As for the game creator, he's an idiot. He'll probably be in the news in Austrailia in years to come for something bad. As for all of you that are posting thoughts and supporting anything to do with this game you're idiots too. Stop hiding behind your phony names when you make stupid comments and use your real names if you have something to say.

What they mean by an official "inquiry" is an investigation into whether or not the creator is in violation of any laws. People have hissy fits about this sort of crap all the time & it's forgotten about within a week. It won't go anywhere. He hasn't done anything wrong under Australian law.

After all, this is the same cow who said Australians are "happy" with 1.5mbps connection speeds. Trying to censor something just because it doesn't comply with popular & conventional ideas is called being a dictator. However there are no laws which prohibit creating "unpopular & unconventional" content. People just need to accept that others have a right to think differently. See, the politicians here usually go along with what ever is popular in the media. If something is given heaps of coverage then it'll be dealt with. However if you have something 10 times more offensive & it doesn't receive any media attention, they won't go near it.

Very sad huh? Hopefully Howard will be booted out of office this year. Maybe then we'll see an end to this BS.

You know, freedom of speech protects stuff like this.

True…BUT whose to say that someone wont do something because of your actions…..*wink wink*

Australia usually bans about one game a year, which isn't much. Games that are banned are USUALLY crappy anyway. Since we don't have an 18+ rating for games I think we do very well. You don't see games like Gears of War, Dead Rising, Saints Row etc. being banned do you? No. All are on shelves uncut & available to anybody over the age of 15. Yes the system needs to be fixed, I am not by any means defending it. HOWEVER this whole "Australia is so strict blah blah" thing is exaggerated immensely.

Censorship exists in every single country on Earth. As an Australian, I say this: yes the guy who created the game is a douchebag, but so is Coonan & the rest of the Howard government. Censorship is BS but it's something everybody has to learn to deal with. If you want to see harsh censorship at it's finest, take a trip to China. You can't even type Democracy into a search engine or chatroom. Hell what about North Korea? The internet is banned for regular citizens all together.

The UK, Canada, New Zealand tc. all employ regimes wereby media can be banned. The US would have to be on of the very few countries in the world to not have any laws regulating the sale & distribution of games or movies. People act like Australia is the only country wereby media can be banned. It's not. Germany is far more strict with games. German releases are very regularly censored. But not so in Australia.on average you're looking at 1 or 2 games a year refused classification. Not a great big drama. I hate censorship as much as the next man, but foreigners (Americans in particular) love perpetuating hyperbole when it comes to this issue.

Regardless of what uninformed sources on Australian politics may tell you (I.E Gamespot) we DON'T ban games left, right & center. It's trashy hyperbole.

That being said, yes the creator of this game is an attention seeking little worm HOWEVER it's not Coonans moral responsibity to stick her nose in & attempt to censors his game. Australia is an amazing, liberal place to live so don't let bogus news articles let you think otherwise. Ok I admit, sometimes the government goes overboard with regulation. But not neccesarily censorship.

This is pretty pathetic. Using a /b/tard's attention-seeking to further your own political aims, and vowing to use taxpayer's money on launching an inquiry into something that has no bearing on our lives.

You want to defeat this kid? Ignore him. He's only reacting to your attention. Forget public inquiries, forget media reporting. Just ignore him. He has the right to make this game. We have the right to ignore him. Simple.

As I've said before:

I was ready to dismiss the game as a typical /b/tard attempt to mock suffering. Then I stopped and thought about it. There were a lot of references to the events and Cho's writing (Nice one, McBeef!). It makes me think maybe this is really, on some level, a commentary on the media saturation.

Look at the way this is being played out now: this Sydney kid is being demonized for making a game about a tragedy, and for offering to take it down for money. People claim he's blackmailing people. Here's the thing, though: He's not shoving it down anyone's throat.

People are seeking it out, then blaming him for what they saw. People are saying no-one should see it while giving it more publicity than the creator could ever achieve on his own. People are claiming he's profiting from the tragedy, but exactly how much money did the tv stations make from their minute-by-minute, weeks long coverage of the tragedy? Every half hour a new revelation, a new piece of information to feed the masses.

