Biostem

But won't anyone that sends you a tell when you do this get the "can't you see I'm on the phone' message?

I like the cell phone idea, though. Too bad it looks like some crappy nokia from 1999. Of course, we could be lucky they didn't put the one in that the merc MM uses to call his troops...

My only objection is that I feel it is ok to use "leet" if it's part of your chaarcter's story/look/theme. If I make a cyborg or a character from a videogame given life, then why not use "H4CK3R"?

Punctuation is your friend.

Here's a few extra: . ! ? ; :

The SG leader, whether you like him or not, has the ability to do just the things you didn't want him to do. With so much concern for the SG, are you it's leader? Why would you, or anyone w/ the necessary permissions, give another person the ability to destroy your SG? It's like giving someone the key to your house, then getting pissed when they let themselves in.

Learn from your mistake and move along. Make yourself leader of a new SG, and don't give ANYONE else the ability to make such changes. You have no one to blame but yourself.

[ QUOTE ]
Bottem line is they don't act fast or can't do anything. You talk about cost of being able to do that stuff. Still cheaper then someone takeing them to court.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have got to be kidding me. What would you bring suit for? Emotional distress? Damages? I'm pretty sure there's some clause that neither NCSoft nor Cryptic is responsible for he things that happen in-game, at least not in a legal or prosecutorial way.

It's time we start acting like adults and take responsibility for our actions. You or your SG-mates should know better than to give personal info out to strangers over the internet. You also don't seem to realize that all petitions are researched; they're not just going to take your word for it and ban or kick the person. How do we know you aren't the one at fault here?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Show me where it says that you can't give personal info out in-game? Show me where it says the Cryptic or NCSoft is responsible for what the players do in-game? Show me where you, or any other player, was coerced to give out RL info in-game, and how it was NCSoft & Cryptic's fault.

[/ QUOTE ]

From the Code of Conduct which applies both here and ingame:
[ QUOTE ]
2. You may not post or communicate any player's real world information (name, address, account name, etc.) through the City of Heroes game or on the official City of Heroes website.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look, I understand this person who started the thread is confused and doesn't really have a clue, but BioStem, at least be clear on what the rules are before you harsh them about which rules have and havent been broken.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for educating me. Now, the burden of proof is on the OP to supply the GM, via petition, with the time, date, and/or screenshots of when the info was given out. Also, wouldn't the person who gave the info be the one breaking this rule then? I mean, it states you are not to give out your info. The "offender" here is the one who merely listened to/read the info being presented, then posted it on some other site...

[ QUOTE ]
Your just the kind of person who doesn't want the GM to have more power. We think the GM should have more power.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wanting the GM to be able to do this or that is fine. It is irrelevant as they cannot do anything about this now, and that's what's at question. If the GMs are to be able to act on additional things, then the publisher will have to amend the ToS & EULA to include that. THAT is a costly matter and may very well result in people packing up and taking their business elsewhere. I still fail to see *why* the GMs should step in on the other issues. Even if they changed the rules right now, this was done some time ago, and wasn't subject to the restriction then. I, for one, don't want any GM intervention in what is clearly an out-of-game issue. Just because the game was used as a medium to transmit the info doesn't make those supplying the medium responsible. ISP's aren't responsible if someone commits a computer crime from their home computer, over the internet, and NCSoft/Cryptic should be responsible for some of your SG-mates carelessly giving out their personal info.

[ QUOTE ]
First of all I personally am not blaming NC Soft or Cryptic, nor am I balming the GM's. Now that thats been said I am saying that this is an issue that can and should be delt with. While it is the players responsability to keep it in check it is the GM's responsability to deal with problems and this is obviously a problem. This game can not afford to lose more players and this sort of thing causes people to stop playing. Other games such as WoW deal with this sort of thing swiftly and with no mercy and thats how it should be. Obviously the nay-sayers in this forum haven't had that happen to them or they would be singing a different tune. On a further note insulting those with this sort of problem is not needed and makes what you say have no real bearing and while yes it is in the wrong section....Oh well it happens but obviously its being read and posted on so hey it works. Move it if they want to thats there choice but location is not as important as the message itself and the opinions and ideas posted herein.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only thing the GMs are responsible to do at this point is research and act on any petiton you may have sent for the cursing, racial epiphets, etc.

