Can game violence go to far?
by Okashira · in General Discussion · 02/16/2007 (4:25 pm) · 37 replies
So, what do you think? Can game violence go to far, or should we release whatever we want and let people decide what games they play/they allow their children to play?
My opinion-
I think that everyone should have the freedom to release whatever type of game they want, because in the end it comes down to the parents to pay attention to what games they buy their kids. Though I DO think that rating systems like ESRB need to be advertised a little better, because let's face it - the average parent/grandparent isn't paying attention to the little ESRB sticker on the game. I think one way this can be solved would be ESRB commercials(similar to the TV rating commercials you might see) warning parents about these things. Also, if a game has explicit stuff I think the developer/publisher ought to place something extra on the package to warn the buyer(like what they did with Conker's Bad Fur Day, though this was obviously done a little for humor), but by choice - they shouldn't be forced to.
-Okashira
My opinion-
I think that everyone should have the freedom to release whatever type of game they want, because in the end it comes down to the parents to pay attention to what games they buy their kids. Though I DO think that rating systems like ESRB need to be advertised a little better, because let's face it - the average parent/grandparent isn't paying attention to the little ESRB sticker on the game. I think one way this can be solved would be ESRB commercials(similar to the TV rating commercials you might see) warning parents about these things. Also, if a game has explicit stuff I think the developer/publisher ought to place something extra on the package to warn the buyer(like what they did with Conker's Bad Fur Day, though this was obviously done a little for humor), but by choice - they shouldn't be forced to.
-Okashira
About the author
#2
300,000 real violent kids who probably never played or seen a video game before:
news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/find_out/guides/world/child_soldiers/newsid_3757000/3...
02/16/2007 (5:31 pm)
Kids shouldnt play violent games. kids shouldnt have access to real guns either. But video games are not the cause of violence in kids. Anyone who beleives that so-and-so went on a rampage in a school or where ever because he played video games is a moron. 300,000 real violent kids who probably never played or seen a video game before:
news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/find_out/guides/world/child_soldiers/newsid_3757000/3...
#3
to clarify, games can't go to far. Neither can movies, music or books.
This is the same crap that's been going on since the book burnings.
Does that mean games can't make kids go around and kill people? Sure they could. So could drinking a cup of Pepsi.
If a kid kills someone because of something he saw in a game, then he, and his parents should be thrown in jail.
As a parent I am sooooo sick and tired of people wanting the goverment to sanction everything so they don't have to take the time to raise the kids themselves.
If you kill people you were probably mental to begin with. If it wasn't a game, a smoothie may have set that person of anyway
02/16/2007 (5:37 pm)
Noto clarify, games can't go to far. Neither can movies, music or books.
This is the same crap that's been going on since the book burnings.
Does that mean games can't make kids go around and kill people? Sure they could. So could drinking a cup of Pepsi.
If a kid kills someone because of something he saw in a game, then he, and his parents should be thrown in jail.
As a parent I am sooooo sick and tired of people wanting the goverment to sanction everything so they don't have to take the time to raise the kids themselves.
If you kill people you were probably mental to begin with. If it wasn't a game, a smoothie may have set that person of anyway
#4
Me too. I agre with all of the above. Build what you want, put a lable on it that discribes what's within, and have fun.
02/16/2007 (6:36 pm)
Quote:As a parent I am sooooo sick and tired of people wanting the goverment to sanction everything so they don't have to take the time to raise the kids themselves.
Me too. I agre with all of the above. Build what you want, put a lable on it that discribes what's within, and have fun.
#5
Now there's a thought - try replacing the word violence with porn and see how the this thread sounds:
With apologies to George Carlin :)
That was fun :)
Violence: The Porn of the new Millennium!!!
02/17/2007 (4:24 am)
These discussions are so puerile and pointless because you fellas never actually talk about the violence, just your right to use it in a game. It reminds me of the discussions that went on around porn in the last century.Now there's a thought - try replacing the word violence with porn and see how the this thread sounds:
Quote:So, what do you think? Can game porn go to far, or should we release whatever we want and let people decide what games they play/they allow their children to play?
Quote:I think porn is fine, as look as its not glorified I think any game, that contains any amount of porn will be fine as long as it doesn't draw unnecessary attention to the porn.
Quote:Kids shouldn't play Porn games. kids shouldn't have access to real dicks either. But video games are not the cause of Porn in kids. Anyone who believes that so-and-so went on a rampage in a school or where ever because he played video games is a moron.
Quote:Does that mean games can't make kids go around and fucking people? Sure they could. So could drinking a cup of Pepsi.
If a kid fucks someone because of something he saw in a game, then he, and his parents should be thrown in jail.
If you fuck people you were probably mental to begin with.
With apologies to George Carlin :)
That was fun :)
Violence: The Porn of the new Millennium!!!
#6
02/17/2007 (6:04 am)
Aye, violence (hurting other people, which few practices) is accepted among gamers while sex (usually doesn't hurt other people, and something which practically everyone practices) is not.
#7
02/17/2007 (6:18 am)
I think all games should replace people with squirrels. Then nobody is killing people, right? Just hunting squirrels with high-powered machineguns. I mean there is a squirrel hunting season, right? 
