Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Entertainment Games News

Repercussions of Legislation on the Gaming Industry 35

Posted by Zonk from the get-out-of-my-console dept.
1up.com has a look at the ways in which anti-violence legislation may affect the gaming industry. From the article: "Although Gamepolitics.com Editor Dennis McCauley says that the Strickland case will be thrown out due to lack of merit because 'no compelling evidence indicates that playing a violent videogame can turn someone into a triple murderer,' the Strickland v. Sony case is detrimental to the industry. It is challenging freedom of speech and expression in videogames -- in contradiction to the 2003 Court of Appeals ruling that videogames are protected by the First Amendment. If Strickland et al were to win, it could force the industry to censor itself out of fear of future lawsuits. And it might result in future federal regulation of videogame content."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Repercussions of Legislation on the Gaming Industry More

Repercussions of Legislation on the Gaming Industry

Comments Filter:

  • Cue forehead slap (Score:4, Funny)

    by yotto ( 590067 ) on Thursday December 01, 2005 @04:28PM (#14160905) Homepage
    I /knew/ I was against these regulations for a reason!
  • IMHO games should be just honestly released in "adults-only" versions whenever applicable, and possibly with "violence-free" editions optionally, whenever the developer feels like it. It's a responsible thing to do.

    The fact -your- kid knows the real thing apart from the game world doesn't mean some other kid does. The fact you're a responsible parent and watch what titles your kid plays, doesn't mean other parents are. And if your kid gets shot by a psycho kid who played one brutal game too many, and lost t

    • Re:IMHO... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by max born ( 739948 ) on Thursday December 01, 2005 @04:53PM (#14161209)
      IMHO games should be just honestly released in "adults-only" versions whenever applicable, and possibly with "violence-free" editions optionally, whenever the developer feels like it. It's a responsible thing to do.

      But for what purpose?

      Take nudity for example. When I was last in Eurpoean I saw full frontal nudity (male and female) on television. The Europeans are a lot more tolerant of this kind of thing. Yet by many indices they have a much lower rate of social deviance.

      Americans are legislating morality. They don't have any scientific evidence that nudity or profanity is bad they just know it is. They also believe in creationism.

      • Re:IMHO... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by blazzy ( 923401 )

        Take nudity for example. When I was last in Eurpoean I saw full frontal nudity (male and female) on television. The Europeans are a lot more tolerant of this kind of thing. Yet by many indices they have a much lower rate of social deviance.

        Full frontal nudity is "social deviance" in US culture. That's an interesting choice of words. =]

        Americans are legislating morality. They don't have any scientific evidence that nudity or profanity is bad they just know it is. They also believe in creationism.

        S

        • What is this... first amendment of which you speak? The name sounds familiar... but... I can't remember what it is. Could you please tell me?

    • Re:IMHO... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Catnapster ( 531547 )

      And if your kid gets shot by a psycho kid who played one brutal game too many, and lost the sense of difference between the games and the real world

      Take note of the critical two words of that sentence: "psycho kid." A kid with the severity of psychological issues that would be necessary to confuse video games with the real world would, sooner or later, run across something violent - be it a video game, a movie, or a fight at school - that would push him to violent acts of his own. Video games are rarely, i

      • Many children in rural areas grow up with easy access to firearms once they're old enough to be taught firearms safety. Many of my cousins had their own rifles for small game hunting and plinking. They also carried pocket knives to school. They didn't shoot their siblings and crime rates were extremely low where they lived.

        • Re:IMHO... (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Catnapster ( 531547 )
          Well, they're taught firearms safety; I inferred from the grandparent poster's phrase "play with dad's gun" that the hypothetical kids in their example were not. Which I ought to have pointed out as well - most kids who have been taught firearms safety are aware of what happens when one shoots something, which would have rendered the scenario moot.

          At the end of the day, it comes down to teaching children what is right and what is wrong. It's not like kids magically learn that killing people is unacceptab
      • Take note of the critical two words of that sentence: "psycho kid." A kid with the severity of psychological issues that would be necessary to confuse video games with the real world would, sooner or later, run across something violent

        You're thinking on a single-bit level. Normal kid - psycho kid. Normal kid sees arbitrary amount of violence, never does any fighting, psycho kid sees dogs fighting in the lawn and goes on a rampage.
        Thing is, there's no fixed level of "psycho". Expose a normal, psychically sta

        • the more you expose children to violence, the more likely given kid will snap

          If that is correct, then we are all absolutely screwed. This world is practically soaked in violence. Yes, there are violent video games, violent movies, violent lyrics in music, and all that. But there's also the news media... watch the evening news one night and see what they tell you. Murders, car crashes, rapes, robberies - you'd think the entire city was one big bloodbath. Or you could watch CNN and hear about the war in Ira

  • Are we worrying too much? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Thursday December 01, 2005 @04:35PM (#14160972)
    Maybe it's just me, but does anyone else feel that there's a lot of unnecessary worry in the gaming community these days?

    I'll admit it's scary that some big, bad men (or women) could take away the hobby that we enjoy, but I think that we've been blowing things out of proportion.

    I don't speak for everyone here, but I live in the United States where we at least attempt to protect the freedom to express ourselves and say what we want. Granted that the issues of censoring games completely and selling games with mature themes to minors are very different issues, but we tend to like to blur them together and treat any legislation as an attack on first ammendment rights. In the case of legislation to prevent sales of M rated games to minors, I really don't care whether or not it passes. The hundreds of posts on the issue that I've read as this debate comes up almost weekly have presented compelling arguments for both sides. Such legislation passing wouldn't affect me because I'm over 18.

    On the other hand, legislation that seeks to censor games and prohibit them from containing sexual or violent content violates our so called rights. Even assuming that such legislation were to pass, somewhere on the chain it would be overturned by the courts. Considering that America has become increasingly less conservative over the years, and that other attempts to censor music, books, and television have usually failed in the past, I don't see it as a major concern today.

    It's a good thing that we're vocal about our concerns as gamers and I wouldn't suggest that you stop being political, but do we really need to get our feathers ruffled on a weekly basis about something that's not likely to happen?
    • Even assuming that such legislation were to pass, somewhere on the chain it would be overturned by the courts

      Prohibition only took, what? 12 years?

      And I'll bet they just went and let all the bootleggers out of jail afterwards, right?

    • I don't speak for everyone here, but I live in the United States where we at least attempt to protect the freedom to express ourselves and say what we want. Granted that the issues of censoring games completely and selling games with mature themes to minors are very different issues, but we tend to like to blur them together and treat any legislation as an attack on first ammendment rights.

      A key thing to realize about the history of the protection of first amendment rights in America - There has been two

  • movies (Score:4, Interesting)

    by blunte ( 183182 ) on Thursday December 01, 2005 @04:35PM (#14160979)
    I still cannot fathom how games can come under such scrutiny while television and movies show things far, far more brutal, sadistic, and sexually depraved.

    I suppose it's because the game industry doesn't (yet) have a total lockdown on the government the way the movie industry does. No sense railing against values in movies since the government won't pass any laws that they're specifically paid off NOT to pass by the movie industry.

    At least one good thing to look forward to is that the dinosaurs that make up the movie industry will die off, while each year the number of gamers increases. Imagine the day when all the old people were gamers in their youth, or even in their old age too...
    • The fact that movies and television do have more offensive/graphic content is precisely the reason that efforts to legislatively censor video games will fail. Successfully censoring video games is just a short hop from doing the same for movies, television, music, and even books (if anyone is still reading, heh heh). The traditional entertainment industry has enough money and political clout to squash these censorship efforts in all likelihood. Not only that, I think they are hoping to make more money from
    • "I still cannot fathom how games can come under such scrutiny while television and movies show things far, far more brutal, sadistic, and sexually depraved."

      Games get the scrutiny because the mainstream media owns the TV and movie companies, so they avoid running stories that criticize them.

    • Re:movies (Score:3, Informative)

      by Detritus ( 11846 )
      The movie industry has had similar problems. Watch some old movies from the 1920s and 1930s. You'll notice a huge change around 1930, when the Hays Code [wikipedia.org] was introduced in response to pressure from many groups to "clean up" the film industry. Some of the early talking movies were quite racy for their day.
    • I still cannot fathom how games can come under such scrutiny while television and movies show things far, far more brutal, sadistic, and sexually depraved.

      You watch a movie from a distance that is both physical and pychological.

      You are not a partcipant in the action. You are not invited to wield the knife and you are not rewarded for the ingenuity of your kills.

  • ...where did I leave that BFG... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nmaster64 ( 867033 ) on Thursday December 01, 2005 @04:43PM (#14161081)
    As long as legislation stays within the realm of "you can't sell M and AO games to kids", I have no problem with it. Hell, I practically support it.

