Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Crytek Considers Leaving Germany Over Game Law

Posted by Zonk on Wed Aug 22, 2007 03:31 PM
from the before-they-turn-up-the-heat dept.
Government Entertainment Games Politics
Heise is reporting that the largest German game developer and makers of the much-anticipated upcoming title Crysis, Crytek, are considering leaving the country in anticipation of a new restrictive law. "The Conference of Interior Ministers (IMK) of the countries had unanimously decided on a production and distribution ban for violent computer games for the first time in the end of May. The responsible Federal Ministry of Family Affairs is presently working on a less drastic draft of a law for the protection of children and youth. Instead of only the previous 'violence glorifying' games, also the 'violence dominated' games should be indexed by the Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons (BPjM) in the future. These may then no longer be advertised and sold to youths."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Crytek Considers Leaving Germany Over Game Law 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Old news? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22 2007, @03:34PM (#20322417)
    http://www.digitalbattle.com/2006/11/29/crytek-mig ht-leave-germany/ [digitalbattle.com]

    November 29th, 2006

  • This should not exist anywhere (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Sciros (986030) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @03:38PM (#20322453) Journal
    "Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons"

    As socially progressive/liberal as Germany is in many ways, the sheer fact that it has such an organization is astounding and disappointing to me. First of all, it sounds way too much like something only a "Totalitarian Regime"(tm) would have. Second, it's such a misappropriation of resources it's laughable.
    • Well, yes and no. Just by the name, you can't be completely sure their purpose. Maybe they approve videos appropriate for classroom viewing? Maybe they are the organization that enforces not selling porn to minors?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Sciros (986030)
        Heh, on that note, given the average German high-schooler's attitude/approach to sex, they might as well *market* porn to minors for all it matters.

        Maybe I was a bit too surprised when a close relative of mine in Germany first nonchalantly said something like "oh, here everyone's slept with everybody" w.r.t. her school... it's like, thanks but I didn't really need to hear it from you T_T
    • In general, I've found that the German government is extremely concerned about not repeating the mistakes of the past. Unfortunately, they seem to choose censorship as the way to accomplish that goal time and time again. C.f. laws making it a felony to deny the Holocaust (I don't deny it, but the cones who do still deserve their free speech).
      • Yeah I agree it shouldn't be a felony. Of course to be fair it also shouldn't be a felony to deliver a swift elbow to a Holocaust denier's jaw. :3
        • Of course to be fair it also shouldn't be a felony to deliver a swift elbow to a Holocaust denier's jaw. :3

          In the U.S. at least, a swift elbow to anyone's jaw is treated as a misdemeanor assault, isn't it (as long as you don't break the jaw and the assaultee isn't a cop)?
          • I just wanna know whose goofy idea it is to strike first with an elbow rather than a fist? "Nerd fight!"

            I keed, I keed :).

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by Sciros (986030)
              Elbow hits harder and hurts the hitter less. Unless you hold your fist at the right angle and connect well you're liable to damage your hand. Far too many people learn this the hard way. So, not so much "nerd fight" as, say, "muay thai" perhaps... :-P

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by koi88 (640490)

        Unfortunately, they seem to choose censorship

        While I certainly don't agree with this kind of law, I don't this this could be called censorship. Violent games would not be forbidden. From tfa: "These may then no longer be advertised and sold to youths."
        Adults (over 18 years) may still purchase these games.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by grumbel (592662)
          ### I don't this this could be called censorship.

          Game magazines had to destroy whole charges of their magazines because they reviewed the wrong game, which could easily happen since the BPjM reviews games after their release, not before release. So at the point the review was written it might have been legal, but not when the magazine went to print some days later. The thing to keep in mind is that advertisement doesn't refer just to a commercial on TV, but to virtually any mention of the game in a positive

    • Re:This should not exist anywhere (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nuzak (959558) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:02PM (#20323275) Journal
      Meh. At least Germany wears its totalitarian nomenclature on its sleeve. In the USA, the same department would be part of the Department of Commerce, created by part 79, paragraph 34, section 5(b) of the Oil Drilling and Cuddly Puppy Recognition Act.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Shihar (153932)
        Sure, but the Department of Commerce would be lynched by the courts if they tried to even think about this level of bullshit. In fact, that is exactly what has happened. Various regulatory branches and legislators made up of in-bred idiots who have apparently never read the constitution have tried multiple times to pull such worthless crap and been shot down.

        Say what you will about the US, but that Bill of Rights is a mighty fine thing to have. It certainly has been eroded over time, but it did just fine

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by samkass (174571)
          This attitude is somewhat ironic. In Germany, content with nudity and some sex are not banned but violence is, while in the United States you're not allowed to see an exposed breast as a kid but you can buy a game in which you blow people's heads off and have their blood splatter everywhere. It's not really about the degree of regulation, but about the values of the society.

