Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Entertainment Games

Government Love and Hate for Video Games 42

Posted by Zonk from the get-with-the-programming dept.
hapwned writes "Jason Della Rocca, the executive director of the International Game Developers Association, unmasks the hypocrisy of governmental interaction with the video game industry. He expounds: 'Why is it that the cultural and artistic merit of the game medium is so hard to accept? Are games simply too complex for digital immigrants to grok? Why can't they see games for the powerful medium that they are? Is the word 'game' honestly so damaging as to demean the entire creative output of the industry, to reduce it to an empty pastime? Or, are the politicos enacting an entirely different drama where the industry is their hapless whipping boy and the sincerity of their intentions to "save the children" need to be questioned altogether?'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Government Love and Hate for Video Games More

Government Love and Hate for Video Games

Comments Filter:

  • Escapist (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    So, /. has linked to the escapist magazine what, three weeks in a row now? Can we please skip it now? It's an excellent magazine. In fact, it might be close to the best games journalism there is. But please stop linking to it week after week. People who want to read it will subscribe. Stop wasting a story on it.

  • Huh? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Otter ( 3800 )
    1) Reading "Are games simply too complex for digital immigrants to grok?", I had a mental image of a pompous, prissy jackass -- that almost perfectly matches Jason Della Rocca's picture. Except for the weird facial hair. What the hell is that?

    2) There's an odd bit of projection in the essay. He keeps tossing out these pairs of government action where the same government (or members thereof) promote one aspect of gaming and criticize another, and flips out at how they're supposedly saying VIDEO GAMES GOOD!!!

  • Tried reading into it, but with the beginnings the words chopped off along the left side of the page, I just lost interest too quickly.

    ("Standard." Must be the world's first one-word oxymoron.)

  • Okay (Score:5, Insightful)

    by vga_init ( 589198 ) on Tuesday September 20, 2005 @02:31PM (#13607354) Journal

    The article heralds gaming as being a priceless cultural artifact and a savior of national economies.

    Honestly, I don't think that video games are really that important. I grew up playing them, and to this day it is still one of my favorite hobbies, but I think that all of the fanfare regarding it is kind of a product of the overactive marketting.

    The one very good point that I see the article raise is how games are treated very differently from films. In Australia, why aren't games allowed to have adult ratings when films are? I do agree that games that are overly violent or sexual in nature are bad particularly for young children (and adults, mildly), and that's why I agree with censorship and regulation.

    I always thought that a good happy medium could be found in countries like Germany, where games that are for adults only are kept behind the counter in stores; they can't be displayed where children can see them, which is okay, and they can't be sold to minors at all, which I think is a good idea. At the end of the day, though, the games are still on the market, and they are still finding their way into the hands of the people that are most fit for playing them.

    The socialist libertarian inside of me says that parents should always have the ultimate choice as to what their kids' game consumption habits are, but I think a society that takes some measures to protect children is a good one, as long as these measures don't stifle beneficial aspects of the industry.

    When all is said and done, however, what's the big deal? I think that the train of thought that leads to discussions like this stem from that pervasive fear that games are corrupting our children. But, in the past, other mediums like televisions and books were doing the same.

    Let's face it; we have to look out for our children, whether we're trying to "save" them from games, movies, comics, Ozzy Osbourne, Socrates, of liberalism (I say that facetiously). However, I think that what truly corrupts a human being takes place at home, and bad parents/societies should stop using scapegoats like video games, which fosters discussions like this.

    • "and that's why I agree with censorship and regulation."
      Censorship and regulation? So because children shouldn't play some games, you want to censor them so no one can play them?

      You can take that censorship you so love and stuff it. I don't need the government telling me what I should be playing.

      • Censorship and regulation? So because children shouldn't play some games, you want to censor them so no one can play them?

        I never said that. In fact, I said quite the opposite; we as a society ought to cooperate in raising well-socialized children and, in some cases, engage in cencorship so they don't get hurt. However, it's important not to overstep our bounds (children need to be exposed to the world if they are expected to grow and be intelligent), and I'm not suggesting a solution here.

        You can ta

  • My Views (Score:2, Informative)

    by McLetter ( 915953 )
    I understand where this person is coming from but they are viewing the industry in a different way then he is. People can say, "yeah some games are good and not bad influencing, but other games (shooters, GTA, etc) are a bad influence." Though IMO I think this is wrong. I think games give people skills such as multitasking and quick thinking, which are both required in almost every good game out there..

  • Remember the introduction of the VCR? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by m50d ( 797211 ) on Tuesday September 20, 2005 @02:36PM (#13607433) Homepage Journal
    The government response went something like "OMG our families will be destroyed by an infestation of video filth, think of the children!!!!". Exactly the same thing happening here. Once a generation that has grown up with videogames gets old enough to run for office the problem will disappear, just as the last one did.