    Now when they start talking about banning games entirely or setting unreasonably strict censors on things, then their going to have one gamer with a BFG to deal with...

    Video games don't cause violence, ignorant politicians do.
    • As long as legislation stays within the realm of "you can't sell M and AO games to kids", I have no problem with it. Hell, I practically support it.

      I don't have a problem with that either, but what irks me is that the same rules should apply to all forms of entertainment media, not just games. So unless there's legislation to stop the sale of M and AO movies (DVDs or cinema tickets) to children, there shouldn't be any such legislation applying to games.
      • ...what irks me is that the same rules should apply to all forms of entertainment media, not just games.

        Hell yeah! Your certainly right there...all this legislation is targeting specifically video games, and completely ignoring the fact a kid can rent a R-movie or check out an erotic novel without any penalties on the distributor. It's completely ludacris to say video games are so much more harmful than other forms of media.

        Going through my girlfriends book collection, I'd much rather have my little bro

  • I call BS (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Red Flayer ( 890720 ) on Thursday December 01, 2005 @04:58PM (#14161282) Journal
    "the Strickland v. Sony case is detrimental to the industry"

    BS. Public discussion of the issues is a Good Thing(tm), especially if it helps parents realize they need to pay attention to what Johnny's doing on his XBox.

    It may be harmful in the short term to certain profit-seeking enterprises in the industry, but in the long term the discussion will have positive repercussions.

    I know I'm oversimplifying here, but either the game industry adapts to new rules (and keeps making money) or the industry keeps on going as is without new rules (and keeps making money). The adult market is big enough that it will continue to be catered to...

    The only parties likely to lose out, depending on the outcome (which is certain, despite what alarmists say):

    Kids who want to play adult games.
    Adults who are too embarassed to buy adult-themed games.
    Freedom of Speech.

    The only one I'm worried about is #3.
    • It may be harmful in the short term to certain profit-seeking enterprises in the industry, but in the long term the discussion will have positive repercussions.

      Stimulating discussion and raising awareness is a good thing, so long as it's understood this must never be allowed to actually pass. Remember the Comics Code [wikipedia.org]? The Hollywood Production Code [wikipedia.org] that preceded the rating system? Censorship is a Bad Thing, and censors always, always, always look foolish in hindsight.

      • You're right of course, but the idea is that we learn from our mistakes of the past... One of the repeating themes of laws violating the First Amendment is that they are passed in times of duress, then reanalyzed and loosened in hindsight... each successive law is less censoring than the last.

        Of course, I'm full of Friday optimism right now, and it's not a foregone truth that the past will predict the future. And we have to make sure that we are loud enough to ensure we're not facing draconian censorship

  • Won't someone PLEASE think of the indie studios!? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lendrick ( 314723 ) on Thursday December 01, 2005 @05:17PM (#14161470) Homepage Journal
    I haven't seen it pointed out yet that requiring all games sold in retail stores to be rated forces indie game developers (who may not have the money in the first place) into a (presumably costly) rating process that would effectively bar them from getting their games on to store shelves.

    Mind you, I'm not aware of any indie games sold at retail outlets, but there may be an unfilled Cheapass Games [cheapass.com] like niche that would be closed by this law.

    • Addendum: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Lendrick ( 314723 )
      Interestingly enough, it appears as if Cheapass Games sells a few computer games of their own. I wouldn't be surprised if a few hobby and game stores sold their computer games alongside their board and card games.
  • There are defiantly some negatives that can come from this.

    What is retailer's reaction to this going to be? Wal-Mart target and just about every other retailer already refuse to carry Ao games. Will this law make them extend this policy to M games as well? If it does, this would be very bad for the video game industry. That would make it necessary for video games to be created T and lower only. You can not survive in the consol market if the chair retailers don't carry your product.

    What will the developer's
  • If you care about video game legislation, why don't you go insert a policy statment about video games into Pete Ashdown's policy & strategy wiki [peteashdown.org] (via [metafilter.com]).
  • I don't think the way they look at gaming reflects the market accurately any more, and anyone picking up violent games like GTA for their kids needs to be banned from parenting, it should be a choice whether you want violence in your game.. not enforced censorship.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Being against torture ought to be sort of a multipartisan thing." -- Karl Lehenbauer, as amended by Jeff Daiell, a Libertarian

Close