          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by koi88 (640490)

            In Germany, content with nudity and some sex are not banned but violence is

            That's exactly the point. There would be no nipplegate in Germany.
            Whenever American friends come to visit here in Germany, they are surprised about the "level of nudity" you can see in public TV. You can see completely naked women in shower gel ads in the afternoon, but nobody would be shocked about that.
            However, there is this tendency of some politicians to blame violent video games for everything that goes wrong with a youn
        • "Various regulatory branches and legislators made up of in-bred idiots who have apparently never read the constitution have tried multiple times to pull such worthless crap..."
          Ah, you're talking about George W. Bush!

          "...and been shot down."
          Oh wait, you weren't.

    • You'd think they would have learned from certain incidents back in the 1940's. Any censorship in general is bad.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Clazzy (958719)
        I think they're under the impression that censorship in the "right areas" will prevent that kind of thing from happening again. Your guess is as good as mine on this, though.
    • What are you surprised about more? The idea that a liberal country would be like this or that your understanding of liberal might be wrong?

      There have been some conservatives out for a while claiming the liberals are like that. I personally expected something like that from Germany but never expected it to go as far as it did. However, I have looked past the liberal is this and conservative it that rubbish people attempt to force us and look to what is actually going on. You see the friendly liberals wanting

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by aichpvee (631243)
        No, liberal means what we think it means. These people just aren't liberal. Anyone who thinks that Hillary Clinton is a liberal in any sense is a fool.
      • Am I saying they're OK in the US but bad in Germany? No... in fact much of my point was that Germany *is* socially progressive (in the sense you're talking about) -- more so that the US.

        So, yeah I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, or why you assume there was something self-righteous about what I stated earlier.
        • It's not that liberal vs. conservatives means to ban or not to ban. Both are equally keen on shaping society through law according to their world view. Conservatives will try to ban matierial they consider 'pornographic' and liberals would want to outlaw violence in the media. Two sides, same coin. Consquently, being suprised about such an insitiution in a 'liberal' country only shows a flawed understanding of what 'liberal' means.
          • I wasn't basing my assessment of Germany on someone else defining it as "liberal." Rather, my personal experience. Also, you are confusing "liberal" with "Democrat" in the political party sense. There's nothing "liberal" about outlawing violence in the media; that's just not how the word is defined.

      • Fuck Canada, I'm moving to Norway.
        I wonder what the best option is among English-speaking countries.

        I basically just want somewhere that won't bother me for owning a gun, hunting, playing any type of video game I want, and whose government won't bitch about porn like it's the epitome of all evil. Cheap broadband and low cost-of-living wouldn't hurt :).

  • I'm gonna coin a new word here: (Score:4, Funny)

    by Stanistani (808333) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @03:44PM (#20322511) Homepage Journal
    Nannyfascist.

  • Piss people off enough and they move (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Applekid (993327) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @03:51PM (#20322575)
    This really shouldn't be much of a surprise. If a government essentially makes your business illegal, you've got three options. Close shop, move, or go underground.

    I have empathy for the Germans, but, let it happen. Let the gaming entertainment industry leave. Let the nanny-state take over. Then pay attention as crime doesn't go down, as youths don't magically become better adjusted, as tax receipts go down due to industry lost.

    Look how long it took for Prohibition in the US to be tossed out the window. Look at what the War on Drugs STILL hasn't managed to succeed in. And, compared to gaming, these two examples are MUCH more important.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Pojut (1027544)

      Look at what the War on someDrugs STILL hasn't managed to succeed in.
      Fixed.

    • Re:Piss people off enough and they move (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Corporate Drone (316880) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @04:17PM (#20322837)
      This really shouldn't be much of a surprise. If a government essentially makes your business illegal, you've got three options. Close shop, move, or go underground.

      Agreed. However...

      I have empathy for the Germans, but, let it happen. ... Then pay attention as crime doesn't go down, as youths don't magically become better adjusted, as tax receipts go down due to industry lost.

      Ahh, yeah, right. Tax receipts will go down over this? Not likely, at least not in any measureable way.

      Look how long it took for Prohibition in the US to be tossed out the window. Look at what the War on Drugs STILL hasn't managed to succeed in. And, compared to gaming, these two examples are MUCH more important.

      Prohibition got tossed 'cause mainstream, voting Americans made it happen. The "war on drugs" isn't getting anywhere 'cause mainstream, voting Americans... don't really care about it. Gaming? Not even on the radar...

      • Tax receipts will go down over this? Not likely, at least not in any measureable way.

        If every video game publisher closed up shop in Germany, they'd lose any sales tax revenue, and any corporate taxes the companies paid.

        It might not be much, but if other media companies followed? It might sting enough. Never underestimate how much governments value other people's money.
  • game developer and makers of the much-anticipated upcoming title Crysis, Crytek, are considering leaving the country in anticipation of a new restrictive law. Said one local, "I am so filled with anticipation that my genitals have sucked up into my body cavity."

    Google it. I can't make this shit up.

  • Parental responsibility, anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by llamalad (12917) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @04:08PM (#20322739)
    Why do we need legislation to protect children?

    Isn't that what parents are for?

    Parents should know their kids and what their kids are doing.

    Outlawing lazy/ignorant parents, I think, would be much more productive than banning video games and porn.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by kalirion (728907)
      Why do we need legislation to protect children?

      Isn't that what parents are for?

      Parents should know their kids and what their kids are doing.

      You realize the same argument can be made against child molestation laws, right? I'm not trying to compare the two, just saying that you should modify your argument a bit ;)
      • Except that video games don't go stalking your children in the park. They sit there on the shelf waiting for you to buy them. They don't download and install themselves on your computer, and then hold the child down and make the child play the game. See the difference?
        • Did you bother to RTFA? This law simply forbids companies from advertising the games directly at kids ("stalking" them, to use your analogy) and shops from selling the games directly to kids (picture your own analogy). See the similarity?

          Companies are still free to develop the games and kids are still free to ask their parents to buy the game for them.
          • Actually the law would mean that any game centered around any form of violence could not be advertised for AT ALL. Neither could it be on shelfes (cause thats also advertising). We all know how keen retailers are to carry products they would have to hide from customers ...
        • > Here's a better way to accomplish the desired result- make it
          > illegal for children to possess/play such games and have
          > consequences for parents who fail their children in this regard.

          While you're at it, why not prosecute parents that fail to indoctrinate their children with the state-approved worldview or religion? Surely they are "failing their children" by letting them see or think about something the Beloved Leader doesn't approve. Yes, let's turn parenting into the KGB.

          If my kids want to

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sumdumass (711423)
      Most parent don't know how to be a parent. And some who think they do never become a proper parent. It is because we have a generation of kids raised by kids attempting to raise kids. They are just burdens and tax write offs now. Whenever someone offer to take part of the parenting role away from parent the majority of them say "OK, less I have to do now" or they had never even though about it long enough to know someone should have been doing it.

      The guberment needs to raise your kids because it takes a vil

    • False premises, false logic, false conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Rui del-Negro (531098) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @09:23PM (#20325447) Homepage
      Unless you give up your job and homeschool your kids, it's kind of hard to know (let alone control) what they're doing 24/7. And I'm not sure that's desirable, either.

      I'm sure you wouldn't like to see explosives manufacturers (for example) targeting your 8-year-old kids. Buy a stick of dynamite, throw it at your friends, it'll be a blast! (add footage of cartoon character covered in soot, but still in one piece, and then everbody laughs).

      Likewise, some people think that certain kinds of games (or certain kinds of movies, powertools, guns, junk food, industrial chemicals, cigarettes, liquor, etc.) should not be advertised or sold directly to children. It's a crazy notion, I know...

      Your talk about "banning videogames" suggests that you don't know what this law says, and didn't even bother to RTFA (in fact, it looks like you didn't even read the fucking summary, let alone the fucking article). The law doesn't "ban" any games and doesn't even forbid children from playing those games. All it says is that the games can't be advertised or sold directly to children. If your kids want to play it, they can simply ask you to buy it for them.

      So you see, this law is exactly what you were asking for: it "outlaws ignorant parents" by making sure they are informed, and forces them to make a conscious decision.

      What Crytek is doing here is called "getting free publicity". Their "threat to leave the country" is nonsensical, for two reasons:

      1. The place where the game is developed makes no difference; the law applies to all games marketed and sold in Germany. They could move to Mars and that wouldn't make any difference.

      2. All this law does is force kids to buy the games through their parents. Is Crytek's target market "kids who buy and play games without telling their parents"? Even if it is (which I find hard to believe), there's still #1.

      • If that's the law then it sounds fair enough to me.

        Just like the many other laws preventing minors from doing/getting stuff unless their parents/guardians approve.
      • Actually, the parent's wouldn't be allowed to let their kids play such games. Secondly, the law prohibits advertisments so no TV spots, no posters, no standup figures, no games convention booth and no copies on retailers shelfes. This might harm them, don't you think?
        I'd act the same way: why the hell pay the high taxes if the country effectivly prevents you from selling you product?
  • Nintendo Europe is also headquartered in Germany (I've been to their offices; it's weird, because they're on an industrial estate on the outskirts of this little village in the middle of nowhere) - what happens if this creeping nannyism spreads to include killing creatures with a sword or a bow (Zelda) or shooting aliens (Metroid) or jumping on turtles (Mario)?
  • Hitler played too many PS1 games back in Austria, look what happened to him! War and violence is a new phenomenon, lets burn everyone at the stake till the issue goes away. Oh and for people surprised germany has so many totalitarian laws, the funniest part is they create them to counter Nazism, apparently strict over reaching laws will stamp this issue out, oh, the delicious irony :)

  • Crytek leaving Germany because of a law prohibiting them to advertise and sell violent games directly to kids ? That would give the expression "political refugee" a whole new sense.

    Seriously, we already have had examples of that kind of laws. I can't remember now in which country it has been prohibited to sell and advertise some product to minors, causing all the industry, for that reason, to emmigrate, staff and employees and their families. The product was alcoholic beverages, I believe...

    I bet that

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by KDR_11k (778916)
      1. The censoring went down as time passed. Try Company of Heroes, it has bloody, severed limbs flying everywhere and its rated 16.
      2. Customs doesn't give a shit what games you are importing. Well, unless it's Manhunt or something because that's banned. They don't care about indexed or unrated games though.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.