Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


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

Step Away From The Games Legislation 104

Posted by Zonk from the no-one-will-be-fragged dept.
Next Generation has an opinion piece by former Lucasarts VP of global marketing John Geoghegan. In it, he discusses exactly why gaming regulation is such a bad idea, and why he's so unsurprised that people have tried to do it anyway. From the article: "Kids need acceptable outlets to channel their energy and aggression. Critics claim video games promote aggression but an argument! is to be made that they channel aggression and perhaps even siphon it off, just like sports. Crucial to Schechter's thesis is his claim that popular entertainment is much less violent today than in the past. Oh, really? Well, consider the 19th century when whole villages turned out for a public hanging like it was a kid's snow day. Or think about Dante's graphic description of hell in The Inferno."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Step Away From The Games Legislation More

Step Away From The Games Legislation

Comments Filter:
  • Common Sense ++

    Fantasy != Reality

    It's not that hard, people.
    • Nu-uh If you do something bad and then find a game that has the same thing in it, thats an easy way to get an easier punnishment, and with people like Jack Thompson out there making very well grounded assesments of games and Evil game developers like Rockstar tricking kids into watching hardcore porn in their games then there will always be a place for people like me who take sarcastic comments waaaay to far...like this one

  • The problem is retailers... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PFI_Optix ( 936301 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:20PM (#14660732) Journal
    They don't sell R-rated movies to a 14 year old. They don't sell "explicit lyrics" records to 14 year old. But they'll sell an M-17 game to the same kid. If retailers would adhere to the voluntary ratings of games the same way they adhere to the voluntary ratings of movies, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
    • The retailers do a better job policing games than movies (81% vs 75%) so why aren't movies attacked first?
      • Where do you get these numbers? Or are they part of the 90% of statistics that are made up on the spot?

        From TFA:

        "The issue isn't one of regulation; it's one of enforcement of the existing ratings at the retail level."

        • Re:The problem is retailers... (Score:4, Informative)

          by sqlrob ( 173498 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:39PM (#14660918)
          I misremembered, or I'm remembering a different year: From the FTC [ftc.gov] for 2003:

          Movie Theater Ticket 36%
          Movie on DVD 81%
          Music Recording 83%
          Electronic Game 69%

          Games are kicking the butt of DVDs and Music, so why are enforcement of game ratings the issue?
          • Just to clarify the parent, lower is better. The percentage signifies the number of underage "mystery shoppers" who were able to obtain goods that they shouldn't have been able to. Movie theaters are leading the pack by only allowing 39% of underage shoppers through. DVDs are doing horrible by allowing 81% of mystery shoppers through. None of them are really doing all that great.

      • IIRC, movies were attacked (at least they used to) just as much. I remember people going after The Matrix (the first one) after Columbine because of the Government Lobby shoot-out (cause they were using guns and wearing trench-coats, you see. *rolls eyes*)

      • Becasue we already went through that phase where we blame many problems on that media and now most adults and older "folks" have been desensitized to it and accept it as something that isn't bad becasue "I grew up with it and I'm fine", same thing with rock music and clowns..."clowns?" you might ask....yes....clowns

    • Re:The problem is retailers... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by itscolduphere ( 933449 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:25PM (#14660787)
      They don't sell R-rated movies to a 14 year old. They don't sell "explicit lyrics" records to 14 year old. But they'll sell an M-17 game to the same kid. If retailers would adhere to the voluntary ratings of games the same way they adhere to the voluntary ratings of movies, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

      All the stores in my area actually do adhere to them. The problem, much like with tobacco, is that they need only find someone 17 or older to buy it for them. This can be an older sibling, friend of a friend, sibling of a friend, guy on the street they gave 10 bucks to (I've actually been offered this before), or whoever. Funny part is, it seems like more often than not the adult buying the game for them is their parent. Ignorance is bliss, and the US is full of some happy people.
      • It sure qould make things a lot easier if the parent of the child playing a violent video game, would just explain the more serious reality of the game. For example, GTA, it should be explained to the child that his violent actions are considered wrong in real life. If he made the same choices in real life, his game would be over. Something along those lines. A violent game can be used as an education tool.
        • Not all games are suitable for all gamers. It's important any time you bring up parental supervision and using violent games as a teaching tool to note that the same game may not be suitable for one person until age 18 but is fine for another person at 14.
        • Parents should teach their children that hurting others is bad...I think this *might* fix some of these problems...maybe all thoes Christians out there can tell their kids what Jesus said was the most important Commandment...HA! Tricked you...whenever someone asks Jesus what the most important commandment is he says "Love your God and love your neighbor as yourself" or some such...end of transmission..../.
          • Actually, the Golden rule would do just fine, and you don't need to be Christian (or any other religion) to see the wisdom in it.
          • Parents should teach their children that hurting others is bad...

            Problem with this is that such education goes to the point where parents tell their kids that it is wrog to defend yourself through physical means when absolutely nessecary(ONLY) even though the law may be different on that. A balance is what we need in this case, do not start fights, but when you have to defend yourself, defend yourself well.

      • Funny part is, it seems like more often than not the adult buying the game for them is their parent.

        It constantly amazes me how many parents don't seem to "get" that a game is not harmless just because it's a computer game. Somehow they all seem to be stuck in this 1980s view of all games being targetted at kids, and the graphics being incapable of showing anything that isn't cartoony. (I'd get into the whole, "It must be fine because it's a cartoon" argument, but then I'd REALLY get sidetracked.) Would it
        • Uh...are you saying that the fact that Game cater to a growing audience (including the first generation of gamers who are now in the second half of their life) is a bad thing, or that it has somehow corrupted video games? I've read your post 5 times and still cannot figure out what you are trying to say.
          • are you saying that the fact that Game cater to a growing audience (including the first generation of gamers who are now in the second half of their life) is a bad thing, or that it has somehow corrupted video games?

            I guess I'm asking a question: Why does an aging generation of gamers automatically presume that gmaers must play adult themed games?

            When the Odyssey and other Pong machines were released, it wasn't kids that were buying them. It was adults with money. These machines were home entertainment devi
            • That is unfortunately a result of capitalism.

              The game designers are not solely to blame, nor are the players; it's the production companies who (much like the movies) are sticking with the "mainstream" games that will net the most profit...

              The fact that gamers have matured over a lifetime of playing games and thus would like something more engaging...(for example you still don't read the same books that you did as a child, or enjoy the same simple movie/TV shows)

              In fact that is the lar

        • Why do you assume that video games are "family entertainment"? Are you not aware that the majority of video game players are adults(65% as of 2004)? I'm sorry to inform you that video games are indeed an "adult" industry, and as such, game producers will increasingly target older audiences.

          If the parents continue to view video games as children's entertainment, perhaps we should be educating the parents on the nature of the market.

          ESA Player Data [theesa.com]

          • Re:The problem is retailers... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by AKAImBatman ( 238306 ) <akaimbatman AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @02:39PM (#14661551) Homepage Journal
            Why do you assume that video games are "family entertainment"?

            Why do you assume that "family entertainment" == "kids"? Many board games are "family entertainment".

            Q: Who are board games intended to entertain?
            A: Adults and children alike.

            Shared experience is what "family entertainment" is all about. Part of growing your child is doing more complex games/tasks with them. This allows them to learn more about being an adult, and allows you to teach and share experiences with them. Not to mention that it can be a LOT of fun for both the adults and children. Whoever came up with this idea that there must be a dichotomy between the two needs to smacked upside the head. No wonder parents never know what their kids are doing! They never participate in any activities with their kids!

            (I feel a long sermon about the "Virtual Babysitter" coming on. Must... resist... temptation...)
            • But the fact that this is a good idea, and something that you want doesn't mean that we have to get rid of the games that you don't like...because you have no right to decide what I like or should play...So when it comes down to it, you have your Family games...Mario Party...basicly any mario game is a good family game..there is a wide range of them as well, also Sports games (to get your children interested in some physical activity) And I'm prolly wrong but it sounds like you are complaining that there i
              • No, as I said in another post, it's not so much that I begrudge people their violent games. I begrudge that the entire industry has moved that direction at the expense of other gaming possibilities.

                Take the golden age of computer gaming as an example. On one hand you had violent games like Doom. On the other hand you had more immersive games like Wing Commander 3. (I picked these because they were both on the first issues of PC Gamer.) Games had the content that made sense in their gameplay genre. Sure, the

            • Why do you assume that "family entertainment" == "kids"?

              Family entertainment is designed with the lowest complexity that can be understood by all participants. Hence, they are designed with children in mind (not that it means that adults won't enjoy it).

              Many board games are "family entertainment".

              And many are not.

              Q: Who are board games intended to entertain? A: Adults and children alike. Shared experience is what "family entertainment" is all about.

              A very agreeable statement; however, there are board

      • The local Gamestop has made a habit of selling anything to anyone. Best Buy and Wal-Mart are both good about enforcing the ratings, at least.

        Of course, the real problem is that parents and grandparents and other family members are buying games for kids without knowing what they are buying, then complaining about violent games. It's like handing your kid alcohol and complaining about underaged drinking.

        The thing is, no one wants to say that. If you call anyone's parenting skills into question, prepare to

        • The local Gamestop has made a habit of selling anything to anyone.

          Reason #3,265 why Gamestop is evil. Does anyone else get that disgusting, oily feeling when you walk into their stores?

          I was just speaking with a fellow the other day who informed me that Gamestop is considering no longer carrying PS1 titles. (Used or otherwise.) Considering that PS1 titles are still popular on a modern PS2, you can only shake your head at their corporate soulessness.
          • Odd, the Gamestop near my house is the only place locally that I can buy an NES and games. I'm not sure about their PS1 selection because I've really never cared for much on PlayStation 1 or 2, but they do carry plenty of old cartridge games still, so I wouldn't expect games for newer consoles like PS1 to be cut out.
            • Odd, the Gamestop near my house is the only place locally that I can buy an NES and games.