You don't seem to understand something - just because you think the GMs should intervene doesn't mean they should. Other than the curing and such, the offenders here haven't broken any rules. Just because you don't like that the person in question has been passing personal information doesn't mean they did anything wrong according to the ToS/EULA, which is all that matters here.

If you are playing this game, you are responsible for your own actions, or should be supervised by an adult who can be responsible. If you still gave your personal info out, and it was later used in a manner you disagree with, too bad!

I don't care what WoW does, and stop trying to make some argument that this game's population is dwindling because of things like this. Grow up, take it in stride, and learn from your mistakes - if not you, then the other people who this happened to.

[ QUOTE ]
Let me see if I can explain what happened. Someone at the highest rank, don't know who, promoted another person (who will henceforth be known as "Jane Doe") to the highest rank. Jane Doe then proceeded to promote a new member of the SG (me) to the maximum rank just because she can. That was a bit of a "what the...?" moment, but not too bad (once this all blows over I'll quit and rejoin so I'm not at the incorrect rank).

Then she started booting everyone of lower rank out of the SG, changing the SG's MOTD, description, colors, rank names, just about anything she could get her hands on. Fortunately someone had the presence of mind to get us into the base and get someone on the Edit Base screen so she could not go in and start deleting everything, and we also grabbed all the salvage and enhancements we could out of storage. She was also being verbally abusive, using racial slurs toward other SG members and calling their sexual orientation into question.

What we are asking for is the swift removal of this person from our SG, if not from the game, so we can get things back to normal. We would also like to have a way to know who promoted her to the highest rank in order to determine if it was an honest mistake or a deliberate attempt at sabotage. And while I can't truly speak for them, I would like to think that the true leaders of the SG have learned a harsh lesson in security, so perhaps some restructuring will be in order.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, you are not entitled to know who promoted this "Jane Doe" - if you are, I'd be very surprised. Second, if this person was using profane language in-game, did you get screenshots of it and did you petition them? THAT is what your recourse would be to get them, if nothing else, suspended from the game.

As for getting this person booted from the SG, is there a precedent for this? I've never heard of a GM ever kicking someone from a SG, but that doesn't mean it hasn't or couldn't happen...

The OP didn't mention any of this - it just talked about a high-ranking SG member selling things in the base, etc... This stuff about the foul language is definitely petitionable...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
!) This is not a guide. take it somewhere else please. Mods, please move tis thread if you see this.

2)I have a good cheese to go with your whine, Beamer. SGs are not democratic. What you're asking for is micromanagement of an SG by mods, which, is not only really inefficient, but draws GM action and attention from other, more important things. It's bad enough that 50-70% of the time you ahve to wait more than 20 minutes for a GM response, can you imagine it would be substantially worse if we had to divert them to matters like this? You're asking for the inefficient, and if you cna't deal with th fact that sometimes, player-based hierarchies are unfair, go home.

Also, stop posting here. This isn't useful in any way to anyone. Go to player questions or the general forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


If we wish to run it as a democratic then we can!

[/ QUOTE ]

And how's that?

[/ QUOTE ]

The way the game is set up it can be done. I'm not going to put down how a SG/VG can be run as a democratic. The SG/VG i'm in happens to run it as a democratic. We just happen to have a leader make someone leader who want to break everything in the SG/VG. We have save only been able to keep the base. We have a toon setting in base edit. To keep this player from deleting the base and salvage. Lucky we had a global chat for the SG/VG that saved all the players and a 2nd SG/Vg to put them in. Now we just wait for the GM's to boot the player so we can get on with gameing life. My point is this person had made playing this game not fun. I do know it's part of the game. But when a player is for the last 24hrs putting peoples info in MOTD. IE: Real Name, phone number, e-mail address, and webpage about players. The GM's have not done anything to the player and he or she is still doing this. You say in post befor that the GM's shouldn't do anything about this. But think if it was your info that was up there! Also the think about the player who made them leader.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then your issue is the fault of the person that gave the offender the permissions necessary to do the damage. As far as the thing w/ the real names & other info goes, how did this person get it? It certainly isn't in-game. How are the GMs supposed to control what goes on outside of the game?

If this were my SG/VG, several things would happen. First, I would never promote anyone to be of equal rank as me (the SG leader). Second, I wouldn't give permission to do base edits to anyone except those I implicitly trusted. If that trust was misplaced, that's my fault and I'd kick the offending person. This issue just reeks of poor judgment, though - why would you give permissions to someone who could do this? It just seems hard to believe that there were no warning signs or indicators that they might do something like this...

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is and I will keep saying it. The GM's need to be fast and swift when players info is being given out over the game. Also thinking I made this person leader is not true. We have it down to two people who did it. I think if the GM's go look at the chat logs they would find out who did it and reason behind it. I do feel they need to come down on both players. If this was a leader who had been in the SG for like 3 month and did this. Well so be it and I would be jacked. If he gave out info of players it should be stopped fast. If someone is made leader of a SG/VG that day and does all the stuff above. They should be kicked form the game. We don't need people like that play. Do you want someone like that playing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Show me where it says that you can't give personal info out in-game? Show me where it says the Cryptic or NCSoft is responsible for what the players do in-game? Show me where you, or any other player, was coerced to give out RL info in-game, and how it was NCSoft & Cryptic's fault.

You, or whomever gave out the info, need to be careful about who you give that info to, in the first place. The GMs are not babysitters, and they aren't there to police such actions. Stop trying to place the burden of you, or the others' mistakes, on the game staff. Hopefully these people will be more careful about giving their info out, from now on.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
!) This is not a guide. take it somewhere else please. Mods, please move tis thread if you see this.

2)I have a good cheese to go with your whine, Beamer. SGs are not democratic. What you're asking for is micromanagement of an SG by mods, which, is not only really inefficient, but draws GM action and attention from other, more important things. It's bad enough that 50-70% of the time you ahve to wait more than 20 minutes for a GM response, can you imagine it would be substantially worse if we had to divert them to matters like this? You're asking for the inefficient, and if you cna't deal with th fact that sometimes, player-based hierarchies are unfair, go home.

Also, stop posting here. This isn't useful in any way to anyone. Go to player questions or the general forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


If we wish to run it as a democratic then we can!

[/ QUOTE ]

And how's that?

[/ QUOTE ]

The way the game is set up it can be done. I'm not going to put down how a SG/VG can be run as a democratic. The SG/VG i'm in happens to run it as a democratic. We just happen to have a leader make someone leader who want to break everything in the SG/VG. We have save only been able to keep the base. We have a toon setting in base edit. To keep this player from deleting the base and salvage. Lucky we had a global chat for the SG/VG that saved all the players and a 2nd SG/Vg to put them in. Now we just wait for the GM's to boot the player so we can get on with gameing life. My point is this person had made playing this game not fun. I do know it's part of the game. But when a player is for the last 24hrs putting peoples info in MOTD. IE: Real Name, phone number, e-mail address, and webpage about players. The GM's have not done anything to the player and he or she is still doing this. You say in post befor that the GM's shouldn't do anything about this. But think if it was your info that was up there! Also the think about the player who made them leader.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then your issue is the fault of the person that gave the offender the permissions necessary to do the damage. As far as the thing w/ the real names & other info goes, how did this person get it? It certainly isn't in-game. How are the GMs supposed to control what goes on outside of the game?

If this were my SG/VG, several things would happen. First, I would never promote anyone to be of equal rank as me (the SG leader). Second, I wouldn't give permission to do base edits to anyone except those I implicitly trusted. If that trust was misplaced, that's my fault and I'd kick the offending person. This issue just reeks of poor judgment, though - why would you give permissions to someone who could do this? It just seems hard to believe that there were no warning signs or indicators that they might do something like this...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My point is that the GM's should take a faster trun around on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dissagree. The GMs should have -ZERO- turn around on this. The system is not at fault here, the players are. I hate to say it, but the person who promoted the 'jerk' to the top level should not have.

