OXM Double Take - why is THQ buddying up to Mike Tyson?

They're doing it because WWE buddied up with him first - he was inducted into their Hall of Fame earlier this year.

Dont open that can of worms, did he didn't he isn't for us to say as we don't know all the details. If he did it then he's paid his dues in prison, and the stigma of being a convicted rapist will stay with him. But should that stop him getting work, not really. He can't box anymore so why not do something that's going to make him money.

Edit: I wouldn't argue with the guy!

All i can do is point people towards the documentary "Tyson"

Hes a fascinating man.

You may have to do a backtrack on this one Matt.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the history of the WWF/WWE, so I'll give a brief recap and not bore you with microdetails. Mike Tyson was used on WWE programming, he had a huge angle and was a major influence. His presence helped WWE turn around their slump when they were losing the ratings way and were close to going out of business. He was used in a huge story that included a now classic showdown with Steve Austin, and culminated with his being in the ring during Wrestlemania 15 when HBK dropped the title to Steve Austin(his first run as champion). HBK retired the next night, and stayed out of wrestling for nearly 5 years. Because of his time spent with WWE, and how important he was overall, he was inducted into their Hall of Fame this year.

Now then, this years WWE game is focussing on the 'attitude era' for all its extra wrestlers. I won't go into vast detail, but suffice to say, this is the era that people consider WWE to have been at its best, and was the time Mike Tyson was involved. In purely wrestling terms, for this game, it is right he be included.

Now then, on to THQ's including him. Before you can definitely say they were wrong to include him, you first have to acknowledge that he has also been used in the Fight Night games. Yes, he IS a boxing legend, but as has been shown, he is also important to the history of wrestling, so he's just acceptable there. If he's OK for one, he should be OK for the other. Also, you need to ask, who decides to add which superstars. WWE can certainly pull wrestlers from the games roster, they've done it before, but who knows how much input they have into the making of each game? This could well have been their choice. You can't justifiably berate THQ without knowing that for sure.

As for WHY you think it's wrong, well, I won't touch the 'did he/didn't he' argument, he's convicted and that's that. However, I've always been of the belief that people should never be judged only on their mistakes, but on how they have improved themselves. It is too easy to dismiss someone as a bad person if they've done a bad thing, but there are causes, and when you have a cause, you have something to be fixed. You bring up Gary Glitter as a joke, but lets think on it for a moment. There is no way that Gary Glitter is a healthy and sane man. No man who is truly in their right minds would do what he did. He is broken, and needs fixing. That doesn't mean he should be excused from punishment of course, but if he were to spend the rest of his life working to protect children from people like him, how do you judge him then? Personally I'd have strung him up years ago, but I don;t bring it up to try and justify Gary Glitter, I'm just making a point. Of course, it is down to the individual what action is unforgivable, but the point is sound, people can learn from their mistakes and can grow to be better people, and the people who make the most vile of mistakes can't be judged as being whole, they are clearly broken.

However you actually feel about the man Matt, THQ were justified in their choice, and there is precedence for his being in a current gen game. If you're coming down on THQ, then you really need to come down on EA as well.

However you actually feel about the man Matt, THQ were justified in their choice, and there is precedence for his being in a current gen game. If you're coming down on THQ, then you really need to come down on EA as well.

Don't forget Acti 'we're closing down another studio' vision.

Taking this approach would mean you better not watch movies anymore, what with the amount of idiocy and criminality that has gone on in the lives of actors and actresses..

THQ aren't entirely to blame here, and yes - I'm aware that the WWE originally hired Tyson to promote wrestling, only two years after he'd finished serving three of a six year sentence. I'm all for giving people a second chance, but Tyson's career has been a horrendous example of how fame can override everything else. He's a nasty piece of work who's career was merely stunted by a criminal record that would have been the end of almost anyone else. If it was me, I'd struggle to get a job in ASDA.

It was an awful decision to make back then, and no better to repeat now in 2012. We're seeing similar stuff happening at the moment with Chris Brown - I think it's genuinely awful that the world is so willing to forgive celebrities who carry out deeply immoral crimes. And yes, morality plays a bigger part in this than legality. If you don't agree, that's fine - but there's no way I'll ever budge on this one.

I'm not happy about his inclusion either, but -and I'm speaking as a fan of WWE - I think I have more of a problem with using him as a pre-order incentive. Sure, he had a (small, really - a lead-up to Wrestlemania? Snooki from Jersey Shore did the same thing last year if we're going down that route) role in the era being covered, but I'm really not comfortable with him being used to sell the game or even hyping up the fact he's in there. I wasn't happy with WWE putting him in the HOF either come to that, even if the WWE's core audience these days are too young to remember/realise what he did. Using him as a selling point for the game doesn't seem right whether for his crimes or contribution - at least in Fight Night as has been mentioned, there was slightly more justification. Saying that - and this is a rather extreme example - but conversely, we're not going to see Chris Benoit in a WWE video game, no matter how much his contribution to Wrestling due to what he did.

And though it's hardly unheard of in the WWE, they're sending out a bloody mixed message. - Warning here, if you're not a WWE fan some of the following might mean nothing to you: but a few months ago current WWE champion and WWE 13 cover star CM Punk got into a fairly heated war with Chris Brown on Twitter, attacking him for his crimes. WWE then ended up mentioning this on the show and on their website, which was significant as it was nothing to do with any of the storylines nor was it 'in character', it was CM Punk's personal beliefs (although granted it's not as if it would have done anything to damage his current 'face' persona). I know a lot of it's kind of pandering to the audience that goes hand in hand with wrestling promotions work but for WWE to be cosying up to Tyson only a few months after essentially decrying Chris Brown publicly leaves a bit of a sour taste in the mouth.

I'm not happy about his inclusion either, but -and I'm speaking as a fan of WWE - I think I have more of a problem with using him as a pre-order incentive. Sure, he had a (small, really - a lead-up to Wrestlemania? Snooki from Jersey Shore did the same thing last year if we're going down that route) role in the era being covered, but I'm really not comfortable with him being used to sell the game or even hyping up the fact he's in there. I wasn't happy with WWE putting him in the HOF either come to that, even if the WWE's core audience these days are too young to remember/realise what he did. Using him as a selling point for the game doesn't seem right whether for his crimes or contribution - at least in Fight Night as has been mentioned, there was slightly more justification. Saying that - and this is a rather extreme example - but conversely, we're not going to see Chris Benoit in a WWE video game, no matter how much his contribution to Wrestling due to what he did.

And though it's hardly unheard of in the WWE, they're sending out a bloody mixed message. - Warning here, if you're not a WWE fan some of the following might mean nothing to you: but a few months ago current WWE champion and WWE 13 cover star CM Punk got into a fairly heated war with Chris Brown on Twitter, attacking him for his crimes. WWE then ended up mentioning this on the show and on their website, which was significant as it was nothing to do with any of the storylines nor was it 'in character', it was CM Punk's personal beliefs (although granted it's not as if it would have done anything to damage his current 'face' persona). I know a lot of it's kind of pandering to the audience that goes hand in hand with wrestling promotions work but for WWE to be cosying up to Tyson only a few months after essentially decrying Chris Brown publicly leaves a bit of a sour taste in the mouth.

I don't think anyone would ever accuse WWE or Vince McMahon of being consistent, they DO however, take great advantage of pop culture. Not as much as Family Guy or something like that does, but when it fits in, they're all over it, regardless of how hypocritical it is.

As far as Benoit is concerned, he brutally murdered his wife and child across a 2 day period. The act wasn't a fit of rage, but one of premeditation. Mike Tyson was a thug, but it doesn't compare to this.