The C-E staff give their views on gaming's most important issues.

Last week Stefan Pakeerah was murdered by Warren Leblanc. Leblanc, 17, was reportedly "obsessed" with Rockstar's recent game, Manhunt. The British tabloid press prompty began lambasting violent videogames, blaming them for the murder. The Pakeerah family are to sue Rockstar Games. Industry representative ELPSA rebutted any claims of wrongdoing, saying absolutely no reponsibility lay with the game. But are they right?

Is the games industry being irresponsible with violent games?

Ben:

It's hard to deal with this one. The problem is, there are actually genuine cases where people are driven to do abnormal things by video games- because of their mental problems. The real problem is people using video games as a scapegoat. Because the government seem intent on blaming everything but themselves for our nation's problems- we see people convicted of crimes trying to force the criminal system to be leniant on them because they thought they were Mario.

I mean, what a complete joke. Where is the limit? Why don't the goverment ban all types of media, and then let them see how they deal with these social problems without a scapegoat? We saw it with the James Bulger case, where horror films were blamed- now we see this young man claiming Manhunt forced him to kill this child. Oh yes, and we all know how the twin towers were destroyed because of Flight Simulator. I'm suprised we haven't seen the young man who stabbed a younger pupil blaming the murder on Vice City. They think they can get away with it. Lawyers have cottoned on.

Because the reality is, games don't kill people- mentally-ill people do. They are clearly not right in the head, which, granted, isn't their fault, if they even considered performing such an act. I've been playing games since I was knee-high to a grasshopper, and I have no urge to run over an old lady.

Violent games arn't my thing- but I see them for what they are, entertainment. If publishers are being irresponsible for letting these games get onto the shelves, so are movie makers, writers and music artists. It's entertainment- for every one person who is affected, there are millions which aren't. If these people are so deranged that they want to hurt someone after playing a violent game, then they simply shouldn't have access to them.

And lets not forget that the majority of these people who play these violent games and then carry out violent acts arn't even old enough to play them. I find it hard to believe that a video game can turn someone murdurous. There must have been signs- in which case, why the hell are the parents letting these kids play these games? You have to be one hell of an ignorant parent to miss the chainsaw on the packet.

I for one, through experience, know that most established games stores are very strict on ELSPA ratings- so the problem lies with the parent or guardian purchasing the game in the first place. This is presuming they were actually affected by the game. Not that the game is simply a scapegoat to try and reduce their sentence they were given for their criminal acts.

I think the most amusing quote found in the news stories surrounding the "Manhunt" story was- "I think his friends said he was obsessed..."

Could this game drive someone to kill?

Jayseven:

I think the games industry is more than aware of what they are doing.

Games nowadays do not sell based on magazine reviews, or based on how good the actual game plays. They sell based on the publicity and the attention from the media. Games producers and developers know that a good way to get extra promotion for their games is by making sure that the game has its taboo bases covered. Sex, drugs, violence. The 3 "Baddest" things in the world. In most instances all a game has to do to sell is to loudly proclaim the vast amounts of bad stuff that is in their games, and gamers will buy it because it is wikkid! bo!

Even if this is not the right way to go about the games business, it isn't entirely wrong. No. People who kill other people and say games, music or films are at fault. Their parents are at fault. Their peers are at fault. If a child has been raised under a household where swearwords are okay, then they will be more likely to insert a swear word in every sentance. Of course, if a child is brought up in a household where a parent is being physically abused by the other, then they will KNOW that it is wrong. It's a human instinct to recognise pain and suffering in another human. It's human instinct to know that pain is not nice, and that suffering is wrong.

People who knowingly harm others do so because they themselves are screwed up... Now, the statistics for people with mental health are rising all the time thanks to more illnesses being recognised thanks to the medical world's progression. There are illnesses where people fail to recognise facial expresions, illnesses where people can do long division in their heads but cannot understand what the difference between yellow and red is, there are people who have difficulty defining right and wrong.

It is unfair for the Daily Mail and GMTV to directly accuse TEH EVIL DEVIL PLAYSTATYUN AND ITS BROTHER MARIO of polluting our childrens mind, it's unfair for the games industry to be accused of triggering some hidden rage inside someones mind, as if we're all at risk of going ker-azeee and chopping someone's head off.

But it's also unfair to blame these individuals who are born with their mental difficulties. The topic at hand isn't "is the way society deals with mentally handicapped people correct?" So I think I'll leave this here for now...

Joby:

It's completely pathetic. If anyone bothered to watch the news report or read an article on the Manhunt being blamed for the murder. You would have acquired that the person playing/blaming the game was too young to play the 18 rated game in the first place. Gaming has always been used as a scapcoat, just like many kid's blamed eminem's lyrics for their schoolyard violence in America. The circle is infinite. Parents need to find something to blame? So why not the 18 rated game THEY brought for their 15 year old kid.

Blaming an entertainment medium when you don't follow the guidelines is pathetic. Even worse that the nationwide media seems to side with the parents. Blaming GTA for everything, or Goldeneye because their kid runs around using their ruler as a gun. Parents reading this... it's YOUR fault. Go get a lecture in how to control your kids.

I won't deny it. I played rated games when I was too young to play them. Did I then go and commit a crime? Or would I ever think about blaming a video game on any violent tendancies I have? No. Because unlike most retarded people who live amongst us (such is the downfall of the nation). I can seperate reality from a videogame. Stop blaming games, start blaming yourself.

A prime offender, apparently

Ash:

Mines an essay argument rant thingy thats more about the Manhunt case then the question but oh well...

First off I'll get the necessary "we feel sorry for the family" out of the way because we truly do, it's not a nice thing and my mom is constantly tells me how horrible it would be for me to be killed and until I have children I'll just have to believe her. So with all the arguments I give below I mean no disrespect.

However...what the hell are they thinking? They are apparently suing Sony and Rockstar for �50 million. I can understand some money to cover the funeral expenses and any setbacks this may have caused but �50 million, what do they need that much money for? I think if I were to die and my family was to use it as a get-rich-quick scheme I'd be disgusted. I'm sure a lot of this is bought on by lawyers but it all seems a bit greedy really. While on the case, why sue Sony? What have they done but have the game on their console, which Microsoft has also done.

The "evidence" that Warren Leblanc's murdering is to blame on the game is the fact his mother said he is "obsessed" with the game. If this open-description word settles a legal case I think the legal system should be re-evaluated. I think it's being used as a scapegoat because you can't blame this one game for a murder that one player, out of the millions who have played the title, has committed. Manhunt was also not until after the court case, it was never even mentioned, to me this is more of an angered and ashamed mother.

Latest information even states the police saying "We haven't connected the game with the murder and we've already made that statement, but some sections of the media chose to ignore it...the motive was robbery." So examples of the media blaming the gaming industry are often generated by the media.

The fact that Leblanc used a hammers and knifes to commit the murder is apparently evidence enough that the game is to blame, have they never thought that these are the most accessible weapons as not everyone has a sword and gun at home. He could of just as easily used a desk, but would that mean we should ban desks?

The old argument rings out again as I repeat the "the game is an 18 game and was being played by a 17 year old child" but just want to add it was February that he did this, he could have been 16 when he began playing the game which came out just before the end of last year. We all know that those age classifications are in place for a reason and as annoying as it is when we're told we cannot play a game we at least know why. Age certificates are placed on games so that minors don't play them because there is the fear that they will not be able to handle them but the truth is most people who are of "sound mind" can differentiate between fantasy and violence.

It is an absurd idea to blame violent games for isolated incidents like this. If we sum it up a business is being blamed for a fictional story unintentionally killing someone. So lets say the American government, that being the "business" made up a fictional story about, oh I don't know, weapons of mass destruction, which led to the death of others. Shall we slap George Bush with a subpoena? No, that would be crazy.

This whole incident reminds me of Columbine a few years ago. Marilyn Manson was blamed for the killings because apparently the murderers were influenced by his music, however they did not even listen to his music, a far way from being influenced by it.

So if you haven't guessed I don't think that games can be solely blamed for such occurrences, so they may play a factor but there are other larger factors at hand here. Nor do I think the gaming industry is being irresponsible with violent games, okay some companies seem to be on the wavelength that bloodier=better but the market appeals to that idea, they are simply entertainment and should not be blamed. When did the Romans ever blame Gladiators for killings?

Bas O:

If the game industry is responsible, then Hollywood is the biggest mass murderer since Adolf Hitler.

It's so easy to point a guilty finger at something that is hard to deal with, even to acknowledge. Admit that the true reason for 'game inspired murder acts' is a lack of common sense and rationality by a certain number of people (probably a pretty large number too, I reckon).

That could be a cause of raising your kids not properly. Parents who don't give a damn, are to busy with their career or are addictive to drugs and alcohol. It could even be a more rooted issue which is the very primitive nature that lies within us, humans. I mean, the fact alone is that violent games are the best selling items all over the world is a sure sign of that. The same goes for the movies.

So the problem isn't the game industry, its easy to boycott a violent game title, but you can't solve society problems overnight, now can you?

A "murder simulator" almost by definition

Pesten:

I'm sick of people looking for scapegoats in the game, film and music industry.

If they actually gets the idea to kill a guy because of a game, film or song - there is something wrong with their heads, and not the medium.

But since most of these cases is involving kids:

To all parents; please take responsibility. Kids are not supposed to play games with mature content, look at violent movies or listen to extrem music. Those labels on the side of the box is there with a reason. Does EXPLICIT CONTENT mean anything to you? And what do you think that 18+ means? Come on..take the responsibility.

[Keep your eyes peeled for a GameOff article related to this subject coming soon - Conor]

We all know you can't really blame a game for the actions of a person, but still, should we be concerned?