It is a regretable event. I won't argue that it's an easy thing to go through as an SG. But I won't accept that the system was to blame when the players could have prevented it easily.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not saying the game was to blam. Just saying the GM's should jump on the fact when people send tickets in about player info being put up in the MOTD. Then they should step in and find out who made that play leader. If it happen in the same day.

[/ QUOTE ]

And why would you, or any other SG member, be privvy to such information? Why are you entitled to know who did what? The Sg members in question are higher rank than you, and don't have to answer to you. Where are you getting this sense of entitlement from? You are the private, the others are the seargents, lieutenants, and generals; you are in no position to question the decisions of your higher-ups.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
!) This is not a guide. take it somewhere else please. Mods, please move tis thread if you see this.

2)I have a good cheese to go with your whine, Beamer. SGs are not democratic. What you're asking for is micromanagement of an SG by mods, which, is not only really inefficient, but draws GM action and attention from other, more important things. It's bad enough that 50-70% of the time you ahve to wait more than 20 minutes for a GM response, can you imagine it would be substantially worse if we had to divert them to matters like this? You're asking for the inefficient, and if you cna't deal with th fact that sometimes, player-based hierarchies are unfair, go home.

Also, stop posting here. This isn't useful in any way to anyone. Go to player questions or the general forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


If we wish to run it as a democratic then we can!

[/ QUOTE ]

And how's that?

[ QUOTE ]
We should not have to leave. The GM's should step up and see this and boot the player who is doing it and the player who is made leader. No one should have to put up with this if they pay! Just saying othere games step up and kick the player or boot them from the group.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except that it is not *your* SG/VG - you are merely a member of someone else's SG. Why should you have any say in that SG? If the leader of the SG wanted you to have a say, he'd have promoted you.

You are not paying to have fair and equitable SG treatment, you pay for access to the game. Anyway, how do you propose that this system of booting the leader be implemented in a way that doesn't promote internal coup's or exploitation?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's the GM's responsibility when the rogue leader in question is at the top of the ranks. Since you cannot demote or kick someone of equal rank, there is not a way to get someone out of the SG/VG who starts behaving like this. It would also be nice if there was a way for other leaders to see who promoted who, so we know who take action against.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. He is *THE* leader of the SG - he answers to no one. If the top-tier guy wanted to dissolve the SG, sell or remove things from the base, kick people, etc, then he has every right to. A SG is not a democracy. It would sure suck, and it wouldn't be the right thing to do - "right" as in, polite, nice, considerate thing to do, but nowhere is it stated or even implied that it is illegal/prohibited. If this person was made top-tier by the other top-tier, and it was by mistake, then there needs to be a way to demote them, if one doesn't already exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but if the top person is gone and left a long time. You can do nothing but take what is done.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which means, sadly, that it's time to pack up and form your own SG w/ the members that are still active. A responsible leader would do something like hand ownership of the SG over to a person that will remain on, before he leaves.

[ QUOTE ]
It's the GM's responsibility when the rogue leader in question is at the top of the ranks. Since you cannot demote or kick someone of equal rank, there is not a way to get someone out of the SG/VG who starts behaving like this. It would also be nice if there was a way for other leaders to see who promoted who, so we know who take action against.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. He is *THE* leader of the SG - he answers to no one. If the top-tier guy wanted to dissolve the SG, sell or remove things from the base, kick people, etc, then he has every right to. A SG is not a democracy. It would sure suck, and it wouldn't be the right thing to do - "right" as in, polite, nice, considerate thing to do, but nowhere is it stated or even implied that it is illegal/prohibited. If this person was made top-tier by the other top-tier, and it was by mistake, then there needs to be a way to demote them, if one doesn't already exist.

