bit-tech.net

Playing The Blame Game

Comments 1 to 25 of 36

Reply
UncertainGod 6th April 2008, 08:22 Quote
I personally agree completely with the Byron report that parents in general see the age rating on games as an indicator of difficulty instead of sutibility for an age range. I used to work for GAME when I was at uni and I remember parents picking up 18+ games because there child was "good at these types of things" at which point I had to explain that there was alot of blood and guts in the game.
HungrySalami 6th April 2008, 08:28 Quote
I believe uninvolved parents are a much more dangerous threat to youth than any game, however violent. Same goes for overprotective parents who use only pre-determined absolutes in raising their children, that would include "violent gaes are bad and if I see you play them, you'll get spanked"-types as well. Raising a kid can't be governed by any book, celebrity or government, it's a threadrope that has to manouvered by the parents themselves.

Concerning politicians, I am reminded of this post on another site which shows what the issue might really be; http://overclockers.com/tips01313/
Toka 6th April 2008, 08:47 Quote
I am unable to express myself in an articulate fashion, with any sort of clarity, over this issue of proposed censorship of my recreational pursuits. I'll limit myself to the following.

Fu*k off and buy some parenting skills you miserable excuse for responsible adults. If you allow your child to experience unsuitable material, or are unaware of the material they are experiencing, then please hand your kids over to social services and come back when your IQ has struggled over 50.
Orionche 6th April 2008, 09:53 Quote
Not much to add... the article and posts above say it all.

Its a generation thing, me thinks. Lots of "older" people had fun differently and can't comprehend todays games. Then there's the fear of technology but that's slightly off topic.

Dunno what's the point of all of this, really... The parents who want this probably want the state to watch over their kids with laws and regulations, because they're too stupid/not interested to do it for them selfs. They should educate new parents on raising their kids properly, not wasting money on "reports"...

Personally, I use games as an exhaust pipe for my frustrations, and I believe I'm not alone. =)
D3s3rt_F0x 6th April 2008, 10:15 Quote
Personally all games should be rated based on there content, although I dont think you could blame them for violence its an easy finger to point, the same as music is because if a murderer listens to Marilyn Manson then they must obviously of done it for that reason. For those of you who have been watching or seen Dexter on TV how many of you has it made to want to go out and chop someone into pieces, I enjoy the show but it certainly hasnt made me want to do that, the same as playing GTA dosnt make me want to go tear arseing around in a car running people over and clubbing em over the head with a baseball bat.

I agree with the point in where in some mentally unstable people it may make them want to follow what they do in games, but if you banned violent games it would be doing something theyve seen on TV or in a movie say Rambo for instance.

For me though with the rating of games it shouldnt be left to the BBFC, its an archaic organisation which just dosnt have the tools of the trade for games imo it barely has them for movies which can be seen from the whole Manhunt 2 fiasco.
Joeymac 6th April 2008, 11:10 Quote
Lately I have watched the following movies rated 15 by the BBFC.. 30 Days of Night and Atonement. 30 days of night had a man killing his wife and children, a small vampire girl getting her head blown off by a shotgun (off screen), many people getting ripped/cut to pieces on screen. It's one of the most graphic films I've seen, and I've seen a lot of films. Atonement's shots of war wounds want to make you throw up.
I'm also watching Band of Brother's at the moment and that's a thousand times more affecting that any war game I've ever played.

So the line at which games look too real to be good for us? If we were playing games that looked at good as, say, Beowulf, it's still a million miles across that uncanny valley before they approach just those two 15 rated movies. There is ZERO weight to any argument that lumps violent games in the same league as violent movies. We are still very much in Tom and Jerry territory as far as I can tell.
Major 6th April 2008, 12:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toka
I am unable to express myself in an articulate fashion, with any sort of clarity, over this issue of proposed censorship of my recreational pursuits. I'll limit myself to the following.

Fu*k off and buy some parenting skills you miserable excuse for responsible adults. If you allow your child to experience unsuitable material, or are unaware of the material they are experiencing, then please hand your kids over to social services and come back when your IQ has struggled over 50.

Your IQ is somewhere around 34?
Th3Maverick 6th April 2008, 13:02 Quote
So, is this gonna end up like the Prohibition Act? Soon, we'll have game-runners driving cross-country in their blacked out Lamborghinis to illicit game dealers, until the world governments realize that it is one of the fundamental rights of being human to kill, maim, destroy, or otherwise d*ck up our lives however we damn well please.

****, it sounds like more fun than playing another round of Tiger Woods 2007.
Paradigm Shifter 6th April 2008, 13:11 Quote
Hm. Sounds to me like irresponsible parents and incompetent politicians are to blame... and it's obvious that neither of those groups will actually admit to it being their fault, because it's easier to blame it on something that can't fight back.

(Music and movies have big Associations backing them, who have a lot of money... computer gaming is too small and fragmented, and doesn't have the cash to keep top-flight lawyers on retainer to fight idiots who want a scapegoat. As much as it pains me to admit it, computer gaming almost needs a "CGAA", a gaming equivalent of the RIAA or MPAA, to lobby politicians etc...)
Joeymac 6th April 2008, 14:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter
Hm. Sounds to me like irresponsible parents and incompetent politicians are to blame... and it's obvious that neither of those groups will actually admit to it being their fault, because it's easier to blame it on something that can't fight back.

(Music and movies have big Associations backing them, who have a lot of money... computer gaming is too small and fragmented, and doesn't have the cash to keep top-flight lawyers on retainer to fight idiots who want a scapegoat. As much as it pains me to admit it, computer gaming almost needs a "CGAA", a gaming equivalent of the RIAA or MPAA, to lobby politicians etc...)

You're kidding right? You've not heard of Microsoft or Sony? Plus I believe the games industry rakes in more dough than the music and movie industry combined.
Computer Gremlin 6th April 2008, 16:06 Quote
The blame lies directly with the parents and the children. Without a doubt if they did not take the extra couple minutes to look up the game rating online before buying a video game children would be exposed to less graphic material. This leads to another issue as well, real violence in and outside the home. Blaming video games for all the ills of society cannot hide the fact removing offensive material from children and making them aware that bad things happen to good people is impossible.

Video games are not very violent. From personal experience dealing with animals on a farm all the articles on video game violence are not founded in good faith. Unstable and violent children can be dangerous regardless if their parents buy a mature rated game or place them in a plastic bubble for the first 18 years of their life. Most children do change but it takes a strong will to make it happen and it is something the government should have no part of in the family.
Paradigm Shifter 6th April 2008, 16:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeymac
You're kidding right? You've not heard of Microsoft or Sony? Plus I believe the games industry rakes in more dough than the music and movie industry combined.

That may be, but Microsoft and Sony don't represent the computer gaming world as a whole. They're far less likely to be the targets of politicians and parents wanted to place the blame somewhere other than themselves, as they have too much money. The smaller developers, though - and particularly the developers rather than the publishers - need better protection from bandwagon-jumping it's-not-my-fault-it's-theirs' attitudes.

Sony and Microsoft are big enough and bad enough to look after themselves - they've got their collective fingers in so many proverbial pies that even if someone did manage to blame them for "my little Mikey didn't murder half his classmates on purpose - it was the game that made him do it" and get the court to fine them, they'd barely notice it. And if someone had to go to prison for it... well, they can always string up the little developer that made the game.

...

Anyway, my point was that music and movies are not considered "soft" targets... computer gaming is.
C-Sniper 6th April 2008, 16:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Computer Gremlin
The blame lies directly with the parents and the children. Without a doubt if they did not take the extra couple minutes to look up the game rating online before buying a video game children would be exposed to less graphic material. This leads to another issue as well, real violence in and outside the home. Blaming video games for all the ills of society cannot hide the fact removing offensive material from children and making them aware that bad things happen to good people is impossible.

*snip* From personal experience dealing with animals on a farm all the articles on video game violence are not founded in good faith. Unstable and violent children can be dangerous regardless if their parents buy a mature rated game or place them in a plastic bubble for the first 18 years of their life. Most children do change but it takes a strong will to make it happen and it is something the government should have no part of in the family.

I completely agree. my mother was raised on a farm and when I got my first video game in 1997 (Goldeneye 007 for N64) she looked at the rating and talked about it first before letting me play. Even then when i got half life in 1999 she made me take it back for 2 years until i could buy it again. I think that most of the parents buying these games for their kids is that they don't know how to say "No". This is a problem i have seen in many parents as they want to be perceived as the "cool" parents that allow their child to have free reign over their lives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Computer Gremlin
Video games are not very violent.
I will agree that they have been "dimmed down" over recent years. An my example is that you don't see anymore exploding body parts like in Half Life or HL:OP.
xPaladin 6th April 2008, 17:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter
(Music and movies have big Associations backing them, who have a lot of money... computer gaming is too small and fragmented, and doesn't have the cash to keep top-flight lawyers on retainer to fight idiots who want a scapegoat. As much as it pains me to admit it, computer gaming almost needs a "CGAA", a gaming equivalent of the RIAA or MPAA, to lobby politicians etc...)

There is the Entertainment Consumers Association (www.theeca.com), but it's no *AA -- thankfully -- since it's a grassroots campaign.
cyrilthefish 6th April 2008, 18:53 Quote
Quote:
Part of the reason this report was commissioned was because of the stabbing of a youth in Leicester by a kid who was said to be obsessed with the Rockstar game Manhunt. This led to the mother of the victim calling for violent video games to be banned and her view has been backed by many other loud voices.
Gah!
makes me cringe to see this reported over and over in the media...

Quoting Gamepolitics:
Quote:
When 14-year-old Stefan Pakeerah (left) was brutally murdered in 2004, there were claims that his killer, 17-year-old Warren LeBlanc, was inspired to commit the crime by playing the original Manhunt video game.

That position has largely been discredited over the years. A Scotland Yard investigation of the crime showed that, while Pakerrah himself owned a copy of the game, his killer did not.
massive text added for emphasis :(
Jodiuh 6th April 2008, 19:14 Quote
What the hell? I expected a picture of the chic?!
BlackMage23 6th April 2008, 19:20 Quote
I used to work for CEX, and just like UncertainGod said in the first post, there are a lot of parents and grandparents that have no idea what they are buying for their children, they just pick up the one the child asks for, and are nomally shocked when told what the content of the game is like.
dr-strangelove 6th April 2008, 22:07 Quote
I agree that the problem is that parents and politicians don't really understand the world of technology, at least the ones calling for the bans don't seem to, I'd say in about 15 years you'll see people who've grown up with video games in government & becoming parents, then they'll understand what they're dealing with and won't be so damn scared of it.
Jordan Wise 6th April 2008, 22:33 Quote
that byron is DOG UGLY
Javerh 7th April 2008, 04:50 Quote
I resent this kind of discrimination of one or two types of medias while others come through unscathed. Why is it that books and cd's don't have ratings? Would you buy Eminem's cd for a five-year-old? Or read him a bed-side story from Steven King's Salem's Lot?
Co2 7th April 2008, 05:13 Quote
I don't understand, must be because I'm was raised 'till the age of six in finland, but if some of the louder voices say that there is a "strong connection between what you do and what you see" then why are all these lawsuits that we hear about aimed at games and not movies (or books) alike?
Co2 7th April 2008, 05:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javerh
I resent this kind of discrimination of one or two types of medias while others come through unscathed. Why is it that books and cd's don't have ratings? Would you buy Eminem's cd for a five-year-old? Or read him a bed-side story from Steven King's Salem's Lot?

Didn't see this one.
E.E.L. Ambiense 7th April 2008, 05:21 Quote
Screw this.... I'm going back to Bioshock.
HungrySalami 7th April 2008, 09:35 Quote
Most CDs do have ratings, I think? (Explicit lyrics, drugs, etc.), that's not to say kids won't be tortured by an operette or daddy's collection of anti-war-songs.

As for books, I think the distinction between a book and reality is so great (Moving, talking, feelable things vs black letters on white papers), that a confusion doesn't enter into it. Besides, when a kid is old enough to read "mature" books (Anarchist's Cookbook etc.), he ought to have been brought to know it's a no-no. Games are easily accessible in a way that books aren't.
DaveT 7th April 2008, 09:38 Quote
Personally, I think some games are abusive, no matter the age they're intended to. Games that promote violence on a hand to hand fashion, religion rage or racism and women/children abuse should be very banned. Why? Because they're excuses polititians and religious leaders use to blame ALL games, good or bad. Ever since the very beginning of games we've seen violence, only back then, a 8x4 sprite was no big violence spark so no-one cared. Nowadays we can almost see the jugular vein pop out when you slid a bad guys throat which is a bit graphic, don't you think?
In my opinion violence in games is ok mostly, because if you are sane and process the suspention of disbelief correctly everything will be fine and it's even a good stress reliever. However there will always be the small percentage of people (no matter it's age) that will interpret the game as an extension of reality and have bad behaviour no matter if trigered by games, movies or music... and that's the sad part I do not wish to see inspired by overly stupid games like GTA, Bully or whatever... most of these games rely on the publicity stunts and the "forbidden fruit" factor so anyone falling for that trick is already handicaped in some way...
Go play some good old fashioned UT and blast some aliens... is there really need for a game that promotes violence like we see all the time on tv?
And always remember, it's the radical stuff that makes everyone label everything trough the highest denominator...
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums