I am doing a weekly youtube radio show every week, on topics of video game controversy...

For today and the next 2 days, I am alone in my house, which is not something that usually happens. So I decided to write some new music, and do a lot of videos in a format of a youtube video radio show, talking about debunking nonsense about violent games, talking about any and all video game legislation, media spread nonsense, and any similar topics. It will air on youtube every weekend, on Sunday or the Next Monday (after being recorded the previous night).  I will occasionally go into off topic topics here and there, but for the most part, it will be video game controversy related...

Enjoy

Take Action! Tell your senator NOT to support S. 134!!!

After browsing GamePolitics.com today, I came across this Entertainment Consumers Association Alert regarding the new Video Game Research bill championed by Senator Rockefeller, another blind attempt to research the nonexistent connection between violent games and "harm to children" or "violence in children"....  This Bill is a direct threat to our freedoms. I urge anyone who is a gamer to send your Senator a message through the "action alert" link at the bottom of the article to talk to your senator to tell them NOT to support this bill. You can find the Article Here

However, the message ECA is sending does not give the Senators the complete picture. Noticeably missing are the fact that the "link" between Call of Duty and Sandy Hook is a media fabrication, and that groups like the Brown VS EMA Hijackers are probably going to try to sway the CDC or whoever is doing this research into believing utter hoaxes to prove their claims. IF this research is as biased and fraudulent as previous research (a topic I will do a youtube video on soon), then this research is in Danger of being completely fabricated. I urge gamers to use the below message instead. It goes into this problem and the fact the Call of Duty thing is a bogus media fraud. 

"Senator Rockefeller has introduced S. 134, the “Violent Content Research Act of 2013.” It calls for a study by the National Academy of Sciences into the connection between video games and violence. We know the answer to that question, because studies have already concluded, including federally funded studies, there is no connection.

• While video game sales have increased globally, violent crime has decreased according to the FBI’s own statistics,
• Countries whose video game spending per capita is more than the United States do not see the level of violence - especially gun violence - that we do.

Those two facts alone show there’s no connection between the two.

Here are more reasons this legislation will achieve little:

• Researchers on both sides of the subject agree that you can’t study violence, only aggression. So there is no way to really come up with answers to the questions posed.
• The charge already has the taint of bias, as the Senator has said he personally believes that there is a connection. Now, no study connected to his worldview will be free of this.
• The CDC has had questionable practices in the past when it comes to studies and their conclusions. They have ignored their own data in past studies and have done so regarding past video game studies.
* No Matter how Questionable the practices of the CDC are there are always groups trying to sway studies and laws relating to Violence in video games. In 2006, during EMA vs Brown, a group from the Midwest (The Eagle Forum) sent in an Amicus Brief that cites known hoaxes such as "Doom Will Become Reality", a phrase supposedly said on Eric Harris's AOL Site, as proof Harris was influenced by Doom only. Only problem is that the site was a fake site according to the FBI. I have severe concerns that a study like this will be hijacked by such groups presenting  hoaxes as evidence to sway the CDC. It will tip the Balance forwards the CDC, Severely Biasing the Study.
• No matter the outcome, at least one side will not agree with the conclusions drawn by the study.
• HHS, the FTC and the FCC have been included in this legislation; they have no role in this study and will likely see this as a way to expand their authority, politicizing the issue even more.
• The recent shootings that have occurred have not been by children. More recent such incidents have been gentlemen in their 60s or older.
• An investigation showed there is little evidence recent shooters played video games, and that the claim that they were was a fabrication by the media, especially the sandy hook reports linking Adam Lanza
to the Game "Call of Duty". All of these reports are based on a Tabloid article that did NOT prove that Adam lanza Played Csll of duty, just said his families plumber thought he might have. The Media all cited this non-proof as proof that he did play call of duty, all at once, making up many ideas, that he lived in a basement, that he trained on the game, etc.  The Media is known for making up such claims and many fraudulent statements from them about violence in video games go unchecked... The "Doom Will become Reality" hoax listed above was used by the media to demean Doom and similar Games after Columbine.
• This legislation squarely focuses on video games, not including other media children are exposed to.
• There are numerous positive outcomes created by video game play, all of which are ignored by Congress.
• This legislation was proposed without talking to leading experts in the field.
• The legislation ignores past studies, which show that there is no causation between video games and violence, as well as reports by the FBI and the Secret Service that conclude the same thing.
• Congress is ignoring the studies have already been done. Why are we to believe that any conclusion other than what Senator Rockefeller wants will end this subject once and for all?

This study is a waste of taxpayer dollars and will not solve the issue of mass shootings in our country. It is a distraction from finding out the real causes and solutions.

It is within your power to guide this conversation responsibly and not simply blame entertainment. I ask that you represent me, your constituent, by doing so.  If you have any questions on this or other similar issues please contact Jennifer Mercurio, the Entertainment Consumers Association’s Vice President and General Counsel, at jenn@theeca.com.

Thank you for your time and consideration."

Is The Government Covering up Lies the Media Spread about Doom after Columbine?

   Last night, I started watching the anti-video game violence BS videos I've been posting on youtube since 2010.  At least one video goes into a Conspiracy Theory of mine saying that all the attacks on video games that seem bogus in this country are part of a government conspiracy to cause violent games to be gotten rid of, banned, etc... It's a crazy theory, but it has stuff to back it up.

One of the ideas that I keep bringing up to back this up is that articles making up utter bullshit about Doom, and how these news pages linking this have been mysteriously taken down!!! Basically there are 3 articles that claim Harris modified doom to train for the school shooting on. But the modified version of doom was proven by me to be completely false... But since then the sites hosting the 3 articles online have been Mysteriously shutting down......

Here is a site that used to host an article, the second on of the 3 with the most faked features supposedly found in the article. Now the site is no longer there:

 

 Now, here is what is left of a site that used to host the times news article that started this whole thing. It's now mysteriously shut down..... Is this evidence of a coverup?

Going into the features of the modified version of doom, I have proven it could not have possibly been real... Doom simply could NOT do the features the described in 1999.  The weird thing is that the more you look into the claims you start seeing tons and tons of little inconsistencies that make it seem like a bunch of people were spreading anti-doom rhetoric (tm).  According to the articles, the hate site tracking group found the fake doom on his Website. But the following article claims the person mentioned from the group found it on his computer..... What the hell...  Are they in on the possible conspiracy to try to get games banned using fake evidence to cause an outcry and government intervention? I don't know but... It's very suspicious....

