, one that is about to start in the coming days, is an Alabama court case entitled Strickland vs. Sony. The extremely large digital media company Sony is being sued by the victim’s families of a 2003 shooting in Fayette, Alabama. A man named Devin Moore stole the gun out of an officer’s belt holster and killed that officer. Then he proceeded to kill another officer who saw what happened, and finally a police dispatcher. Moore claimed that he spent hours upon hours of his free time on the “cop-killing murder simulation” (as Jack Thompson calls such games) Grand Theft Auto III and Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. Jack Thompson will be representing the victim’s families in this case under a Pro Hac Vice status which allows him to practice law outside of Florida.
    Let’s back up now and find out what started all of this Grand Theft Auto controversy. Not long after the latest installment of the GTA series, San Andreas, was released, a modification to the game named “Hot Coffee” by a third party was released to the public. This modification showcased “sexually explicit material” that was hidden in the game code. Rockstar Games, developers of the GTA series, said that this content WAS in the original game, but was locked away and never meant to be seen by anyone. Soon after the modification was released, all kinds of lawyers, activists, and even senators were lobbying to have this game banned for its content. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas had had a content rating of M for Mature (ages 17+). That soon changed as the ERSB (Entertainment Rating Software Board) saw fit to give San Andreas the infamous rating of AO for Adults Only (ages 18+). This begs the question: “What difference does one year between M and AO make?” Having a game rated AO means one thing for gaming companies: no sale. Rockstar Games immediately started producing another distribution of the game excluding the hidden sex scenes and having its rating lowered back to M for Mature.
    A lot of these senators and lawyers are claiming that Grand Theft Auto has an adverse effect on the minds of children, teaching them how to kill cops and beat up people walking the street. But wait, wasn’t this game rated Mature? This is the exact reason for the ERSB and the way they rate games. If a game is rated Mature, it’s not meant for children, or even kids younger than 17. Yet people like Jack Thompson sue game developers and publishers for marketing these games to kids. The truth is, when a child sees a game he likes, he asks his parent. It is the parent’s job to assess the game and make sure it is appropriate. Why blame the game itself for violence and corruption of children when the irresponsible parent is at fault? Games are clearly marked with the rating. If a parent cares not what their child is playing, they have no right to blame retailers, developers, or publishers of the games.
    Recently, the “anti-game crusader” Jack Thompson made an offer to donate $10,000 to charity if someone were to tailor a game to his specifications: A game in which the player urinates on the brains of game developers, and those who work at game stores. Isn’t this guy the one trying to get these kinds of games banned? Anyway, the same people who made the “Hot Coffee” mod for San Andreas did exactly what Thompson asked. And what did Thompson do? He retracted his offer to charity, claiming it was just “satire”. It must be that time of day to get the hopes up of the poor and starving people of the world, only to take away that hope because of “satire”. Well, some people in the gaming community, namely the creators of a popular web comic (Penny Arcade) Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins, finally got fed up with this man. So what did they do? They donated $10,000 to charity in Jack Thompson’s name. On the donation check, the comment was “For Jack Thompson, because Jack Thompson won’t”.  As soon as Thompson heard about this, he immediately contacted the Seattle PD with a fax, asking for “the investigation and/or arrest of the employee’s of this little extortion factory.” When this attempt to arrest Mike and Jerry failed, Thompson actually tried to contact the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to have them open a case on the “extortion factory”. Don’t worry, this attempt failed too. This man is clearly out of his mind.
    Aside from all of the drama surrounding the Grand Theft Auto games, the FBI has released all sorts of statistics from 2004, including the status of the violent crime rate. Surprise, surprise, it has fallen 2.2% since 2003. But that is just for adults. Now let’s look at the numbers for our so called “violent youth”. Statistics that have been compared to that of 1995 figures show a 30.9% decrease in violent crimes committed by youths. So what does this mean? It means that according to the FBI, the murder rate has hit a 40-year low. This shows that even with Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas being the best selling game of 2004, it did not increase murders or violent crimes committed, especially by youths, AT ALL. Not even a little bit. If anything it made them DECREASE.
    There is a website out there that follows the day to day actions and events in the real world of video games that deals with politics, who is suing who, and what needs to be known about certain games. GamePolitics.com has all of the latest news about what is happening in the real word of video games. Right now they are covering the case Strickland vs. Sony. They have given the premise, the background information, and essentially everything that needs to be known about this case. If there is something big going on in the real world of video games, this is the place to get information about it. And as such, this case, Strickland vs. Sony, is a huge court case that could very well seal the fate of all video games.
    The bottom line is this: violent games do not cause violence in people. If anything, people like Jack Thompson cause violence in people, especially gamers. If by some miracle this man manages to ban all games it will just make things ten times worse. Not only will it put many software developers out of work, increasing the unemployment rate, but just because something is illegal does not mean it won’t somehow make it into the hands of consumers (just look at drugs like marijuana). And in the event of a ban on games, it just makes such games that much more desirable (such is the case with illegal drugs, but that’s another whole topic entirely). Violent games, in many people’s opinions, including the writer of this paper, are just plain fun.