[ QUOTE ]
OK I think the GM's need to take a trun on the game with Rogue plays or leaders. Like when a person is made leader for no reason and they delete base and kick everyone out. People send in petition say the person is going crazy and saying stuff that should not be said. I like this game a lot. I just feel the GM's need to step up like othere MMORPG and IE: ban, kick players from the game. I was just wondering if players out there feel this way? [/color]

[/ QUOTE ]

1. A person in a SG/VG will not be promoted "for no reason". Someone either promoted them, or activated a feature to give them that promotion. Either way, it didn't "just happen".

2. If that person is promoted to a position in said SG/VG where they can add/delete/kick members, then it is fully within their right to do so. If whomever is in charge doesn't want them to do this, then they should either demote this person, or kick them form the SG. Otherwise, they can pretty much do whatever they want.

3. If you dislike the actions of those above you in the SG, alert the leader/founder of the SG, and have them correct it. If you are not of high enough rank to make the corrections yourself, then perhaps the leader of the SG doesn't find your input/opinion of much value - join another SG that is more in line w/ your values, or form your own.

Why should anyone else be held accountable? How is this the GMs' responsibility? If the person who did the deleting/kicking admits, in-game, that they did what they did to spite someone or to piss you off, then take a screen cap of it & petition them.

Gauntlet is a good inherent. Taunt auras are a valuable tool. Onlya few tanker secondaries have a ranged attack (before the APPs) to get the attention of a distant enemy.

Yes, everyoen should work as a team and stick together, but sometimes a teammate is too far away to have the enemy attackign him be drawn to the tanker by his taunt aura or gauntlet.

That's there taunt comes into play. It allows a tanker to get enemy attention from a distance. Is it perfect? No. Can it be a crutch? Yes. But it does have its uses.

All I'm saying is that gauntlet, taunt auras, and the taunt power, have their places. You can handle many situations w/ only a few of the tools, but there's that off chance where you need all of them.

The problem is that there is no downside to taking the highest performing sets. What if that ice/em blaster couldn't take FoN/PFF/Acro/etc? What if that em/ stalker could only take /DA? In every other MMO I've played, warrior A can take any warrior skill. Not every scrapper can take any scrapper power, because once they choose a primary and secondary, their choices are locked out.

What should happen is that a character is given a certain # of points to spend, and high-performance sets simply cost more. There's your balancing factor. So, my ta/dark defender may be able to get SS, SJ, hasten, acro, etc, while that em/nin stalker may be only able to fit in 1 travel power, and it's either fly or tp.

I'm not saying I know what the point costs should be, and it's obviously too late to implement this now, but (other than theme/flavor) why take a less powerful set if all we're focusing on is PvP?

I'm currently having a *blast* w/ my 30 ice/traps corr. It's definitely a "setup and pull" secondary, but still very fun. With MMs around, the pets would provide the necessary cover to "toe bomb" the enemies.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm extremely disappointed that an image of Statesman would be used in such a way. I know that we designed City of Heroes to appeal to "children of all ages." My proudest accomplishment with the game is that many parents (including my brother) play with their children...sharing, I hope, the same joy for the comic book world that I've had ever since I was 8. I cannot express the shock that I felt seeing that a character created by Cryptic would be used in the same sentence as Columbine.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's called libel, and lawyers would probably love to represent Cryptic and yourself in that case.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure the libel only applies to real people.

[ QUOTE ]
Now I'm not so naive as to suggest that computer games are the seat of all things evil, but... the thing is, society has regressed behaviorally over the past few decades... why?
Why is it not feasible for a woman to walk down the street after dark? Why in many stadiums in Europe can't you take your kids to a football game? Why do we shrug off reports of violent crime so easily now? Why are we not *shocked* any more? Have we grown so numb?
Maybe I am being naive... and part of it is that I'm experiencing the trepidation of impending fatherhood... but I really do wish that society as a whole was a safer place.
I think the easy access we have within the media to violence has somewhat deadened our reactions. Not just video games (and let's be honest, politicos - that's a very small part of it all) - but all of the Media. Problem is, very few real "statesmen" (I use the word in the political sense!) exist that are willing to take it all on, because it would be career suicide.