Notice how the top article's image says the the modified version of doom on was found on his PC. And it didn't even say it was a modified version, it wasn't even made clear. Below it says that the same group found it on his website. Which is true? Which is false? Are they both false like I suspect? I don't know... But it's very suspicious that nonsense like this, was cited in over 100 different "attack sites" all bringing it up as proof that doom either was a factor or a cause for the school shooting, even thought the version of doom mentioned is not real. Later on, these articles claims were used against violent games in Brown VS EMA in a right wing anti-violent games group's Amicus brief, filled with other major lies such as video games break down the inhibition to kill (debunked here), that Cornell learned how to shoot from doom, and doom only and other similar things (debunked here).  and then later the sites hosting the articles, long after I started my debunking on them, started mysteriously going down. I think there is a coverup going on but I can't prove it. It's just very suspicious to me.

More on this rediculous tax on violent games...

So I've been reading up on the really badly written violent games tax bill coming from Missouri. My previous Post goes into it more. It basically levies a 1% tax on all violent games sold in the entire country, giving the proceeds away to "treat" non existant mental illnesses associated with the "exposure to violent games". But much more sinister is it's tax related "personal property" used, consumed or bought in  "this state" (without saying what "this state" is, Missouri or USA). Basically it taxing anyone who is "purchasing",  "using", "storing", or "otherwise" consuming violent games in "this state", to a tune of 1% of all the "personal property" that the person owns. I quote:

"144.1024.  1.  In addition to any other tax provided for by law, there is hereby levied

 upon persons storing, using, or otherwise consuming within this state, tangible personal

 property purchased or brought into this state, an excise tax on the storage, use, or other

 consumption in this state of all violent video games, based on the gross receipts or purchase

 price of such property at a rate of one percent."

Here is the real issue. If someone lives in whatever the blue hell "this state" is, any property in this state would  be have their value added into to the tax on any violent games they buy, use or otherwise consume... Everytime someone buys a violent game they could have to pay up to 100 dollars tax for this. I am not kidding. Here is a spreadsheet which I used to count what I own and it's price according to amazon.com.

The total value is around 5000 dollars. If I tried to buy, play, or store a violent game in "this state", I would have to pay an EXTRA 50 dollars tax each time!!!! That's ridiculous. What this could effect is insane.. Number 1, "this state" is not defined, so it is theoretically possible that It could be abused to prosecute  anyone in the US. Even worse, every time I tried to even play a violent game, I would be required to play 50 dollars again! For people playing games a lot of the day, that could be a 500 dollar charge per run of a violent game. 

Now you could say "this is not enforceable". Not true. All they need to do is stick a keylogger in anyone buying Internet access in "this state" that is designed to look for program names of games run, by screenshotting the desktop so that they can see what "violent" games are being played. Then apply the tax to the person who owns the computer.... It's not as "un-enforceable" as it seems.

Basically this is designed to punish people for merely owning violent games by, A) forcing them to pay obscene amount of money per game bought or played, and B) mandating "Treatment" for people who play violent games... Notice in the law it does not say treatment is only for children playing violent games, it is for anyone "exposed" to them.  The tornado of bullshit is touching down. Contact your senators, it is really important!!!

Comments attacking violent games on news articles, filled with BS, Surprise!!!!

For years, I have been seeing BS comments on newspaper articles that attack video games for controversial reasons such as causing school shootings, violent content, etc. Calling violent games "trash", "junk" or "garbage" is a common one I have seen thousands of times since 1999. Always being bugged by crap excuses like this and people saying crap about gamers, I committed myself to studying just how many of the comments from articles I found, could be considered inflammatory toward gamers, games, the industry, and most important, spread lies about violent games. The results were quite shocking, to say the least...
So I embarked on this study last year. The total results were from 7 parts published on my wordpress blog and the details are cited below... Part 6 is available here as well. (The first 5 out of 7 were deleted due to possible libel complaints down the road... I wanted to avoid that, but the specific comment types were recorded in another post online, but that was accidentally deleted last night)


"I am continuing my study into the nature of comments attacking violent games on articles in newspaper sites online. By definition the comments must fit these categories to be considered ‘attacking violent games’…

A) Spread lies about violent games

A2) Making up new lies about violent games .

B) Call for games to be banned outright

C) Call for games to be restricted to adults

D) Enforce negative gamer stereotypes

D2) Shows dislike, hate, or a grudge towards gamers.

E) A Bias towards gaming, such that the person commenting thinks games don’t deserve 1st amendment

protection,  the industry is marketing “trash” to my kids, etc.

F) Not sure what violence effects on kids are a restriction might be in order…

G) Attacking the ESRB due to some flawed thing like the FTC study or the fact ‘my 9 year old’ could get bulletstorm.

H) Wants violent game manufacturers sued or games boycotted.

The Previous 6 parts of the study found that, out of 77 comments, 57% were spreading lies about violent games, 31% had a clear bias towards violent games, 7% wanted violent games banned, or violent game makers sued, and 4% wanted violent games restricted to adults.

Results:

Out of all 97 comments in parts 1-7, 64 are spreading lies about violent games. That’s 65%

Out of 97 comments in parts 1-7, 26 have clear bias towards violent games, violent gaming companies, or the industry. That’s 26%

Out of 97 comments, 5 wanted violent games banned, and 5 more wanted the companies that make these game sued. that’s dropped to 5% for each.  3% wanted violent games restricted to adults.

Out of 97 comments, 7 made up totally new lies about violent games. that’s 7%. It’s small but still significant that this is happening.

Out of 97 comments, 4 enforced negative gamer stereotypes.  (4%)

Out of 97 comments,  4 showed a clear hate or dislike towards gamers. (4%).

Lies that are made up from the blue seem to be getting more popular in the last few articles. These lies are brand new, and are being spread by commenters. They are not from various news articles, or psychologists. These ones are troubling. Who would gain from complete nonsense being spread about a violent game by people who knowingly spread these lies that they know are not true? If you make up a total nonsense claim about a violent game you know you haven’t heard before, you have to know it’s a lie… Right? So who would gain?

Do anti-gamers sign up under fake names and spread more lies?

I can’t say. But these lies seem to hint at that. These aren’t the things I have heard from the so-called “experts” on media violence. These are totally new to me….  And they are false… But…  Do we really have a generation of libeling right wing anti-violent games groups hiring members to sign up with fake names to make up BS claims about violent games and post them in comments? I think we do. But I can’t prove it. But if they ARE doing this… It is VERY alarming… I will keep track of these lies that seem to be made up by commenters to see if others repeat them in other articles. I have an idea to see how many people are gullible enough to believe nonsense that is spread. More on it later…."

Now to read the worst of the comments and my response (if I responded to it in the original surveys at all):

(A certain comment, quoted from part 6)

“And it games cause violence, so be it. If a gamer tries to be violent with you, remember this one rule of thumb, so to speak. Since gamers spend a lot of time inside playing games, they are physically weak. As long as you can avoid their powerful, unnaturally strong thumbs, you should be able to subdue them.”

Pitiful. Who in the hell actually thinks that “violent gamers” should be “subdued”. Someone who hates gamers who think gamers cause school shootings, like that idiot who threatened to kill me on the newspaper forum back in 1999 after Columbine. This goes beyond a mere perpetrating anti-gamer stereotypes and goes to wanting them physically hurt. Is this a trend? First we’re bullies, and now we need to be “Subdued”. Moronic.

Source : https://www.npr.org/templates/story/storyComments.php?storyId=137660609&pageNum=1

(source story DELELTED to cover it up?)

“others are using pseudo facts to support their bias towards games in the guise of anti-censorship”.

Source : http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10430358-17.html

"games have 'passive and casual avatar rape and murder' in them"  

2 Words : Custer’s Revenge. 1989! Stop making this damn fake claim of rape simulators up… It’s idiotic. These people read biased articles that keep putting that lie in the game and everyone believes this  tripe. It’s ridiculous.

Source : The same link that was deleted above

“Remember when the cigarette companies kept saying that no one had “proven” that cigarettes CAUSE cancer? So we continued to let the ads run where all the kids could see them. Lots of people died. Has it yet been scientifically proven that cigarettes cause cancer? Do you believe they do anyway?

Here’s the future of gaming: TVs as big as your entire living room wall. Life size enemies. Realistic wireless game guns with a loud bang and a huge kick. Maybe actual gun makers will make a wireless game clip that you can pop in the real gun where the bullet clip goes. Maybe someone will make an accessory that throws fake blood all over you when you shoot a game enemy at close range.

That’s OK, because no one has scientifically proven that violent games make the players more prone to violence. Until they do, let the carnage continue! “

Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10430358-17.html

Now you can see the idiocy being spread by commenters and how many comments attacking violent games are filled with anti-gamer stereotypes, hate towards gamers, games, the industry, etc, and how much they spread complete lies, fabrications, all designed to make violent games look bad after a school shooting. Every time I heard the media using fake claims like "violent games make kids violent/aggressive", "violent games are used in the military to break down the inhibition to kill", "violent games link to real life violence is greater than cigarettes link to cancer", "Violent games are being marketed to kids", "violent games are recruitment tools", "violent games that allow you to rape and pee on people", "violent games that allow you to stalk virtual women and rape them", "violent games are training tools", etc, I always here at least 1 commenter per article respreading them, and in some of the claims, you get "special anonymous advertisers" repeatedly and maliciously advertising the book for the author who made up the "video games are being used in the military to break down the inhibition to kill" BS claim, on talk shows after Columbine, a Hack Psychologist. You also get TONS of comments, on how gamers are psychopaths, sociopaths, how gamers should be subdued, how we're "gamer shitheads", how we are "gamer druggies", how gamers are all potential school shooters, and much worse. It's a real problem, because the exact same claims made about gamers being sociopaths/potential school shooters/violent people were also made by certain anti-gaming fundies on newspapers as well, after 1 or 2 immature gamers threatened their lives.... Being a death threat victim myself from similar people to the people  who claim they are being threatened (and multiple ones claim they did, without proof of course), it makes them look like complete hypocrites, because they unknowingly (or knowingly) support people who intentionally make other peoples lives miserable on message boards just to prove "gamers get violent", as  the moron troll on the message board of a newspaper did to multiple gamers 24/7 for 3 months, and said "I have enough evidence that gamers get violent" (the responses to their death threats probably), has been swept under the rug and covered up. It's pathetic. The fact that there are people out there that think all gamers are sociopath's because of people like Eric Harris, or any other damn reason, I don't give a fuck, is sick in itself....  I know at least 10 guys who have played video games before, 5 were serious gamers, NONE were sociopaths. Maybe 1 or 2 gamers are "sociopaths" but that's just a goddamn coincidence, not proof that games take completely normal children and turn them into sociopaths... Sheesh..

Now to show off comments making complete NEW lies up, all completely false, but apparently some people besides wackos in anti-gamer right wing religious groups like to make up false claims about violent games...

“But the videos in question, which the court ruled that kids can see, allows them to virtually stalk, beat, rape, and defile virtual women in a range of perverse and degrading ways. That is purely sick”

THERE ARE NO GAMES THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO DO THESE THINGS….

Source : http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/sex-and-the-supremes/

“It’s offensive and embarrassing the Supreme Court will afford murder in all its contexts—self-defense, revenge, military mission, zombie killer, mobster—and variety–disembowelment, decapitation, abassination, guns, chainsaws—more protection that sex.”

Most of these things aren’t even murder…… Only assassination, mobster are… The rest are either military combat, “self-defense”, or combat…. how is “zombie killer” murder? Idiots like this astound me. Especially when they bring up disembowelment, and and decapitation, which are rare in most violent games!

Source : http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/sex-and-the-supremes/

"1 comment of type A2) Making up new lies about violent games – Claims violent games as training tools to recruit military at young age, says violent games ‘permanently burn memories’ into the minds of children, blah-blah blah… Common. Back up your crap. You can’t therefore it’s a lie."

Source : http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10430358-17.html

1 Comment of type A2) Making up new lies about violent games – Claims violent games and action movies have too much things happening at once, overloading the brain, causing ‘anti-social behavior’ in kids. WTF?

Source : http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10430358-17.html

“But the videos in question, which the court ruled that kids can see, allows them to virtually stalk, beat, rape, and defile virtual women in a range of perverse and degrading ways. That is purely sick”

Source : http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/sex-and-the-supremes/

"The Commenter Claims just because he drove around for days and because of the length, he was forced to automatically do things without knowing he did them, the ‘kids that play games 18,20,24 hours a day will go into kill mode!’ Is this another hack psychologist worshipper unknowingly or knowingly advertising his best seller?"

Now they are making up utter crap about games in comments.... Some of these comments seem like something a moron in a right wing pro-censorship group would say, like the "perminantly burn memories", and "overloading the brain", and the "going into kill mode" ones...  In my honest opinion we have a bunch of pro-censorship morons both saying things like this, all completely made up to the media, especially after school shootings, and also on forums with fake names. I can't prove it, but those 3 comments are too suspicious to ignore, in light of all the very similar nonsense made up claims anti-gamers keep on making on talk shows, newspapers, etc after a school shooting. I have heard every single goddamned fake claim being made up about violent games by the anti-gamer right wing morons. I know them all by heart... These ones are new to me... What actual gain would a normal person have to actually post some claim they made up to make games look bad on a message board? None. Now what gain would a right wing anti-gaming moron from one of  those anti-gaming groups that keep spreading crap about violent games in the media, have to post something like this on forums? More people could believe the lies they post, and their claims could be spread to other forums. It all spirals out of control when one person online says one fake claim, others repost it quite quickly, everyone believes it because people today have been brainwashed to believe everything they hear.  This effect, greatly aids such right wing violent game censors, trust me it does..