#8
02/17/2007 (8:10 am)
What are the young squirrels supposed to play now?
#10
A game where you, a young impressible squirrel is forced to take up arms against these Big (country wide) Assed Humans when they invade your woodland looking for Nuts Of Mass Destruction (NOMaDs). Not only are your Nuts on the line, but those of all Squirrel-kind's and your right to be a Tree Hugger!
Yeah!
... well, it could work...
... maybe...
not.
:)
02/17/2007 (9:30 am)
Cool!A game where you, a young impressible squirrel is forced to take up arms against these Big (country wide) Assed Humans when they invade your woodland looking for Nuts Of Mass Destruction (NOMaDs). Not only are your Nuts on the line, but those of all Squirrel-kind's and your right to be a Tree Hugger!
Yeah!
... well, it could work...
... maybe...
not.
:)
#11
I'm sick of the rules only being discussed in it's regards to video games. If Movie ratings didn't exist, parrents still would not allow thier children to see those types of movies. Why are video games any different?
02/17/2007 (9:37 am)
Seing movies like Saw, Saw II, Saw III, Silence of the Lambs, 3 or 4 sequels and prequels, texas chainsaw masacre, it's prequels......I'm sick of the rules only being discussed in it's regards to video games. If Movie ratings didn't exist, parrents still would not allow thier children to see those types of movies. Why are video games any different?
#12
02/17/2007 (9:38 am)
Oh, for the record, i've never seen any of the movies i listed in my post.
#13
Because, unfortunantly most parents still have the view that all video games are Pacman & Mario fun.
02/17/2007 (9:46 am)
@SeanBecause, unfortunantly most parents still have the view that all video games are Pacman & Mario fun.
#14
Would a game like Trauma Unit for the Wii, but with realistic squirming and screaming children and exacting scalpel slices for the removal of organs and carving of symbols in a satanic ritual game be "too far". Would a GTA-style game where you can simulate rape and slit their throats to stop their screaming when police are near be "too far"? Would entering an infant ICU ward and bludgeoning babies with a crowbar be "too far"? Would, again using Trauma Unit and perhaps Elebits for the Wii, a game simulating a back-alley coat-hanger abortion be going "too far"? Is a game like Ethnic Cleansing, where you rack up points for the murder of Jews and blacks be considered going "too far"? Would a Dahmer-inspired game that played like Cooking Mama but with photo-realistic graphics (since they are all the rage) where you cut up small boys and cook them to temp to concoct a tasty dish, be "too far"? Would a first-person simulation of Rwanda be going "too far"? Armed with a machete you chop, chop, chop through unarmed men and women and children? Sometimes they are armed and scared. For those, you can either use a bullet or let them live until they are asleep. The strategies are endless.
Are there ethical limits to game development? Is there a point where art moves into gratuity and out of the art vogue? Is art simply a limit of the vogue? People have been asking these questions of art for a long, long time.
02/17/2007 (10:40 am)
It depends on what you consider "too far". And most of the discussions on the topic take the form of examples of current games that the media says have gone "too far". I rather like to think of games that have yet to be made.Would a game like Trauma Unit for the Wii, but with realistic squirming and screaming children and exacting scalpel slices for the removal of organs and carving of symbols in a satanic ritual game be "too far". Would a GTA-style game where you can simulate rape and slit their throats to stop their screaming when police are near be "too far"? Would entering an infant ICU ward and bludgeoning babies with a crowbar be "too far"? Would, again using Trauma Unit and perhaps Elebits for the Wii, a game simulating a back-alley coat-hanger abortion be going "too far"? Is a game like Ethnic Cleansing, where you rack up points for the murder of Jews and blacks be considered going "too far"? Would a Dahmer-inspired game that played like Cooking Mama but with photo-realistic graphics (since they are all the rage) where you cut up small boys and cook them to temp to concoct a tasty dish, be "too far"? Would a first-person simulation of Rwanda be going "too far"? Armed with a machete you chop, chop, chop through unarmed men and women and children? Sometimes they are armed and scared. For those, you can either use a bullet or let them live until they are asleep. The strategies are endless.
Are there ethical limits to game development? Is there a point where art moves into gratuity and out of the art vogue? Is art simply a limit of the vogue? People have been asking these questions of art for a long, long time.
#15
Uh, yeah. Those would probably be considered to far :).
Political correctness is a huge part of censorship - not just violence. One example would be - it is generaly accepted (and never really talked about by Senators) that shooting Nazis in a game is ok, but when it comes down to shooting gangs or Jews that is wrong, because they are people too(not that I agree with Nazis or shooting gangs and Jews, but YKWIM).
Also, jumping on "goombas" or shooting "space invaders" is generally accepted as ok, but shooting a Doom 3 zombie (where blood splashes out) is generally accepted as bad. So detail is a big part too, which is why more aware parents will let their kids play mecha games where they are still killing people, but not Doom 3 or Quake where blood is squirting out.
