Illinois Videogame Law Moves Forward 192
The ongoing trend of legislating the sale of video games moves forward. Gamasutra has news on the Illinois law currently moving through the legislature, which apparently has "overwhelming support". From the Illinois debate: "An industry that is making so much money selling these things to your children is dealing with things like decapitation, defecation on people. There's vivid pictures of nudity. It's an industry that needs help being policed..."
since when... (Score:3, Funny)
can anyone tell me if there are really any american games with this sort of thing, or if it's just FUD.
Re:since when... (Score:2)
Re:since when... (Score:2)
Nah, he's just sitting there with his pants down looking at the newspaper.
Now, if you check out the ending for Duke Nukem: Land Of The Babes (Playstation), there's a line of babes lining up at the White House to get into the Lincoln Bedroom with him since he was the only guy left alive to keep the human race going. It was a Bill Clinton moment to be sure.
Re:since when... (Score:5, Insightful)
There are a lot of bad [somethingawful.com] games out there. But then, there are millions of games out there. By the same token, I don't have anything morally against making parents come in and buy games for their kids if they want them to have them. I've known far too many people in the retail sector who have told kids no, and been yelled at by the parent for stopping their kid from buying, say, Manslaughter. Inevitably, the parent then comes back the following day and freaks out on the poor underpaid associate for selling such filth to their kid.
I think the generation which preceeded ours has certain expectations about cartoons and videogames which ours does not. To them, more mature cartoons or videogames is like Jack Daniels flavored breastmilk. Or black leather studded diapers. In exactly the same way that movies were seen as kid's stuff at the turn of the century, so too is videogames the realm of kids. And therefore anything that gets released in a videogame is marketed at kids, and all of that stuff that you see in videogames is people trying to mess up your children.
It's a different perspective. While I don't disagree with the idea of restricting the sale of certain videogames to minors, I do disagree with the perspective.
Re:since when... (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Interesting)
And there are a lot more "underage" gamers than underage smokers or drinkers.
Games are not for kids.
Games, like most things, are for people mature enough to handle it. I can play Halo and enjoy the strategy without going trigger-happy and without looking for a game with more gore. (In fact, much as I enjoy Halo, I find games with gratuitous gore very distasteful.)
Surveys have shown that the vast majority of gamers are over 18 years of age.
Ehheh. Right. Surveys show that the vast majority of people are over 18 years of age. I mean, you're comparing what, a group from roughly 10 or 12 to 18 with a group from 19 to who-knows-where? Of course you'll get more in the latter.
Is there a survey that shows that there is a vastly greater percentage of gaming adults compared to the percentage of gaming teenagers? I'm pretty sure that a randomly-selected teenager is far more likely to play video games than a randomly-selected adult.
The fact that games contain elements which are distasteful in ordinary society is no big surprise when you stop thinking about games as entertainment for kids and start thinking about them as an escape from reality for adults.
Except for one thing: lots of developers treat games as entertainment for kids. And lots of teenagers like this kind of escape from reality, and are mature enough to handle tasteful games....
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Right right. But what if I want those games? I probably misread your comment, but it seems that you want to ban Mario and Spyro so that you can get your games. Which is no different...except that it's my games that are banned.
Games are not just for kids.
Thanks for adding the word "just". That wasn't in your original comment. That's all I was basically asking for.
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
The problem with that (from my POV, which is of course biased) is that a divided or unsure ratings board will automatically choose not to act. If by default that means not giving authorization, fewer games will be authorized. If by default that means giving a high-age rating, games will tend not to have high age requirements unless necessary.
It's human nature. People prefer not to have made a goo
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
This is an issue of tail wagging. The only people who will be bothered by this are the ones who shouldn't be playing these games to begin with.
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is that in practice, any certification costs money. This means that any game developed by nonprofits in general will not be certified. It would be a lot of work, and quite likely costly, for a OSS developer to ensure that his game was certified according to each of dozens of different classification-boards.
And if you think large groups of countries will agree on one common standard, one common certification board, you're dreaming. That's not the case for movies and wouldn't be the case for games.
Practical upshot ? You can't legally sell a Linux-distro to a minor in Germany. In practice it's done all the time, because the law gets ignored for things which aren't mainly games, and which are obviously not very objectionable anyway.
But in principle, you'll have to strip ALL games (including solitaire, mahjong, minesweeper and tuxracer) from a Linux-distro, or jump trough expensive and time-consuming hoops if you want to legally sell your linux-distro to minors in Germany.
17 year-old linux-users aren't exactly *that* rare.
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Any you know what? This shouldn't just apply to games. We need to protect kids from pornographic images and text as well. Anyone who publishes a magazine or newspaper must restrict it to 18 and over unless they first get it approved by the ratings board. In fact lets imprison you for publishing your post on here without first getting it approved by a ratings board.
And don't think there's some real fundamental
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Informative)
I think that's simple and straight forward, but your government (and mine even more so) do not understand that because they think of games as being solely for children. Here in Australia we don't even have an 18+ rating for games. We also don't allow unrated games on the shelves. The result is that the vast majority of people who play games (which, as I said, is mostly over the age of 18) are saddled with kiddie junk. The few companies that actually try to make games for adults have their games effectively banned from my country (as they are refused a classification and unrated games are banned from the shelves). So think yourself lucky that you have any adult rated games there at all.
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:5, Informative)
The parent also didn't say that games should be banned for people under 18. The idea is that if a company wants people under 18 to be able to play the game, they have to submit it for review.
Review boards wouldn't be necessary for most games, as they are obviously targetted to adults and could go straight to the stores with a rating of 18+. If a game is meant for a younger audience (or for all ages), it can be submitted and reviewed and then deemed appropriate. This also has the effet of stopping violent games from "slipping thru the cracks."
Seems pretty reasonable to me
-B
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
Except for the fact that most games are not intended just for people 18 and over. The games intended for that audience, the current M and AO rated game
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
The reviewers need to play the games thoroughly, and some games like 200hrs. Game companies should be smart by keeping out all the gore and blood till later levels when the reviewer might have given up by then.
Games will not be released until it has been reviewed. Bang, you will need to hire hundreds of people to review thousands of games. And the reviewers should be paid by a "
Re:Here's my suggestion (Score:2)
No one said that people under 18 didn't read. Survey's have shown that the vast majority of readers are adults.
No one is saying that books and magazines and websites should be banned for people under 18. The idea is that if you want people under 18 to be able to read your post, you have to submit it for review.
Review boards woul
Errrrr (Score:5, Interesting)
I play a _lot_ of games, and I'm pretty sure there's no game out there where you can squat and take a cleveland steamer on someone.
Sure, you can pee on people in Postal 2, but that's surely what they aren't implying, or they would have used the word urinate.
No matter how you slice it, the government's (local and national) obsession with controlling what media our children see is unhealthy. Hell, I don't even know how any lawmakers got it into their head that this is somehow important.
Re:Errrrr (Score:5, Interesting)
Another crew has a pic of poop in a urinal (WTF people) as their spray.
So, yes, people do deficate on each other.
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
If there were a game where the game designers actually put the ability to defecate on someone into the game *as sold*, I could see the point of the objectors, but I've never heard of one.
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
That's probably in reference to one Counter-Strike level that has a toliet with a turd in it. Shoot the turd, the toliet explodes. Bathroom humor. Heh-heh...
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
It's worse: Your monster can be trained to throw poop and eat poop. Sometimes it learns it on its own without training.
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
I wouldn't recommend Duke Nukem for kids, and I'm all for classification instead of outright censorship. If you're over 18 and you can buy any game you want to, where's the bad? If you're a kid and you want to play a game that has sex, graphic violence, nudity, whatever in it, perhaps that should be up to your parents to decide whether
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
But it would make a fun sequel to Katamari Damacy (sp?). You start as a tiny beetle, who lays tiny little turds, which you try to dump on ants. And you transfer through different stages -- you become a mouse who dumps on beetles, a bird who soils statues, a rabbit who lets people slip on tiny marbles, etc. -- until you reach the final goal: you become a huge mammoth who comple
Re:Errrrr (Score:5, Insightful)
Also worth noting for its oddity value, there are exactly 18 games intended only for people over 18.
The reason that congreess people are so up-in-arms about this is because there are 3 sides to this issue. Pro regulation: You think that video game violence is dispicable and the sexual content is deplorable, even though you've never played a video game nor have you ever seen any of this content you're so enraged at. Anti regulation: You think that the industry is doing a good job of regulating itself. You play games and if you have children, you monitor what they play and consider the ESRB ratings before making any purchase. Apathetic: They're just games... who cares?
What makes lawmakers so fervent about this is that the type of people who are for regulation call them and write them constantly to make sure it happens. People who are anti-regulation write reactionary articles and either post them online or send them to the lawmakers, but since the lawmaker doesn't want to look like a "flip flopper," they refuse to change their stance. And the vast majority of people are apathetic on the subject, so even though they really aren't calling for regulation, nobody notices because they're not saying anything at all.
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
You're just not playing these games with the right people. Oh, and BTW, it's not a videogame (unless someone's filming it)...
Re:Errrrr (Score:2)
Because it can get on the news and because they can say that their opponent SUPPORTS it because they aren't trying to pass a law against it.
-
It all went down hill... (Score:4, Funny)
No more than other media... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
Lesson on how to succeed:
If you fail, try again. Repeat.
I've worked for 5-6 failed businesses before getting sick of it. I am on my 3rd company and it will succeed or fail. Eit
Re:No more than other media... (Score:4, Insightful)
This will prevent 13yo boys from giggling each other to death while playing Vampire: Bloodlines.
And it should be that way.
People need to understand that parents cannot possible watch their kids 100% of the time. It just isn't feasable. The best we can do is to teach them well and hope they make the right choices when we aren't around.
Unfortunately, not every parent teaches their kid properly (whatever that is) and peer-pressure is very strong.
Remove cigiratte laws and kids will smoke.
Remove CD warning labels and kids will listen to fiddicent singing about shooting 2pack and fucking his mom.
Remove MPAA ratings and kids will end up watching violent movies.
Why not limit the avalibility of HL2 to prevent 13yo boys from fragging each other?
I know most people say that watching something or doing it virtually will not cause it to happen in real life. I tend to agree.
Most kids will never shoot an AWP into a crowd. But how many of them will call women "bitches" and "hos"? Kids may never do battle with the legions of hell, but how many will think of shooting a gun as "cool"?
A good quote (badly paraphrased) is: Thoughts lead to actions. Actions lead to habits. Habits build your character.
This law should prevent kids from playing violent games in the same way that it prevents them from seeing a violent movie. It won't be 100% effective, but it'll help when the parents can't be there. And this law will never prevent you from buying violent games, cigirattes, girls gone wild, or anything else that adults generally enjoy.
Re:No more than other media... (Score:3, Informative)
I used to not put a whole lot of weight into the ratin
Re:No more than other media... (Score:3, Insightful)
I still don't see the need for a law, however, any more than we have a law enforcing PG-13 movie ratings. Unless this is purely focused on X-rated games, of which there are only a handful.
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
Yes, movies and music are regulated.... but the movie ratings and the parental advisory labels are all generated from within the industry, not from the government. The act of peer review allows for a quality assessment of the product and a determination on the character by a group of people who are k
Regulation, but not like this (Score:2)
Re:Regulation, but not like this (Score:2)
Then these kids go play football and try the same tackles and say the same trash talk.
Fighting games speak for themselves.
Racing games generally do not emphasize violence to win. There may be some "rubbing" in racing, but most of the races you see on TV are clean. As l
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
If the market would push for good internal controls, then lawmakers would keep out.
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
No laws prohibit kids from viewing movies. Yes, I started from the end, but it looked like the main idea.
>This will prevent 13yo boys from giggling each other to death while playing Vampire: Bloodlines.
Yeah, that's right. Giggling is a no-no.
>Remove cigiratte laws and kids will smoke.
Of course, because with these laws kids don't smoke....
>but how many will think of
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
I don't know about that - when I was kid and they introduced labeling it just made it easier to figure out what music would be good for pissing your parents off.
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
Well at least your honest. There are not many people will the balls to come right out and advocate government engage in thought control.
By the way, you should be in prison for making your post available to those under 18. It was not first rated for under 18 approval. It could have contained explicit sexual text, or even a link to Goatse. It does not matter that your post did not contain any
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
Retailers should be able to carry whatever they want. However, it the package is marked "T for Teen", they shouldn't sell it to a 12yo. If it's "M", they shouldn't sell it to anyone under 18.
And no, if you are American and you love liberty, you shouldn't shop WalMart. WalMart forces their suppliers to offshore to China so they can reduce costs. They encourage wage reductions and overlook atrocious working conditions. WalMart means fewer American jobs,
Re:No more than other media... (Score:2)
In my home town, a retailer was arrested for selling "Luke Skywalker" CDs.
Today, it's much better. The industry stamps labels on it's merchendise and the retailers can choose to carry it or not.
People can shoose to buy it, but they have to meet age requirements. Parents who buy it (hopefully) see the warnings.
The games industry is in chaos now. There are reccomendations, but no enforcement. Even the reccomendation
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:peer 2 peer (Score:2, Interesting)
PS: Im under 18 and in IL
Re:peer 2 peer (Score:2)
Just curious.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's about time... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
I think the biggest problem in American education today is that kids expected to be handed everything, they don't want to work for anything. I paid my own way through college, and 30+ hour weeks of work while doing 18 credits of CS and engineering really blew, but I am glad that I did it. It REALLY imprinted on me
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
I've never had a kid under 15 try to buy a Mature rated title from me. Most no we wouldn't sell it to them anyways as part of our corporate policy to look 'family oriented'. Now above 15, well
Re:It's about time... (Score:2)
Alcohol is a serious drug and it can cause serious problems. Likewise, some explicit material just isn't right for people under 18 to get involved in
Getting my goat (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"for the children" (Score:2)
I won't support censorship "for the children".
I will support classification "for the children".
Censorship removes your right to choice.
Classification doesn't, although you might have to wait a little while if you're underage.
This topic is mostly about classification, not censorship. So what's the problem? RW - you're under 18, aren't ya?
"for the children" != evil (Score:2)
"for the children" - It's assumed that children do not have enough experience or psychological development to be able to make well reasoned decisions. Therefore, the government sets up some safeguards so that children aren't allowed to make certain decisions legally (i.e.
Re:"for the children" != evil (Score:2)
If someone can talk me through a restriction on media "for the children" logically, and with clear proof and valid arguments backing them, then I will support their position. But the Il legislators aren't doing
defecation! (Score:2)
WHY DID NO ONE INFORM ME OF THIS EARLIER?
Nudity? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Nudity? (Score:2)
Re:Nudity? (Score:2)
GoatWagon sounds good. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice knee-jerk, I give it a 9.5. (Score:2)
Rob
Re:Nice knee-jerk, I give it a 9.5. (Score:2, Insightful)
This reminds me... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This reminds me... (Score:3, Funny)
I don't understand... (Score:4, Insightful)
No! (Score:2, Insightful)
Damn whiny dems.
I have 10 bucks that says this crap actually passes and wastes our precious $ on its way to the Supreme Court, which of course, will over turn it.
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Illinois Congress, meet Foresight.
Re:No! (Score:2)
My parents couldn't keep me from sneaking out of my bedroom when everyone was asleep to catch some boobies on Cinemax. My parents couldn't prevent me from listening to explicit songs on my walkman. My parents couldn't prevent any manner of material I was exposed to through my friends as well.
There is a limit to the amount of policing a parent can do. Especially in the case of young adults and teenagers who have a need for privacy. Instilling good values
Patheitc (Score:5, Interesting)
If this law was extended to cover movies, music and books also it would essenically (sp?) outlaw the sale of the Bible or Star Wars films to minors. Pretty pathetic.
Re:Patheitc (Score:2)
Likewise, there are some who believe that Star Wars is becoming less appropriate for not only children, but for people in genereal.
Re:Patheitc (Score:2)
Becasue we have these wonderful examples of democracys that work, and work well. How many of the most prosperous and least oppresive countries are democratic? Name one first world dictatorship today. Bastardizing democracy is outweighted by _real_ democracy, and you'd h
Re:Patheitc (Score:2)
Damn, I was all fired up to fight this horrible stupid evil law, and then someone has to come along and point out such a tempting side effect. Yes, it's still a horrible evil stupid law, but man.... that would almost make it worth it.
Oh, and no one go ranting about Christian bashing either. I'm sure the Koran and Torah and the rest contain comparable sexual and/or violent content. They'd all be available on the same rack, right next to Playboy and Hustler and all the other Mat
Re:Patheitc (Score:5, Informative)
My evil plan... (Score:2)
Thank You, O Wise Legislators (Score:4, Funny)
These kids need to learn that if you want to commit acts of violence for no good reason whatsoever, you coerce Congress to declare war on a random middle-eastern country. That's just the way it's done, damnit!
So I'm glad some legislature finally realizes the importance of applying state-sanctioned blanket age restrictions on videogames. Because it's well-known that everyone is magically at the exact same level of maturity when they reach some arbitrary age, and I sure as hell know that my state's laws kept me from getting any R-rated movies - or beer - before my time.
Re:Thank You, O Wise Legislators (Score:3, Funny)
Hospitals were all occupied by people who looked like accordions! It was a real mess.
Fortunately, Illinois legislators passed the Scwewy Wabbit bill and all kids seen watching cartoons are shot on sight. They haven't had a problem since.
yet another example... (Score:3, Insightful)
But I seem to have digressed slightly. If parents have a problem with something, then they should police their own kids; they don't need to force their beliefs on the general public.
shock (Score:4, Insightful)
Witch hunt
This is nothing more than a simple ploy by some politicians to push ahead on the morals front
If you don't want your children to play these games then please do so parenting and don't let everyone else suffer from increasingly restrictive laws due to your moral sence of misplaced duty.
Most of us here played games as violent as these when we were kids , The graphics may not have been as good , though kids have great imaginations. I turned out OK,
Most of the other people here turned out OK.
Violent games don't make violent people
go to a maximum security prison and asked some of the inmates about their childhood
maybe this is good (Score:3, Interesting)
So...lets ban all violent video games, music with naughty words, and any images of the human body that show more skin then an Afghani wearing a burqua! For every prohibition, you create an underground. The more underground our economy is, they less the corporate glutons profit from it and the more average citizens learn to be rebels and freedom fighters.
Re:maybe this is good (Score:3, Interesting)
2. A society like the one you speak of would produce people as ill-informed, immature, and reactionary as you are, judging from your comment. Keep believing that all authority is "fascist." See where that gets you. Parents, churches, and governments are imperfect, sometimes painfully so, but don't tell me that "Love thy neighbor," "All men are created equal," and the l
ummm... no (Score:2)
Re:ummm... no (Score:2)
Um... no. (Score:3, Insightful)
Enron needed to be policed. Spam needs to be policed. Telemarketers need to be policed. Any industry that relies on fraud, embezzlement or harassment to turn a profit needs to be policed. And, as the video game industry does not (yet) fall into any of these categories...
Oh, and one more industry should be policed: politics. If the state legislators in Springfield have this much free time on their hands, perhaps its time to shorten the length of the legislative session in Illinois.
Industry needs? (Score:2)
This is how the tempermental brats are born; not killers or rapists, but annoying, obnoxious, I-want-it-my-way tempermental brats who were never spanked in their life.
Instead of making these stupid laws that will keep the status quo (parents buying the games for kids), let's have a new required night
Just Illinois Politics (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing to see here folks! This is just Illinois politics. The governor has been a profound disappointment here and is now scrambling for easy targets to win reelection. They all know this law won't stand constitutional muster.
This is just a waste of taxpayer money. [proliphus.com]
As if young kids didn't pirate enough (Score:3, Insightful)
dangerous games (Score:2, Insightful)
The big question is... (Score:2)
If they are following the ESRB ratings, I have no problems with that.
But, when a government decides to regulate games in a way that is outside of and/or different (perhaps more strict than) the ESRB system, thats when I have a problem. If some politition who only knows about through what the idiot moral conservatives who are ruining the country have told him
The land of the free? (Score:2)
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Re:Please No (Score:2)
Re:Parents can't distribute either? (Score:4, Informative)
Sec. 12A-20. Affirmative defenses. In any prosecution
21 arising under this Article, it is an affirmative defense:
22 (1) that the defendant was a family member of the minor for
23 whom the game was purchased. "Family member" for the purpose of
24 this Section, includes a parent, sibling, grandparent, aunt,
25 uncle, or first cousin;
Of course the definition of "Violence" is way too vague... I guess Madden or any boxing game is "Mature" game because it allows serious physical harm to another human being
30 (e) "Violent" video games include depictions of or
31 simulations of human-on-human violence in which the player
32 kills, seriously injures, or otherwise causes serious physical
33 harm to another human, including but not limited to depictions
1 of death, dismemberment, amputation, decapitation, maiming,
2 disfigurement, mutilation of body parts, or rape.