This whole spread of lies is, IMHO, part of a much bigger scheme to get violent games banned for 1 reason, they offend religious right nutjobs.  There is evidence to suggest in many places that the media makes up utter crap about violent games, and the politicians believe it. But that isn't enough to get a ban to happen, because they need faked evidence to sway the supreme court, to fight against a claim of unconstitutionality. Faked evidence in the form of hoaxes were spread in April/May 1999 and in an Amicus Brief done by a right wing pro-family group, these hoaxes were cited as evidence to prove violent games make people violent.... This group has been known to recycle 2 very false claims about violent games over and over again, the claims that games have "decapitation of prostitutes" and "sodomizing victims with broomsticks". This groups claims cannot be true, because research done by me on my wordpress blog revealed how fake these 2 claims are. 

This whole thing is been engineered to create the violent game bans the censor/anti-gamers want.... The thing is that the media spreading lies and hoaxes being made by the media and others are being used to hijack the supreme court now.... You then add in justices who are for violent games through the election of a conservative christian president (like the candidate who supports a complete game ban), and what's to stop the supreme court from having a hung jury (and going back to the law that was passed before they looked at it on grounds of unconstitutionality), or even finding it constitutional via faked evidence in Amicus Briefs and 4 justices who support the idea of a violent games ban. This could happen if you add these 2 things in, the faked evidence in Amicus briefs and new justices who support bans... It's scary... Something must be done about it and the lies being spread... More on that for another article or video... Stay tuned gamers

Insite into the Controversy Surrounding certain Video game Mods... (old blog repost)

(This blog post was posted on my other blog at wordpress a few years ago but got deleted for some other reason. I am reposting it here)

After reading about that article complaining about the ‘game’ (really a Half-life 2 MOD)  school shooter 2012, I began to wonder how the people writing the biased article linked in that debunking got their hands on the mod. It’s not like the mod was popular. It wasn’t even popular in the HL2 Community, so how the hell did the people attacking the game on the article find out about it?

Mod communities are closed communities. Fans of the game the mod is made for, and only those fans, go to the communities looking for mods for it.  So how does a nanny state representitive who wants to find the newest violent game to complain about find out about a mod, to complain about it?  In the case of a real game like GTA, there is countless ads on TV, articles about it coming out, etc. For mods none of this exists.  So for someone to find that mod to attack it on a site, must mean that they are in the Community releasing the mod, at least I think so. Do the anti-gamers go to gaming mod sites, and then write articles complaining about the mod being released by the mainstream video game press… It seems likely this is the case…

Only problem, is this is the only time that I’ve EVER seen a mod for a game, be targetted like it’s a game, by the violent game attackers. The thing is that this is not the first time someone has made some tasteless school shooting level or mod for a game. Go to Doomworld idgames site (where doom levels are hosted) and you will find this lovely gem, from back in 1997. Overlooked by all the anti-gamers. Was really the same thing as school shooter : american tour 2012, minus the kill yourself ending. Not that I like this kind of game, but….. It’s been done before. What caused SSAT 2012 to get so much negative press? It's content is horrible, making light of the school shooting tragedies, make no mistake, but if this article would never have been written, no one would have commented on it outside the gaming community. There are tasteless mods for many games online... None are complained about in the media.

Who is inside these communities finding this stuff to write about? Is it someone being an idiot and seeing all the bad responses to get something to laugh at, because he has a sick sense of humor? Is he someone doing this on purpose to see how idiotic the comments are about violent games, to see what misconceptions they spread? Was the whole mod made for that purpose? Or is the writer some anti-gamer latching onto a mod that is tasteless to use it as ammo to attack Valve software with. It's not like Valve hasn't been hit with lawsuit threats before. Some lawyer threatened to sue valve when 'he' (the lawyer - in a news article, no less) named counterstrike as an influence to the V-Tech Killer's rampage. With no other proof that Cho played counterstrike, presumably to use it as ammo against valve in some big lawsuit, even though valve did not make Counterstrike. The thing is that he said that 'Cho Played Half-life'.  Currently, the articles slamming the Mod (or "game" as they label it for this purpose) don't mention Valve. But what if one did? The company who has developed some of the best FPS games ever (half-life, HL2, Portal, Left 4 dead 1/2) would be ruined.... Out of all the gaming companies that DON'T deserve this kind of link to a school shooting, valve is it.  Their games are usually puzzle intensive, where combat is a challenge, and violence is not rewarded like in GTA. They pretty much started the ideas that formed the tactical shooter revolutioin, and lead to Far Cry, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., etc.


 Valve would get lawsuit threats, a crapload of media complaints, and maybe even another senate hearing that could lead to stronger restrictions, a govt enforced rating system that I think could be abused to 'effectively' ban violent games to all age groups in the US. Is this the purpose of the article......
I don’t know. But I would love to find out

ANOTHER Site Spreading BS about violent games... WHEN WILL IT END?

So I was browsing the net looking for a certain candidates views on violent game bans that I was writing about last week, when I  came across this lovely right wing Conservative site that is spreading utter BS about violent games to people, claiming to be a trustworthy source. Now I will add a disclaimer,  the site may not be Intentionally doing this, but many of the PRO side points are quite suspicious at best, and down right fabrications or bad misinterpretations at worst... Anyone looking at this will believe the points debunked below, because most people believe what they hear: Here is the site I am talking about.

http://videogames.procon.org/

Now on  to the debunking, shall we.. After all, this IS what I do here, debunk BS spread about violent games by ANYONE!