Currently, I live in Japan - generally a much safer county than the US, or even my native Australia (& I'm assured by friends, much safer than England too). Hell, a murder here is a national headline, purse-snatching makes page 2 in the nation's media. My pregnant wife goes out with her friends, and then walks home from our inner-city-suburban subway station, and is safe doing so.
But it's changing. There are parts of our city that you don't go into late at night (not the case even 5 years ago!), even considered 'unsafe' for a reasonably large foreigner (in Japan, I went from being 'a little big' back home to 'pretty-damn-huge' here in Japan). Change, and with a tyke on the way, it scares me a little.
Bullying within schools increasing tenfold, extortion rampant, and generally a country famous for it's sense of community is growing more & more selfish day by day.

I don't have answers, I don't know what is to be done. But for us to sit back & state that nothing's wrong is just as naive as saying that it's all <insert latest pariah>'s fault.
As I said earlier, I do think that in part, responsible parenting and being a 'better' community is key. Surely, part of that has to be the acknowledement is that stuff isn't where we want it to be, and realising that we all (as a community) need to take steps to make it better. An "I'm-ok-therefore-nothing's-wrong" attitude helps us little. A more responsible attitude towards those around us is a step in the right direction.

Hell... now I sound like I'm preaching - I shouldn't be. God knows I can be just as selfish as the next person, probably more than most.

And understand that I'm not talking about gaming - it's incredibly naive of those involved to place society's ills on the gaming industry...

[/ QUOTE ]

I attribute the rise in violence to a few different things:

1. Worldwide communication is everywhere & is obtained & transmitted much more easily, and in greater amounts, than ever before. So, we are hearing about killings, disasters, etc, much more often & in more mediums than we ever did before.

2. The population of the world is increasing rapidly; you have more people sharing the same amount of space; more people means that even a smaller % of incidents is numerically greater than when the population is smaller.

3. Availability of substitute caregivers; instead of having children entertain themselves w/ sports, reading, drawing, etc, you have tv & videogames. Now, I am not faulting these media, but because they are more interactive, it is easier to just park a kid in front of one of them & have them engaged by it for longer periods of time. If a child is drawing, playing catch, etc, they need supervision. While the same *should* be true of tv & videogames, it is easy for irresponsible parents to forgo this.

4. Change in family dynamics; in the past, there was typically a financial provider for the family, and a care-giver. Now, most families have to have 2 working parents to make ends meet. This means less time to dedicate to child rearing.

5. Financial rewards of violence & sex - it is pretty clear that sex & violence sells. If enough people simply stop buying products that contain sex & violence, other avenues will emerge. Parents should unite & simply stop buying games that contain these things & their prevalence will drop...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm extremely disappointed that an image of Statesman would be used in such a way. I know that we designed City of Heroes to appeal to "children of all ages." My proudest accomplishment with the game is that many parents (including my brother) play with their children...sharing, I hope, the same joy for the comic book world that I've had ever since I was 8. I cannot express the shock that I felt seeing that a character created by Cryptic would be used in the same sentence as Columbine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statesman is the iconic representation of a game where people kill other people with huge broadswords and fireballs with attacks named things like 'head splitter' and 'disembowel', so it is kind of a waste of time to play innocent victim. 99% of the content in City of Heroes is violence. It is the only way to solve any mission in any area of the game. To act shocked and dismayed about it is beyond hypocrisy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think that a person, by age 13, should know the difference between fantasy & reality, and that hitting/killing is wrong? If so, then playing any game will not affect them, as those values are already developed. If you do not think that a 13 year old would know the difference, then I ask how playing a game would change their behavior as opposed to watchign the news, or prime-time tv. Heck, cartoons show people swinging sword, shooting fireballs, etc. Also, I'd be very impressed if a 13 year old knew what "disembowel" meant. And as far as language goes, how is "head splitter" and "splitting headache" that different, especially in the example of the kid that dopesn't know right from wrong. In that case, it is the parents' fault for not instilling such basic values in their child. Anyone below age 13 that is playing a T-rated game usupervised & commits an act of violence is entirely the parents' fault - the ratign is there but they chose not to be aware of their child's activities.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm extremely disappointed that an image of Statesman would be used in such a way. I know that we designed City of Heroes to appeal to "children of all ages." My proudest accomplishment with the game is that many parents (including my brother) play with their children...sharing, I hope, the same joy for the comic book world that I've had ever since I was 8. I cannot express the shock that I felt seeing that a character created by Cryptic would be used in the same sentence as Columbine.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be frank, when I saw the shot of Stateman in the trailer, I thought it heavily undermined the credibility of the film because of the very reason you give. How a game that espouses Superman-esque morals is in any way comparable to the [censored] and murder of everyone's favorite example of violent video games is beyond me.