There aren't and shouldn't be ethical limits to game development or any other form of art for that matter - but there SHOULD be good restrictions on what art should be seen by certain groups(i.e. there are adult 'art' stores where only adults can go and buy things). Or atleast these restrictions should be more apparent.
We must remember that video games are the newest form of art and that people will continue to judge new forms of art for the rest of eternity(Mr. UghUgh the Caveman was very criticized for his invention the "painting", but nowadays painting is accepted and respected as a solid art form).
02/17/2007 (10:59 am)
@DavidUh, yeah. Those would probably be considered to far :).
Political correctness is a huge part of censorship - not just violence. One example would be - it is generaly accepted (and never really talked about by Senators) that shooting Nazis in a game is ok, but when it comes down to shooting gangs or Jews that is wrong, because they are people too(not that I agree with Nazis or shooting gangs and Jews, but YKWIM).
Also, jumping on "goombas" or shooting "space invaders" is generally accepted as ok, but shooting a Doom 3 zombie (where blood splashes out) is generally accepted as bad. So detail is a big part too, which is why more aware parents will let their kids play mecha games where they are still killing people, but not Doom 3 or Quake where blood is squirting out.
There aren't and shouldn't be ethical limits to game development or any other form of art for that matter - but there SHOULD be good restrictions on what art should be seen by certain groups(i.e. there are adult 'art' stores where only adults can go and buy things). Or atleast these restrictions should be more apparent.
We must remember that video games are the newest form of art and that people will continue to judge new forms of art for the rest of eternity(Mr. UghUgh the Caveman was very criticized for his invention the "painting", but nowadays painting is accepted and respected as a solid art form).
#16
02/17/2007 (11:08 am)
Political correctness is a spectrum, and one of the key difficulties with mentioning it or arguing it is that people argue different sides of the spectrum and assume that they are arguing the same side. That is mostly because people are imprecise with their arguments. This usually leads to circular generalizations and an even more nebulous definition of "political correctness" which is completely and totally dependent upon the perspective of the speaker and social affiliations of the speaker at the moment of utterance/writing. And even then the definition will shift with precision.
#17
First off, political correctness is for the most part a way for people to hide or mask their true views or intentions. At best, they can be a guide to behavior. What they can't do and what was/is their original intent, is to provide insight and understanding. We see this has for the most part failed. Or has it?
Two: Arguably, Ughugh painted not for appreciation, to make a statement or as a commentary on his/her world. It takes the form of something more utilitarian than that. Again, arguably, all art began this way and was used this way. But over the centuries, it's purpose evolved. Perhaps given another hundred years Video/Computer Games will too.
Finally Okashira* your comment on games as art:
That said, computer games have had an impact on the wiring of the human brain over the last couple of decades. These changes have been for the most part beneficial and are there irregardless of violent content.
And if we accepted that this rewiring has occurred, how else does it impact society as a whole, regardless of age?
Are there other ways in which a game changes our view of the world and how we behave?
Then if we wish to call ourselves Artists, do we not then take responsibility for that?
If we wish to have this industry viewed as an Art Form, then we must at the very least be interested in the reactions to the work. Not defensive.
The discussion is getting interesting now :)
*edit: corrected quote attribution
02/17/2007 (12:18 pm)
@ Sean - a number of people took their kids to see Pan's Labyrinth and that was clearly rated. Plus, there are more movie "types" than slash/gore flicks. And as was discussed in anther thread, PL used violence to support the story. How many games do that?First off, political correctness is for the most part a way for people to hide or mask their true views or intentions. At best, they can be a guide to behavior. What they can't do and what was/is their original intent, is to provide insight and understanding. We see this has for the most part failed. Or has it?
Two: Arguably, Ughugh painted not for appreciation, to make a statement or as a commentary on his/her world. It takes the form of something more utilitarian than that. Again, arguably, all art began this way and was used this way. But over the centuries, it's purpose evolved. Perhaps given another hundred years Video/Computer Games will too.
Finally Okashira* your comment on games as art:
Quote:There aren't and shouldn't be ethical limits to game development or any other form of art for that matterYou first make the assumption that games are an Art Form so therefore the same rules for other Art Forms should apply. Unfortunately, I would argue games are not an Art Form (not yet) but more a craft or perhaps Pop Culture at best. They become an historical oddity and have no relevance outside that generation.
That said, computer games have had an impact on the wiring of the human brain over the last couple of decades. These changes have been for the most part beneficial and are there irregardless of violent content.
And if we accepted that this rewiring has occurred, how else does it impact society as a whole, regardless of age?
Are there other ways in which a game changes our view of the world and how we behave?
Then if we wish to call ourselves Artists, do we not then take responsibility for that?
If we wish to have this industry viewed as an Art Form, then we must at the very least be interested in the reactions to the work. Not defensive.
The discussion is getting interesting now :)
*edit: corrected quote attribution
Torque Owner Edward Smith
Silencersoft
I feel parents aren't taking enough notice of there children's games etc. And so they blame the developers.
Rating do need to be more visible, in Australia (where I am) we have a new rating system for movies and games, that is colour coded and much larger on the front side and back of the product.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Film_and_Literature_Classification_(Australia)