"97% of 12-17 year olds in the US played video games in 2008, thus fueling an $11.7 billion domestic video game industry. In 2008, 10 of the top 20 best-selling video games in the US contained violence." Really, 97% of 12-17 year olds played video games? Shocker. Notice it said video games, not Violent ones...  It then tries to claim that this is the reason that the gaming industry made so much money. Then it immediately tried to assume this 12-17 year olds must have played  the violent ones!!! So  "10 of the top 20 best-selling video games in the US contained violence" Shocker!!! Let me tell you one thing. Most violent games aren't even played by such "young kids"... The target demographic is 18-35, according to the ESA. They also say that the average age of gamers are 30 years old... They even did a study proving this, unlike the article linked above, which tries to imply that 12-17 year olds are playing "violent" games. Now Let me define violent game. A game with Combat in it, and killing. Not neccisarily a Uber Violent one like GTA where you run over old ladies, or games where you decapitate people, BLAH BLAH BLAH. The media for years has been using examples of rare tastelessly violent games as a way to say most games are like this, but it's more than wrong because, according to a study I did using a wikipedia list of 605 FPS games released since 1986 on my other blog, only 4% or so were what I think most people would  consider "tastelessly" violent. That's 21 out of 605. Not even 1/10! The real number of tastelessly violent games is actually lower than this because FPS games make up only 1/5 of total violent games and tastlessly violent games, at least to me, seem quite rare... Now on to the more severe lies...

"Increasing reports of bullying can be partially attributed to the popularity of violent video games. The 2008 study Grand Theft Childhood reported that 60% of middle school boys who played at least one Mature-rated game hit or beat up someone, compared to 39% of boys that did not play Mature-rated games."

The sample size is not mentioned here, 60% of anything less than  5000 people means nothing... A lot of studies  that try  to prove this stuff use small sample sizes to make it look like it's an serious issue, and by possibly manipulating the results to show high percentages of people pre-chosen to show the result they want they can fudge the study. Recently a study was done saying that 1000 people all supported violent game legislation. 1000 people may seem like a lot to the untrained eye, but 1000 is Tiny, like in 625 times smaller than the Population of Boston, MA in 2011, 625,000 or so. So finding 1000 people who support legislation ignores the other Millions who do not. It's statistically insignificant, and the fact that such studies, more than likely pick and chose 1000 people who support it anyway, means that they should not be trusted. Not saying the study above isn't trust worthy or the one mentioned in the article but you have to learn how to critically examine such studies...



"Video games often reward players for simulating violence, and thus enhance the learning of violent behaviors. "

Most violent games don't even do this at all. Ones that do are things like GTA, Sure, and uber violent games like blood, but many games don't even make dead enemies drop items at all these days. Very few actually force players  to even kill any enemies, notable exceptions are quake 2, and serious sam type games. So much for rewarding violent behavior. Yes, killing is part of many games, but to kill, in order to survive hostile opponents trying to kill you, isn't really rewarding anything but survival. Very Few FPS games that I have played (and I have played 100's), really give you substantial rewards for killing... The whole realism thing in modern shooters (a BIG thing today) prevents significant rewards because realism requires minimal rewards per kill... A lot of these games focus on puzzles and missions to accomplish as well. Killing enemies is secondary. You can beat 90% of shooters without killing enemies. Just because killing is part of these games doesn't mean they reward "simulating violence". Also the claim that games that "reward simulation of violence" enhance the learning of violent behaviors is crazy. Most people who play violent games won't go out and kill people because they have been rewarded in a game to do so in the game, not in real life... These points mentioned completely ignore that real life violence is different than simulated violence in a game, on purpose many times, to make it look like people who play violent games will want to kill for real... 



"Violent video games desensitize players to real-life violence. It is common for victims in video games to disappear off screen when they are killed or for players to have multiple lives."

There is actually no real evidence to support the idea that violent games desensitize people to real life violence. Define Real life violence, then look at what desensization really means. It means that people who consume violent entertainment get more used to the violence in it. Real life violence is Completely separate from  this, Period!  There is evidence to suggest that consuming said violence entertainment, or anything really, will make a person more used to it. That's all the evidence is really saying. Saying it proves that people get used to a completely separate, different thing (real life violence), is a willful, stupid, and deceitful misinterpretation of studies that prove something different. If there is any study that says violent games desensitize people to real life violence, then I seriously doubt that it isn't flawed like all the other video game "aggression" studies being linked as proof of violent games causing real life violence by anti-gaming morons everywhere for 10 years. 

Now on to the claims that there are lots of games that have multiple lives, and disappearing characters. Where the hell did they get this from? Only Extremely KIDDIE games like Super Noah's Ark 3D have Disappearing characters that completely disappear. Only one recent game series features this, that's serious sam. Most games have corpses that NEVER disappear. Making Dissapearing characters is way to make a game seem LESS violent to kids, and is only done in KID type games to prevent the game from showing off VIOLENT DEATHS... HELLO!  And the idea that people in games have multiple lives. I can name all the popular games in FPS history that conform to this. Wolf3d, Descent Series, and Serious sam. THATS IT. Most FPS games ditched the whole lives thing because it made it too easy. The change was made in 1993 for gods sake, with Doom, which revolutionized  the idea that players who die don't get to come back without restarting the level or loading a save game. Lives in FPS games are almost non-existent.




"A 2000 FBI report (187 KB)  includes playing violent video games in a list of behaviors associated with school shootings."

Ok... So there is this study that lists risk factors for school shootings, and it listed being obsessed with violent entertainment. So a bunch of anti-gamer DickNozzles starting purposely interpreting it as proof that playing violent games is the risk factor, not being obsessed with any form of violent entertainment. Since I couldn't actually quote the study, I screenshotted it below. Lo and Behold, this proves it again. The people who made this site committed this crime.

Nowhere here does it A) Single out violent games B) Make it so simply playing them is a risk factor like the article linking to it says.  The article above is Purposely misinterpreting the facts to create a moral panic. Plain and simple.   The FBI study finds that "themes of hatried, violence, weapons and mass destruction Recur in virtually all his activities, hobbies, and past times". So simply playing violent games will make this happen? WTF! Sounds like these people who posted the article Don't know people who play violent games mostly Do NOT obsess over real life violence. The study also says "The student spends inordinate amounts of time playing games with violent themes and seems to be more interested in violent images than the game itself". Where does this equate simply playing violent games with school shootings. NOWHERE.   Then it says "On the internet the student regularly searches for web sites involving violence, weapons, and other disturbing subjects. There is evidence the student downloaded and kept material from these sites". Where does this equate playing Violent games, with school shootings? NOWHERE. It equates being Obsessed with Real violence, Hatred, And wanting to commit real violence, as a risk factor. This whole paragraph DOES NOT simply link playing violent games with school shootings. It links OBSESSION WITH VIOLENCE IN GENERAL. These people are making up BS about this.... The FBI wouldn't actually link simply playing violent games at all. They aren't pro family enough to do  that... Only right wing nutjobs who want violent games banned do that..




"Violent video games cause players to associate pleasure and happiness with the ability to cause pain in others."

Looking at  the source of this proved that it came from one of the "hack psychologists" going around on talk shows in April 1999 claiming the military uses violent games to break down the inhibition to kill, all while selling his book, a big batch of lies... If a blog run by an actual person who was in the armed forces debunks the claim, then this claim sounds suspicious as well.. I know for a fact that even though I played wolf3d for the first time at age 13, duke3d at age 16, etc, I did not "associate pleasure and happiness with the ability to cause pain in others". The whole idea that this happens, is using the same analogy as people misinterpreting desensitizing studies to prove that violent games desensitize people to real life violence, not the fake video game violence. This makes it look like games that make people want to cause pain in a virtual environment make people want to do it in real life. It's BS... Just trust me on that... If it were true, you would have a LOT more cases of gamers hurting real people. I don't see that, or any evidence that that is actually happening... So this is more than likely bunk too, IMHO.

"A 1998 study found that 21% of games sampled involved violence against women (165 KB) . Exposure to sexual violence in video games is linked to increases in violence towards women and false attitudes about rape (47 KB)  such as that women incite men to rape or that women secretly desire rape."

Number 1, the (probably) flawed study was done in 1998! More than 10 years ago! Number 2, since then most FPS or violent games, don't even have women to kill in them. And if they do, that's not saying they do this on purpose to single violence against women on purpose. Then the thing makes up the claim about sexual violence. Like all the other claims of "rape simulators" in violent games, this is also BS, because the last time a game actually had a scene where there was a controllable rape scene where a woman was a victim and the player was a perpetrator was, Custer's Revenge, in 1989, an ADULT only game not sold in normal stores!!!! Since then only 3 games have even had rape in them, Phantasmogoria, which features the player being raped in a cutscene, and Fear 2, which ends with the evil chick villian Alma, Raping you in arguably  the most fucked up ending any game has ever had, but get this, it is most likely a dream sequence....  Not once has there been a game that had virtual rape in it where a women was a victim, and if a guy was a victim, well, I have never heard of it. And the claim  that violent games lead to "increases in rape" came straight out of a moron Fox news put on their "bullshitting" on Bulletstorm 3 years ago, which they tried to say bulletstorm causes real life rape, with this analogy "Since Rape is a violent crime and violent games cause violence, then violent games have caused rape"... It's Fucking bullshit. The person saying this had NO proof that violent games caused real life rape, just said they did without actual evidence.



"Violent video games can train youth to be killers. The US Marine Corps licensed Doom II in 1996 to createMarine Doom in order to train soldiers. In 2002, the US Army released first-person shooter America's Army to recruit soldiers and prepare recruits for the battlefield. "

Nowhere here, did they mention that the first was a training for group tactics, and was a Modification of the game not the game itself, with HEAVY REALISTIC changes to gameplay, and graphics, almost nothing from Doom in it at all. They want to make it look like the military uses real games like Doom 2 to train soldiers to kill on, but the blog ran by the military dude linked above "design synthesis" disproved that, didn't it?  Now the thing about americas army is true, it WAS a recruitment tool. But it's the only game that ever was a recruitment tool, period. That's out of THOUSANDS of violent games, most of which aren't tastelessly violent..



"California passed a law in 2005 that would have required violent video games to include an "18" label and criminalized the sale of these games to minors. On June 27, 2011, the US Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Association (485 KB) that the law violated free speech rights."

What they don't say is that this law would have used a really subjective Obscenity clause like language to determine what games would be fined, by saying that games that are morbidly violent and "lack literary, scientific and educational value" are targeted for fines. This would allow them to fine any game they got offended by, period, causing many tame games to be fined, causing stores to pull any game that could be fined under the law off  the shelves, causing most violent games not to be sold in stores, causing the companies that make lesser known games go out of business at the least. That's what the BS article REFUSES to tell people...  It claims to be a trusted source on the points made by the experts...  All it is is spreading plainly debunkable lies to fuel censorship... It's stinks, like most of the polished turds that get released by the anti-gamers...

Youtube videos on Debunking Violent games BS being started by me.

Since I opened this blog to debunk BS claims made about violent games by certain groups who apparently all wanted extreme anti-violent games legislation passed (such as bans, 100% taxes on companies, taking down all sites related to violent games, etc), I've seen quite a bit of Youtube video's by other gamers talking about the so-called (or non-existant) link between violent games and school shootings, etc. Many of the video's were really well done, some weren't but none that I have seen have gone to lengths to debunk claims that are made against violent games that are utter BS, or fabricated. I am attempting to change this trend on Youtube to educate Gamers and Gaming Groups to the danger of fabricated claims being used against violent games that are possibly being done in an attempt to introduce draconian violent games legislation like Mr Poster boy Presidential Candidate is apparently supporting.  Here is a link to my first video of an extended series of video's all disproving various claims that are utter bunk, that are all being used to attack violent games.

This just in! A Certain presidential candidate wants a Complete ban on violent games!

While looking at how many of the candidates are for video game legislation of any kind, I came across a shocker, according to this site, which posted US presidential election candidates opinions on violent game legislation  A certain Presidential candidate  apparently  supports a complete ban on all violent games, yes that's right, a full ban to everyone, adults included, not just kids. (I'm not naming this candidate by name to protect my from possible fraudulent libel lawsuits from any candidate. I have no choice, the US Gov't won't make it so bloggers are immune to Libel, and don't make it so false claims of libel get thrown out before the lawsuit has been decided to go to trial.)

So He is quite possibly saying that he  wants to go every retailer that even dares to sell violent games, PERIOD. Apparently to "shield kids from the violence in society", we need to makes sure even ADULTS can't get "video games that are uber violent BLAH BLAH BLAH!".  And I assume he has lumped online retailers like amazon.com into his description, because they have no way to filter out kids because there is no way to tell age at all through amazon, so under his plan he would be taking down any possible retailer that could accidentally sell "uber" (as in any kind of violence in them) violent games to kids, even ones online that have no way of knowing what age their buyers are.. BAH!  Well under his description of what all of these games are like we would end up banning 99% of all the games ever made because 99% of video games have violent content, from sidescrollers, to FPS, to Third Person Shooters, To RPG's, to fighting games, to you-name-it. But apparently someone hasn't actually researched how many violent games are not Uber violent. Shocker!

Using an article from my other blog, the erosion of freedom, which was set up 3 years ago to debunk violent games related myths and to show my opposition of any kind of censorship, I will show right here, that unlike what certain people think, 99% of violent games are not uber violent...

