data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9f64e/9f64e9ff02cd84277f0ea13f5ba91b9e178c10e1" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c3cc7/c3cc729b1e7938b72ddc70c0ace772f18a4071fb" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5ce5b/5ce5b4527bb0262e26dc0e67d5967ca9b54b7bc7" alt=""
I've never been much of a fan or follower of Grand Theft because the story line suggests graphic violence in real life settings like in any normal neighborhood. We're fine with the gunshots and anti-terrorist concepts like what Counter Strike popularized because it concentrates more on team work, real military strategies with the manner of death and violence not graphically enhanced, but with Grand Theft Auto, there's something hands on and socially relevant above mere strategies and entertainment.
Anti-violence groups lobbied against it, I'm sure, but it's just a video game, right? It's all in the responsibility and the mental capacity of the player to make it practically harmless. That is, until a Thai juvenile robbed and killed a cab driver, just because he wants to have money to continue playing the video game. He used the strategy, by the way, from Grand Theft Auto.
Do we need more data? Who's responsible now?
Picture sources:
http://www.gadaily.com/media/news/GTAIV.jpg
http://a.abcnews.com/images/WN/ap_manhunt2_071030_ms.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment