Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Games Government Entertainment Politics

Crytek Considers Leaving Germany Over Game Law 124

Posted by Zonk
from the before-they-turn-up-the-heat dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Crytek Considers Leaving Germany Over Game Law

Comments Filter:
  • Old news? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @04:34PM (#20322417)
    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Jack Thompson is furiously smoking a crack pipe and muttering to himself in german about the nature of violence...

      If Crytek actually *does* change location due to legislation like this, I think that *IS* news. Otherwise.. meh.

    • by KDR_11k (778916)
      It's quite possible that they're just considering it again.
  • by Sciros (986030) on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @04:38PM (#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.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      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
        • by KDR_11k (778916)
          What better marketing is there than saying "you're not allowed to have this"?
        • by ultranova (717540)

          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...

          I guess that's one way of making the job of a teacher more appealing ;).

        • Welcome to the US in the 1970's.

          God! The 80's sucked! :p

        • Last year I spent a couple of nights sleeping in the same place as German choir which was on tour. Everybody was just walking around naked the whole time.

    • 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).
      • by Sciros (986030)
        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
        • by kalirion (728907)
          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)?
          • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

            by ShaneThePain (929627)
            Screaming at someone is considered simple assault in the US, I would know. Did 32 hours of community service for that bullshit.
          • by MBGMorden (803437)
            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
      • by aichpvee (631243)
        Freedom of speech is how we've gotten into most of the big social messes that we have in the last 30 years. Personally I don't think people should have the right to teach ridiculous lies to children so that they grow up thinking that the truth is absurd. Felony seems a little light for these kind of people.
      • 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.
        • by KDR_11k (778916)
          It's a bit hard to buy such a game because putting them on shelves where minors can see them counts as advertising and many major chains won't carry something they can't put on shelves. Indie game stores will probably work, though as well as rental shops since those have 18+ sections anyway.
          • Not to question your credentials (I don't know if you're german) but are you sure this applies to germany? I live in belgium (where porn is regulated in a similar way) and it is perfectly legal to put porn on the top shelf above a bunch of video games, for instance.
            • by KDR_11k (778916)
              Germany's laws differ. I'm not sure about porn but putting indexed games on shelves is pretty much illegal. It may be allowed but noone wants to risk it.
        • 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
    • by nuzak (959558) on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @06:02PM (#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.

        • by nuzak (959558)
          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.

          Shot down again and again and again and again and again and ....

          Eventually, they get some kind of "compromise" that sticks, but it always pushes in their direction. Then they start over again.
    • by icedcool (446975)
      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.
      • by KDR_11k (778916)
        Or they learned that where there's a will there's a way and all the anti-censorship laws in the world won't stop a dictator from censoring things.
    • by sykopomp (1133507)
      The US isn't the only country that's suffering a conservative revival. Even in France, the cons are making a big fuss (and taking over the gov.) It seems to be a pretty widespread phenomenon in the western world atm. At least good ol' Scandinavia is still liberal and awesome. Fuck Canada, I'm moving to Norway.
      • by MBGMorden (803437)

        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 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 :).
          Uhm... Texas?
        • All English speaking countries are a pretty bad bunch on this. I'd recommend learning another language. But if you MUST choose an English speaking country, I think New Zealand probably meets the most of your above criteria - just stay out of Auckland. Preferably somewhere much further south like Dunedin is good for the "do what you want as long as you're not hurting anyone" attitude.

          (please note: attitude, not law. The law isn't too bad there, but there's still some pretty screwed up ones)
          (second note:
        • by sykopomp (1133507)
          Scandinavia is basically English-speaking. Pretty much everyone in the cities is fluent in English, and they do a lot of business in English. I'm not sure about Norway, but I know Finland (aka Winland) actually has some local TV stations that broadcast in English with Finnish (or maybe it was Swedish...) subtitles. Plus, after 2-3 years living in a country and being immersed in a language, it's not too hard to learn it fluently.
    • by sumdumass (711423)
      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.
    • oh and the banning of ww2 models with swaticas on has been so sucsessful in curbing neo nazi parties. BTW Crytek come to Bedford in the Uk its a nice town near to london 35 min on train (ill get the local MP to open your new offices :-)
      • While the UK nanny state has not emulated the banning of games yet, I think it is quite possible they might do so in the future. In some regards, the UK is already worse than Germany.
        I think it would be smarter for Crytek to do what they hinted at and make their office in Budapest the new headquarters ;-)
  • by Stanistani (808333) on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @04:44PM (#20322511) Homepage Journal
    Nannyfascist.
  • by Applekid (993327) on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @04:51PM (#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.
    • by Corporate Drone (316880) on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @05:17PM (#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...

      • by Khaed (544779)
        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.
    • by yoprst (944706)
      Then pay attention as crime doesn't go down, as youths don't magically become better adjusted
      This (paying attention) never happens
      What really happens is that after "major advancments in protecting our youth" "we need to put more effort" because crime doesn't go down and youths don't magically become better adjusted. Nanny-state is like gas, it expands unless confined by sitizens. It's a form of power. They can't kill you and rape your wife, but still they can decide what you can or cannot do. That's satis
    • And the interesting (and quite unsurprising thing) is: in 2005 more germans left their country than ever (since WW2, that is).
      145,000 people. And those are merely the ones who *say* that they're leaving - an estimate 250,000 people are simply leaving without comment. Over half of them are under 30.

      2006 there were more. The 2007 numbers will be even higher.

      Germany is not particularly evil (I know, I live here). The politicians are morons like everywhere else, so this doesn't count either.
      But they're a) amazi
  • 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.
    • by notamac (750472)
      I feel spent, like a man who is forced to wear his genitals around his neck like a pendant.
  • by llamalad (12917) on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @05:08PM (#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 ;)
      • 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 ;)

        I realize that your point was likely directed at the statements "Why do we need legislation to protect children?" and "Isn't that what parents are for?". But I believe you chose a poor comparison (yes, I know you didn't mean to compare the two).

        Child molestation (and child abuse in general) is a very damaging crime with far and wide reaching consequences. Child molestation is often perpetrated by someone close to the family and quite often the commission of the act is done very subtly and the revelat

      • by CastrTroy (595695)
        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.
          • by DerWulf (782458)
            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 ...
            • Cigarettes can't be advertised in most places but just about every coffeshop throughout Europe sells them. Porn can't be advertised, either, but the porn industry makes more money than Hollywood. So what was your point...?

              And I believe the keyword in your first sentence is "centered". Is it too much to ask that games have a plot and some gameplay beyond pressing the trigger and killing anything that moves?

              Germany has some really stupid "anti-violence" laws (which led to silly things such as changing the col
              • by DerWulf (782458)
                Listen, you wouldn't know. Trust me: the current law already limits advertisment for M-Rated (M-Rated is much easier to get in GER though) games. It explicitly states that the product can't be showcased either. Basically you can not put anything up in the public that even mentions the games name. M-Rating is a death sentence for any game in Germany. The proposed law would extend this treatment to ALL games that focus on violence (C&C, HL, WoW etc etc pp.). The current violent game law is already much to
      • by llamalad (12917)
        You cannot possibly equate publishing Doom with accosting children. That's absolutely ridiculous and more than a little offensive.

        Legislation is no substitute for parents' being actively involved in their childrens' lives. If you don't want your children to play violent games, don't buy such things for them. If you're concerned that they'll play them at a friend's house, ensure that your childs' friends' parents' values are similar to your own. YOU are responsible for raising your children.

        Here's a better w
        • > 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
          • by llamalad (12917)
            Sarcasm doesn't come through well over the 'net.

            My "better idea" was meant to show how ridiculous the situation is. It's intended to put responsibility where it should be (on parents) but also points out the degree to which it restricts parents in how they raise their children
            • How does requiring parents to know which games their children play "resctrict the way they can raise their children"? Unless your definition of "raise" means "let them do anything they want and not even be informed about it".

              If anything, forcing parents to act as intermediaries between their children and commercial corporations will force them (and, eventually, the corporations) to act more responsibly.

              I'm strongly opposed to any law that bans or criminalises access to any kind of information, but the issue
    • 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
    • by Rui del-Negro (531098) on Wednesday August 22, 2007 @10:23PM (#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.

      • by TheLink (130905)
        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.
      • by DerWulf (782458)
        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?
        • gt; Actually, the parent's wouldn't be allowed to let their kids play such games.

          Can you please post a link to the part of the law that says that?

          gt; the law prohibits advertisments so no TV spots,

          TV spots would probably be allowed after a certain time of day, as happens with ads for alcoholic drinks, for example. The current draft of the law does not forbid advertising; it forbids advertising targetted at minors. I don't remeber any TV spots for FarCry, anyway, so even if they couldn't run TV spots at
          • by DerWulf (782458)
            I'm sorry but you have no idea of what you are talking about. This isn't meant as a personal attack but you obviously don't know how the german jugendschutz (and laws thereof) operate.
            I'll just debunk your first point and would ask you to get to know the actual law before arguing about it:
            From the current JuSchG (law for protection of the young)
            http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/juschg/__12.htm l [gesetze-im-internet.de]

            (3) Bildträger, die nicht oder mit "Keine Jugendfreigabe" nach 14 Abs. 2 von der obersten Landesbeh

            • I really wish that some one would mod the parent post up. Reading the posts attached to this article, I see a lot of people just don't understand German law.

              It kind of reminds me of the people who don't understand that when Britain bans a game or a movie, it is actually banned. They think because you can't legally do that in the U. S. that its just some kind of extra restriction. Then I usually have to bring up Video Nasties, etc...

              Also, the people who are for this law, probably don't have to worry.

      • by nefertari (240766)

        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.
        No, the new law which some politicians propose would also forbid to make such games in germany.
        • In every country, "some politicians" will propose very stupid things. But this is what the Heise article says:

          "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."
          • by grumbel (592662)
            ### If this is what the law does (limit advertising and sale of violent games),

            Germany *already* has laws that forbid sales to minors (USK ratings are: everybody, age 6, age 12, age 16, age 18). Germany also has the BPjM, which 'indexes' games, which not only restricts sales to minors, but also forbids any kind of advertisement, advertisment here has a very broad definition, meaning basically every mentioning of the game in a positive context, so you can't review the games in a game magazine and even mentio
            • What the article says is that "The IMK had decided on a production and distribution ban for violent computer games [...but...] the Federal Ministry of Family Affairs is presently working on a less drastic draft of the law which would make "violence glorifying" and "violence dominated" games indexed by the BPjM, meaning these could no longer be advertised and sold to youths".

              In other words, only "violence dominated" and "violence glorifying" games (which I take to mean things like GTA, deathmatch games, etc.
              • by grumbel (592662)
                The thing is that "violence glorifying" games are already banned. Both BPjM and USK are there and doing exactly that and have been doing so for quite some years, in the case of the BPjM decades. This new draft seems try to ban "violence dominated" games as well (whatever that would be, since it kind of applies to almost all games), which basically means that some politicians, who have absolutely no clue what they are talking about, want to overrule the decisions made by both the BPjM and the USK on what ga
                • I don't think I've ever seen schoolgirls in CS, but I admit a lot of players behave that way. :)

                  But I have seen the effects of CS addiction on some kids, so that is one game that I definitely think parents should be required to "approve". If they have to be the ones to buy the game, then at least they can't say they "didn't know" and that's "it's not their responsibility".

                  Anyway, the Heise article states that the current draft of the law will only forbid advertising and selling to children. Is that not true
                  • by grumbel (592662)
                    ### Anyway, the Heise article states that the current draft of the law will only forbid advertising and selling to children. Is that not true?

                    That might be true, I haven't actually looked at the current draft. The point however is that we are *already* banning games. We have mandatory age ratings and even stricter bans (no advertisement, no public sales). All the child protection is *already* in place. So any change isn't adding any child protection at all, its just meant to go one step closer to completly
                    • That might be true, I haven't actually looked at the current draft. The point however is that we are *already* banning games. We have mandatory age ratings and even stricter bans (no advertisement, no public sales). All the child protection is *already* in place. So any change isn't adding any child protection at all

                      Again, the impression I get from the article is that the new draft is less restrictive than the current law, no? It says "The Conference of Interior Ministers (IMK) of the countries had unanim
                    • by grumbel (592662)
                      ### Again, the impression I get from the article is that the new draft is less restrictive than the current law, no?

                      No, its only less restrictive then what the crazy politicians wants, but its more restrictive then the current law, since it tries to also ban "violence dominated" games instead of just "violence glorifying" onces (what exactly those terms mean in terms of games I have no idea).
      • by KDR_11k (778916)
        It's still a retarded law that's only introduced because they want to look like they're doing something (yeah, bringing back the Reich!) while the laws are already set up to prevent minors from getting violent videogames. All they're doing now is try to get more games forced under counters and into 18+ sections because the authorities doing that part aren't willing to obey every whim of the govt and don't just file a game as 18+ becasue some retarded wannabe Nazi needs to get some more voter support from th
    • by grumbel (592662)
      ### Why do we need legislation to protect children?

      Why should we make it extra hard for parents to do their job? Simple restriction of games to minors is perfectly fine to me, it doesn't take any power out of the hands of the parents, instead it gives them some more, since all the possibly inappropriate sales have to go through them. Really nothing wrong with that and even a lot of retailers in the USA seem to agree, since they also try to enforce ESRB ratings, even without being required from the state.

      Whe
  • First I want to mention that I consider games as art. Many people put much effort into the production process with graphics, sound and gameplay. Each game is individual (has its special character). I am German and I won't buy any games in Germany that were originally produced for adult gamers. Why? Because they all have been changed until "child-safe". Wtf should I do with such a game? I give you one example... one of the worst things I've ever seen. Remember the game Commandos [wikipedia.org]? Sometimes when you want to
    • 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.
    • by grumbel (592662)
      The censoring is done by the publishers/developers themselves not some government organization, if stuff looks stupid, they simply did a bad job. Censorship done right can actually be pretty cool at times, the robots in Prototector are for example way cooler then the simple Rambo look-a-likes in Contra.
  • 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

A penny saved is a penny to squander. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...