There's more at play than this game. This is about media hypocrisy. More, it's about our own hypocrisy. We who watched the news casts, the updates, the tv specials on these brutal, senseless murders and their perpetrator. We who were entertained by the spectacle. It's not about some "internet hero" making a stupid game. It's about us.

The game is no doubt in extremely poor taste, but it's still a case of freedom of speech regardless.

I'm more disturbed by how politicians here in Australia are continually acting like the "thought police". Senator Helen Coonan is going to launch an inquiry into the issue - and then what? Is she going to try and ban it? Or rather, is she just trying to look like she's "doing something" - after all, it's Federal election year here in Australia, and the polls indicate that the Coalition party running the country is looking to be voted out. More a case of political point scoring than anything else - and staying in the headlines.

I wouldn't be surprised if the government here manages to find a way to link this game with "terrorism" - they seem to do so with everything else these days.

To be fair, the whole thing of 'Them and Us' is a human condition not an American one USA Hater.

As an example, you yourself said you didn't care because 150 people died in Iraq. The question you should ask yourself is 'should I care any LESS about those at VTech than those in Iraq? The truth is that neither are more or less 'important' than the other, none of them should have died.

So, yes, I too am saddened by the civilian casualties in Iraq, and no, I'm not American, and have my own opinions regarding the War in Iraq, but refusing to care because 'They do it too' is an invite into a wheel of violence and indifference that has been turning for centuries.

@ usa hater

I think someone didn't get enough hugs when he was growing up.

'It’s not more complicated than douchebag exploiting a tragedy for attention (and outright financial gain), '

Again, Jack Thomson, right?

although I fully agree with the fact he has a right to put the game out. I am enjoying how much hatred this kid (and I say kid because his maturity level is as such) is getting. it seems only some losers online and his friends seem to like him, which doesn't say much about him. problem is he seems to get off on everyone hating him. he's one of those guys who creates trouble just to get attention, but goes further so all he gets is negative attention. since negative attention sticks more and is brought up to other people. he's a sad person, with no job, probably lives with his parents, doesn't go to college, and obviously seems to have no incentive to change his way of life.

I find comfort in the fact that 10 years from now that he will probably either be in the same situation, or worse off. I don't ever wish that on people, but this kid doesn't seem to show me that he deserves any better.

@wiseguy couldn't have said it better myself but oddly enough if i don't take sentences to the end of the text box they get magically cut off by my evil"hit the enter button"habit.

@vaminion If thats the case then these websites shouldn't bother existing at all,if their purpose is to share art and ideas but they don't like certain art ideas then they defeat the purpose of their original creation of the site to begin with.the better analogy would be "don't put up a sign saying free beer and expect no one to show up for said beer"or something to that extent.it also makes em look like a hypocrite too.

@the rest of you censorcrat wannabes if you are american and you don't support your own frigging bill of rights then maybe we should ship you off to a country that lacks those basic rights so you can appreciate them better how about the congo for starters?or iran?

@Conjeo
"but the people clamoring for his censorship enjoy the freedoms they want to revoke from him."

The second you hit private property, you give up free speech. For example, you can curse all you want at Target, but you'll be thrown out if you're obnoxious enough. The First Amendment doesn't protect you because you're on private property. It's the same with a webserver...the ISP can knock you down any time you violate the TAC, and I suspect any smart ISP has a "We can pull the plug at any time" clause just to cover their butts in cases like this.

And just like patrons can complain to the manager at Target about your cursing, I fail to see where the problem is with saying something should come down.

Ok, so she believe the guy did this partially for attention, but decides to launch an official inquiry? I mean, isn't that just giving the guy more attention?

No inquiry was needed, as far as I am concerned. The guy made something that, from what I understand, is horribly tasteless and unpleasant. People do that all the time, this guy just did so in a way that earned him a bunch of attention, and now is getting even more.

>I am at a loss here. What exactly did this person do that was wrong?

Using copyrighted music.

Other than that, he should be in the clear.