  • It's All About the Votes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TychoCelchuuu ( 835690 ) on Tuesday September 20, 2005 @02:42PM (#13607501) Journal
    When it comes to trivial, useless things like video games (I love them, but they're just entertainment, harmless), the only thing that a politician cares about is votes. Except for a few crazy ones, senators couldn't care less what people play on their consoles or their PCs as long as it falls short of interactive child porn. The only reason Hillary Clinton or any of the others even pay attention to someone like Jack Thompson is because he is scaring parents, making them think video games will ruin their children's lives. Jack Thompson might be completely nuts, but he can tell people who to vote for and if they've listened to him thus far, there's a good chance they'd agree with him. Courting Jack Thompson, and to a greater degree playing off of the latest irrational fear that the public has been infected with for some reason or another, is just an easy way to get votes. It's the same reason Republicans bring up 9/11 when they want to get elected: to scare people into voting for them. It's why Democrats blame Katrina on global warming: to scare people into voting for them.

    It's all about the votes. If people are afraid of video games, if they're mad at video games, then it's time to regulate video games. The content doesn't come into play for the people making the decisions.

  • Why is it that the cultural and artistic merit of the game medium is so hard to accept?

    While there are some games that are artistic, maybe if we saw some topselling games that didn't feature easter eggs that were sex scenes with hookers, rewards for stealing cars, or woman that look at all realistic, instead of Lara Croft with her need for a cantilevered bra, people might start taking games seriously. When the well known and publicized games appeal to more than the adolescent male ego, with a need for larg
    • Hey, San Andreas has realistic women. For California I mean.
    • While there are some games that are artistic, maybe if we saw some topselling games that didn't feature easter eggs that were sex scenes with hookers, rewards for stealing cars, or woman that look at all realistic, instead of Lara Croft with her need for a cantilevered bra, people might start taking games seriously.

      Bingo! I had ctrl-c'd the exact same sentence you had all ready to make pretty much the same reply you did. So allow me to just expand upon it a little bit further.

      In my experience, when most
      • Hate to burst your bubble, but, no offense, "art" isn't defined as "that subset which I approve of". It's also not defined as "snotty philosophical stuff that contemplates really deep stuff and/or makes references to obscure 19'th century authors".

        Art never was defined like that. A lot of what we today consider classic art never was more than an expensive low-tech version of pornography. (I'll go on a limb and say that in an age where female clothing was such that seeing an ankle counted as arousing, having

  • Violence (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cs668 ( 89484 ) <cservin@crom[ ]on.com ['agn' in gap]> on Tuesday September 20, 2005 @03:52PM (#13608310)
    The funny thing is violence in video games suits the government just fine when it is used as a recruiting tool for the military as "America's Army" the video game.

    You can't sell a violent game, but the army can give it away for free.

    • Re:Violence (Score:3, Interesting)

      by alan_dershowitz ( 586542 )
      The Army used to use a modified version of DOOM to help train troops. Look at it from the government's persepective. They are promoting games that facilitate socially-acceptable violent ends (working in the army, as a team toward a national goal.) This has two items to it that I can perceive. Firstly, try convincing the government that games don't facilitate violence when they are actively using it for that purpose; and secondly, if you actually play America's Army, it's not an anything-goes deathmatch like
      • I appreciate you perspective, and agree with it.

        I just thought it was funny that the violence in video games is "bad" until it benefits Uncle Sam.

        I love video game violence. I think that if you can not tell the difference between fantasy and reality and that causes you to do stupid things we should just put you out of your misery - video games should not be an excuse.

        I am actually all for our soldiers getting as immersive experience as possible before they find themselves in harms way.

        But, that does not me

  • What theyre called (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by Gogo0 ( 877020 )
    Is the word 'game' honestly so damaging as to demean the entire creative output of the industry, to reduce it to an empty pastime?

    Dont worry, in a few years Microsoft and Sony will start calling them "interactive media". The only people who will call them games any more will be Nintendo.
  • As stated by a Chinese culture minister, apparently player versus player or "player killing" (PK) is harmful to kids:

    "Minors should not be allowed to play online games that have PK content, that allow players to increase the power of their own online game characters by killing other players ... They are harmful to young people."

    Their government took the time to actually learn what was going on in-game before taking a position. And they're addressing something that coud be seen as an actual problem w

  • Save ... um, someone... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Thing 1 ( 178996 ) on Tuesday September 20, 2005 @09:50PM (#13610730) Journal
    Or, are the politicos enacting an entirely different drama where the industry is their hapless whipping boy and the sincerity of their intentions to "save the children" need to be questioned altogether?

    My take on political speech is that any time anybody asks you to "think of the children" they're really asking you to stop thinking, and agree with them that their restriction is palatable.

  • because our advocates use words like "Grok"
  • Why is it that everyone has this dying urge for people to consider videogames art. Videogames are a form of entertainment and while there are plenty of games that spew style(Katamari) and have tons of artistic overtones(Zelda, esp. Wind Waker) that doesn't mean that it matters whether anyone else thinks it is or is not art. The type of people who appreciate something as an art are the most die hard types of people. The average person doesn't see a movie as an art, but ask Roger Ebert and I'm sure he'll have

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close