Here is a quote from that blog's article in question which was written to debunk the most common violent game myths using a wikipedia list of all the FPS games made since 1986, to calculate how many fit the claim of the myth based on ones I have played or heard about:



"Claim  : Most FPS games are Ultra-Violent

Source : MANY, Many articles saying this in many ways, basically all saying most FPS games are uber violentbased on descriptions of one game (good example is all the articles describing games like Postal 2 to attack the Justices who voted against CA in EMA vs Brown)

Ok… This isn’t so much a claim but a pattern among articles “damning” Violent video games.  These articles use examples from 1 or 2 violent games that are what I call “Uber Violent” games as proof that “most games” are like them. Uber violent games are a rare thing. What’s the definition of “Uber violent games”? Games that are so violent that most people would find them tastlessly violent.  Out of all 605 FPS games ever made, only 4.46% are “Uber Violent” like this. Only 14.81% of all 81 Popular FPS games could be considered Uber Violent. These “Popular Uber Violent” Fps games only make 1.98% of all FPS games ever released! (605)"

So according to this data, which I measured myself, only 4.46% of all FPS games are "uber violent", not counting all the Third Person Shooters, RPG's, Fighting games, and Sidescrollers that I didn't count, so the actual % of violent games that are uber violent is actually much smaller than  that 4.46% figure.

First the GOP wages war on porn, and now thiis candidate's comments suggest he is willing to wage an unconstitutional war on all games with even a hint of violence. Under no circumstances should the US government even think of an outright ban on violent games to all age groups. The very thought of US even attempting to this is Obscene in itself. The scary thing is that, it's happened before in 2 states, right after columbine. Both states drafted bills that would have banned violent games to everyone but both failed thanks to the supreme courts. The government was so brainwashed by the newspapers all making up fake crap about doom (doom has pipebombs, allows you to kill kids, is a school shooting simulator, remember these?) to make it look like Harris/Klebold were solely influenced by it, that they had to attempt full bans. There is no excuse for this BS. Restrict all the games to adults all you want, but once the government even attempts to legislate morality in such a way so that any kind of ban, intended or not, happens, in such a way so adults cannot get violent games at all, or companies can't sell them to adults in stores, or the internet,  this country becomes a fascist state.  I have played over 100 FPS games since I was 13, and there was not a single time I felt like I was gonna get violent or aggressive due to them, ever. And there are millions like me, and only a few anomalies, and people the media labeled as "game obsessed", people who the media claim become violent due to violent games and only that, but in reality those people (School Shooters) most likely had other problems, like an obsession with violence in general, and terrorism, racism/white supremacy crap, mental illness, and other issues that would more likely cause real life violence than playing Doom, a game that came out in 1993! A game scapegoated by the media with questionable or possibly even hoaxed evidence,  like no other for crimes it did not commit, under the false tense of "saving the children" from violence caused by other issues! Go figure.... BLAH BLAH BLAH!

Hoaxed Evidence used to blame Doom for Columbine?

This might be a very long post. I don't care. I have to get this off my chest. First thing's first, I will say is that I have been a gamer since 1993 when I started playing Simcity, Wolf3d, Doom, the list goes on. I have played every single big FPS game for the PC till around 1999. Then came the columbine massacre. Despite how horrible it was (I am NOT condoning it), what pissed me off is how the media kept on blaming violent games.  Doom was blamed for it almost right away. Claims that the shooters were influenced by it. Blah Blah Blah... I started reading really bad, sensationalist articles on newspapers around that time, all blaming Doom for the crime, saying they were living in a game world, playing out the game in "god mode", and how doom had pipebombs, the ability to kill children, and many worse. Blah, blah, blah....  Then came the article and the incident that caused me to become an pro-violent games pro-freedom anti-censorship activist.

An article was written by a Colorado newspaper which I won't mention here by name. It said that some hate site tracking group found a modified version of Doom on Eric Harris's AOL page, which they claimed was used to plan the shooting, with begging students saying a quote "oh lord, why are you doing this to me...", and other dubious features.  I couldn't stand the game-bashing by the media any more so I signed up to that newspapers forums, and posted how I couldn't stand the lies being spread by newspapers making up bunk claims to make violent games look like a cause of what we would learn later was a botched terrorism attack by two really messed up individuals, not game obsessed murderers turned that way by Doom. I physically blamed the media and condemned people in schools trying to "reform" and "discipline" Doom playing students after the shooting, and complained about 2 bills that were being worked on in 2 states legislatures that would have completely banned violent games, to adults, not just kids.

Immediately I was threatened by an internet troll, using a fake name, who started insulting me right and left, and called me and some other pro gamer types on the forum "gamer shitheads", and then threatened my life after anger drove me to say a particularly rude reply in return, with an underhanded attempt to quote themselves from a previous post saying "you're sick" as something I said later on... The whole thing wen't on and on, with the same old BS replies to anyone who even dared defend Doom, every sentence was quoted, and followed by insults, then the next sentence, more insults, etc. The insults were lewd, sexually explicit and full of swears, threats, racial slurs, you name it.  After 3 months of this happening every 1 minute 24/7, with only a few breaks, and 99% of the forum posters on the Troll's side condemning the "gamers who like to twittle with their joysticks" - yes another quote by a moron who sided with the troll,  the troll then was asked "prove that Harris was Inspired by Doom", and then he used an internet hoax "doom will become reality"  to back it up, which I debunked on my first blog post at my old wordpress blog, which is here. So that's what I set out to do, debunk BS claims said about violent games. And I did for 3 years on that blog, but a lack of followers and viewers have always stymied me there.. So I am posting this article here... Now onto the main point of this article..

The poster who threatened me on the forum of the newspaper said one very suspicious thing, "I have enough evidence to prove gamers get violent". This post was taken down no more than 20 minutes later. 3 years later the entire forum was removed, all of it, and then the email address on "justicemail.com" was completely removed from their system, in fact the whole system was completely purged.  Justice mail is advertised as "email for the law community" or was then.... So the thought crossed the mind of my friend who was there to fight the troll for me, "it's a lawyer!!!". So for a few years I kept on trying to reverse trace the morons email with NO good results on 100's of reverse email lookups. I needed info on who this moron was... But every attempt lead to "no results", over and over again.