And don't get me started on the logic or lack thereof behind the flight simulator-9/11 conspiracy theory...

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much. The entire thing was just plain and simple fear mongering. I find it disgusting.

People always have to have a scapegoat. This time it's gaming. Thing is, it's up to the parents to police what the child is and isn't exposed to. If more parents would do that, this kind of crap would be history. If your child isn't ready for violence, don't expose them to violent types of media. Simple, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

The damnedest thing about that flight simulator thing. I actually kept trying to fly certain planes in between the Twin Trade Towers. Most notably the only one I could get was a 737 which kept blowing up on the wings!

Ah yes, Flight Simulator 98...I must be a terrorist, or the game taught me how to be! Not like I'd try stunt flying a jumbo jet in real life, that's just crazy

[/ QUOTE ]

It sort of reminds me of the saying "anything can be a weapon". This is most prominant with things like guns. I used to go to school in NW PA, and it was a very rural area. Many guys in their late teens would target shoot. A few actually had those fancy single-shot pistols, meant specifically for target shooting. That doesn't mean that a person couldn't use it to kill. Heck, a rock can be used to kill. I guess my point is that it is not the inanimate object, the computer, or even the weapon that's to blame. It's the person who turned it on his fellow man.

How come no one asks "why" when it comes to these acts of violence? "Why" did the people who committed the Columbine shootings do what they did? Could it be because they weregetting beat up at school & nobody lifted a finger to help them? Could it be that they had certain mental ailments that could result in violence? Could it be because people ignored the warning signs? I'm sure videogames were a piece of the puzzle, but did anyone even stop to notice that they were using the game as a planning tool? Should we ban pen and paper since they wrote down a list of people they wanted to kill? Maybe if we had, they wouldn't be able to remember who they wanted to kill...

[ QUOTE ]
ok, i keep hearing the same thing year after year after year. about how video games make violent kids. will i for one am calling everyone who truly care and start telling your reps. in the government to look beyond the games. i saw that trailer and something was said along the lines of " a 9 year old picking up a game killing cops and thinking thats ok" how would a 9 year old even get a game like that unless the parents dont care and use games as a baby sitter. i have a much younger brother and he wanted a Grand Theift Auto game and i told my mother that he is way too young to play a game like that. my mother didnt even realize that it is a mature game. parents need to wake up and stop blaming everything else for their neglect. i think its time the the video game cummunity take action and show the world that the industry is doing what it can but in the end its parents and family that are ultimately responcible for what their kids do. i mean case in point, and i do hate to use this tragety but it proves a point, in the collumbine massicer the 2 shooters were bowling when they decided to go killing. did anyone yell and scream about bowling being the cuase... no, did anyone ask why or how those kids got the guns...no, they just said video games were the cuase. funny huh

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't take this the wrong way, but basically here are the options open to the legislators:

1) Implement multi-billion dollar education, daycare, and rehabilitation programs to alleviate and offer alternatives to solutions that spur people to violent acts.

2) Find a scapegoat, blame it on that one source, and pat yourself on the back for having done a good day's work.

To address the issue of violence you have to look at poverty, self-esteem, mental health, outlets for aggression, and other such factors. But why do that, when you can pin the blame on something and call it a day?