I am at a loss here. What exactly did this person do that was wrong? He made a game and posted it - nothing illegal about that. What on earth would the 'government' be 'investigating'?

All those who commented that the 'government is doing the right thing' have it all wrong. Simply because someone's expression is not to your taste does not mean that he or she did anything wrong. This is not the government's or anyone's concern.

Bottom line - if you don't like it, don't watch it. But don't tread on the freedom to express. Just remember, it's a slippery slope from 'investigating' to 'regulating' and finally 'controlling'. And I don't want any government to 'control' my expression.

@kurisu7885

i disapprove of what you say, but i will defend to the death your right to say it.

"Communications Minister Senator Helen Coonan said that Lambourn should seek professional help, adding that she will be instigating an official investigation against the game"

What exactly would an investigation consist of/lead to? It's not more complicated than douchebag exploiting a tragedy for attention (and outright financial gain), the government need not be involved.

@VaMinion

but the people clamoring for his censorship enjoy the freedoms they want to revoke from him.

"Australian Communications Minister Senator Helen Coonan said that... her agency will launch an official inquiry into V-Tech Rampage."

Ah, the good old government inquiry. The tool you use when you want to appear to be doing something, but don't actually want to do anything about it. You could even step it up another notch and call a Royal Commission... but I don't think this is scandalous enough to warrant that... ;)

I should state that this kid Lambourn does need help. He came off as someone who thinks his sh** smells better then anyone else's.

Australia bans games all the time for various reasons:
Drug use:
http://gamepolitics.com/2007/01/24/blitz-banned/

No reason at all:
http://gamepolitics.com/2006/09/24/australian-official-thinks-bully-rati...

Even the game developers have opinions that differentiate from the rest of the world:
http://gamepolitics.com/2006/09/09/are-video-games-art/

Games like Manhunt have been banned down under.

And yet when it comes to exporting film violence, Australia allows garbage horror because, oh, I don't know it's good for the economy?:

http://imdb.com/title/tt0339840/

Australian politicians need to focus on REAL matters like their current account deficit, Australian environment problems like salinisation, Child Labor, a wide-spread use of chemical insecticides, and one that America has too, obesity. They may also have issues with air toxics, depression and suicide.

Now this is scary! Granted the game was in bad taste but going after the creator... damn! What I find sad is people praising it. Guys the game might be in bad taste but the guy had the right to create it. You have the right to dislike it and speak out on it. But praising politicians for going after a guy and not the industry is just the same thing. It just a matter of money and people.

damn you dennis and that multiple spaces cutoff! the last part was "I

@Conejo:

He's Australian. The Bill of Rights doesn't apply.

As a general rule although our politicians can be aggravating here down under they tend to research a topic before they talk on it.

Aussie Politician Vows to Investigate V-Tech Rampage Game...

...

This is a very fitting response. At least Australian politicians have their sh*t together.

Ahh music to my ears.

It's so nice to hear something a little more responsibable.

It's really nice and good so far that media's been thinking more about the game maker himself as an idividual rather then the game.

Expect for that one politian who wants to boycott an unbuyable game.

...Man how stupid can one get.

Yeah it is refreshing to not feel like WE'RE also getting blamed because we play video games too. I agree with her, this kid should never have made the dumb game.

@LightWarrior

How would you boycott unbuyable games? I have games on my TI-83, i got those for free, not to mention the seeminly unlimited number of games on the internet for free, like CS was at one time free.

I'm still seeing this article as describing a politician taking up a stance against this person as vote-getting tool for herself and her party. It seems completely selfish.

I sincerely doubt the author of the game needs therapy. He didn't do anything that would indicate his mental state. He did test the limits of bad taste, though.

I doubt he was making a profound political statement by releasing the game, but that's how it ended up. Why make such a fuss over something that everyone (of those talking about it) claims they don't like it and won't play it? It isn't worth an investigation. The choice is clear, don't download it if you don't want to play it. It doesn't just jump to your hard drive by itself.

As for the payment model being so close to the "extortion" model, there is one way to protest the game. Don't download it, and don't pay for it. If the game fades into obscurity without making money, we gamers have made the best response possible with a minimum of fuss.