So I gave up, and forgot about it, till I opened the wordpress blog 3 years ago and debunked the hoax. That brought back bad memories, and I started wondering about the news article with the modified version of Doom found on the AOL site of eric harris. Immediately something pissed me off about it the first time I read it. I had a "gut" feeling it was a much more elaborate hoax like the Doom will become reality one, but couldn't really prove it. While researching BS claims made by violent game haters that mentioned Doom and Columbine one day for a blog post I ended up discovering this thesis which claimed Doom was licensed by the military to train soldiers to kill better (a lie, Doom was used as an Unnoficial mod to train group tactics, not to break down the inhibition to kill - a BIG lie spread by anti-gamers (my term for radical censors who spread lies about violent games)), and the fact that a modified version of doom was found by the same exact hate site tracking group without the begging students but with "2 shooters, infinite ammo, and extra weapons for both shooters".  I knew right away the 2 shooters and extra weapons were NOT doable by Doom in 1999. I've been editing doom since 1995, I know what can be done and what can't be done. In 1999, the only way to modify a doom .exe is with the program dehacked. There were no source ports with the features needed then.  So this Thesis was spewing Bogus claims. But further research found out that the claims were quoted from an APA paper which is not online anymore. It mentioned the same features 2 weapons, infinite ammo, extra weapons, and so did an article from another Colorado news paper, but that newspaper article was even more dubious, because it mentioned the quote said by dying students in the mod, but it was a completely different quote than in the first newspaper article I read , plus "infinite weapons" as a feature, something NO Fps can do. There is no way to even have infinite weapons, the idea simply doesn't compute. Weapons are a finite asset, not something you can never run out of, in fact running out of weapons is impossible, It's ammo you run out of, not weapons. The idea is so dumb that I don't know where to start.  Further research lead to the original source of the BS, an article written by a magazine writer talking about columbine on the first 3 pages, and then mentioning this modified version of doom being found on the AOL page again with no sign of the begging students being mentioned, but the article did mention the 2 shooters, infinite ammo, extra weapons and one feature that I knew Doom could not do "when one of the shooters ran out of ammo, he died". Or something along those lines.

Ok... That's the long part out of the way. Now to the more interesting part, proof that all of these articles are putting claims in that simply cannot be done in Doom...  Here is a screenshot from the program dehacked I mentioned above.

This shows the property set used for all "things" that dehacked allows you to edit. Examples of things, for the non-Doom Editing people out there, are Ammo, Items, Weapons, monsters, basically anything that can move and isn't a wall, floor, etc. Every thing in the game uses this exact set of properties. Lets say I was trying to make a "second shooter" in dehacked. I would need a property to make one of the peaceable enemies in the game (lets say the chaingunner), friendly to attack enemies that look like students, via some graphic editing used.  You look closely and you can see that there is no property for friendly AI, whatsoever... But that's not even the last part in these articles that is an outright impossible claim.

Here is the Generic Player Properties, cheat changing panel and weapon properties list in Dehacked. The generic properties allow the player to have more total bullets, more total health, armor, and more ammo at the start of any level. The weapon properties allow someone to change properties of each weapon in the game. Adding "extra weapons" for each "shooter" with this is simply impossible. Why? Doom has only 8 weapons, Fist/Chainsaw/Pistol/Shotgun/Chaingun/Rocket Launcher/Plasma Rifle and BFG. Doom 2 adds the double barreled shotgun. There is absolutely no way to add a new weapon without replacing an old weapon, with this program. Look for a "new weapon" button. You won't find one. Dehacked won't let you do that. Another claim of the article, proved to be impossible.


Now look at the above image again. Is there any variable that stores the players current ammo at any time editable through dehacked? No. That variable is always in memory and can't be edited directly, because it always changes. The problem is that  there is no way to make the player die if he runs out of ammo, period.  No way. No variable for current ammo on that screen at all. So how could someone have even made a feature where the shooter who runs out of ammo dies first?

This first image again of the player's properties. Look for a property or ability to make the player die first when he runs out of ammo. There is none!!! No way whatsoever to even do this!!! In fact the magazine article in question even says the modified version of doom had infinite ammo then said the player who ran out of ammo dies first. How is that even possible when running out of ammo is impossible with infinite ammo? IT ISNT! As you can see many of these features this modifed version of doom had simply don't work in 1999. Not till 2000 did friendly AI even become a real thing in Doom Sourceports via Dehacked, and not till 2002 did ACS scripting, the first scripting language get implemented in Doom that would have made "killing the player who ran out of ammo first" even doable.

The more I look at this, the more I see how suspicious this article and the Doom will become reality hoax seem. The 3 articles (the magazines one, the first colorado newspapers one, the 2nd colorado newspapers one) all mention the same hate site tracking group, but cannot even get the features consistent among them. The first article, the magazine one failed to even mention any begging students. The second one, which was published by a colorado newspaper, doesn't even mention the running out of ammo and dying thing, but mentions that the quote was cried out, and Infinite weapons. Then the 3rd article, the one by the 2nd colorado newspaper, mentions a completely different quote, says it was shouted, not cried, and left out everything else, the infinite ammo/weapons, the dying when running out, etc. The more you look at it, the more it looks like a sloppily done article series with impossible in doom claims done by 3 newspaper/magazine writers, that all borrowed the same hate site tracking group but added in their own features, all in an attempt to cause a massive outcry against violent games. If these articles and the doom will become reality hoax never even happened, the link between the shooters and Doom would be less defined...
All I know is that certain things just don't add up to me.

The hoax mentioned above, "Doom Will become Reality" is used in over 7 pages of anti-video game attack sites, all blaming doom for columbine. We still don't know who put up the hoax on the fake Eric Harris AOL page mentioned at this site,  (look at the link on the bottom right). This site proved it was a hoax but was swept under the rug by such attack sites. The only other site corroborating the fact that this was a hoax was "mysteriously" taken offline by someone. I found it search results, some newspaper. It is gone now. Now you take the articles with the impossible features and search for them, using this quote from the second newspaper article,  in the search results, and you get over 13 pages of results. (make sure to let google put in the search results that are omitted). You combine the search results for the doom will become reality hoax search and the search with the quote and you get over 20 pages of results all claiming these articles are genuine and are reporting the god-fearing truth, but only 3 pages debunking them with facts, 4 at one point but it was taken down. The problem is that none of these attack sites even proved without a shadow of a doubt that this modified version of doom was even real. In fact no one has. All of the other Eric Harris Wads are available online if you search for eric harris wads. People around 1999 were trying to get their hands on addons by him for some sick reason, but not once on his AOL site did he even mention this modified version of Doom. And since the way file/website hosting works involves knowing the exact file path needed to download it off his site, which intern requires finding a link posted by someone else (who found it), how did  this hate site tracking group even find it, without knowing the directory listing of all his files on his AOL site? If it really wasn't found by people in the doom community like all of his other wads, how could they have known the file name? I don't think they could have hacked his password in time, but maybe it is possible...

However even if they did find something, these claims dispute any rational idea that this mod even existed at all.  More questions, less answers, that's all I have to say.  I will keep writing here about more video game related BS said by the media, debunking it if I can, if I can't I simply won't post it. I also have to talking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership more. Enjoy.