              That is odd. I've been informed by Gamestop management that it's corporate policy not to carry anything older than the Dreamcast. Are you sure you're not thinking of Game Crazy? Those guys are pretty cool.
              • I'm sure it's Gamestop. They seemed to be actually repairing/refurbishing the NES units in-store because the first time I went there they had one NES cracked open on the counter and a soldering iron was out. The sale units are basically a console, controller, and light gun vacuum-sealed in plastic, so I wonder if it might be just a choice of the management at this particular store.
      • The Family Entertainment Protection Act [wikipedia.org] would basically make it mandatory to enforce the ratings. You're right of course, any kid with older friends can get around this with extreme ease.
    • They don't sell R-rated movies to a 14 year old. They don't sell "explicit lyrics" records to 14 year old. But they'll sell an M-17 game to the same kid.

      could you please inform me as to what store will sell that game to a 14-year old? every store i've been in requries you to show photo ID to buy anything rated M.

    • They don't sell R-rated movies to a 14 year old. They don't sell "explicit lyrics" records to 14 year old. But they'll sell an M-17 game to the same kid.

      Says who??? Sorry, but I'm just not buying this argument. The notion seems to be that everybody knows retailers wantonly sell games to children with no regard to ratings, yet these same retailers will hold back movies and music based on ratings? I mean, come on! Let's use some sense! Why on earth would a clerk ignore such a hot-button issue as mature rated

  • Yeah (Score:1)

    by GigsVT ( 208848 )
    It's precisely the watering down of normal entertainment that makes games look so bad.

    In the 80s when I was a kid, it was common to watch action shows during prime time TV where the hero got shot or shot someone nearly every episode.

    Those sort of shows mostly only existed as syndication-only shows in the 90s, and are almost nonexistant today.

    • Hey, come on! It wasn't all that bad! At least with The A-Team, people could get blown up, rolled over in a vehicle that did fifty flips, get shot at but never hit even after an entire ammunition factory lost their inventory in one battle -- and no one died! They all got up, brushed off their fatigues, then got pummelled by B.A. and the rest of the gang!

      And when did anyone get shot in The Greatest American Hero? Okay, he flew into a building or had a really bad landing in every episode, but that's di
    • Are you kidding?

      In science fiction alone we watch everything from one-on-one gunfights to entire civilizations being annihilated. Firefly especially had some quite violent scenes--the "War Stories" episode comes to mind. Everyone on the show (except River and maybe Inara) was shot, stabbed, or otherwise injured during the 15 episodes it ran.

      Then there's the CSI-type shows that not only show people die, but quite a bit of them after they're dead.

      And let's not forget the hospital shows...just two days ago, Gr

  • reading for kids??? (Score:3, Funny)

    by joe 155 ( 937621 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:25PM (#14660789) Journal
    "Or think about Dante's graphic description of hell in The Inferno."

    Ah yes, I remember my grandad telling me about when he was a young lad, reading Dante's divine comedy...
    • Of course your grandad didn't read The Divine Comedy when he was a small child. He had one of the original copies of "My First Big Picture Book o' Dante", which should explain quite a lot if you've ever wondered why he had those recurring nightmares that started around age 5...

  • The Music Man (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bender0x7D1 ( 536254 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:35PM (#14660887)
    While presented in a comedic way, it shows someone convincing a town that they have trouble because the billiard parlor in town has brought in a pool table. While billiards is OK, pool is a horrible game and will cause degradation in the children and cause them to stop doing their chores and become gamblers.

    Just goes to show that new things are often looked upon as corruptive or causing some sort of lamentable behavior. I remember when Pac-Man came out and people objected since it was dangerous medically and that playing it was like running up 2-3 flights of stairs. Now it is considered harmless fun.
  • See, it's all about grey areas and blaming. Until there is a legislation, the parties will keep blaming each other whenever a death-related-with-gaming incident occurs. But with legislation, the parents can be rightfully blamed. "Oh, you let the kid have this mature-rated game. YOU'RE the one responsible!" (actually it's bad parenting, but at least we'd have an excuse to jail them).

    Of course, evil gaming companies know that with legislation, they'll lose a great part of their revenue, and this is why they k

  • A License To Have Children (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mabu ( 178417 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:45PM (#14660969)
    The more I hear about things like this, the more it occurs to me that perhaps the only legislation we really need is a license to have children. Seriously, parents should know what is going on with their kids; they should be aware of how much of which media their children are exposed to and that is what needs the most regulating. There will always be some easily-accessible corrupting or dangerous influence. If, as a parent, you don't have the time or desire to regulate your children's activities, you shouldn't be a parent.

    • Re:A License To Have Children (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Yeah this is a great idea, I'm glad this was modded up. Not only is it plausible, it makes perfect sense! I mean heck, it did wonders for the Nazis, amirite?? Who should we grant licenses to? Older, white middle class americans only?

      You have a point in that irresponsible parents (and irresponsibility) in general is the real problem here, however, your suggestion is not only infantile but offensive and preposterous.

      Laws won't fix this problem. We as a society need to reward and encourage responsibility,

    • Re:A License To Have Children (Score:4, Insightful)

      by jandrese ( 485 ) * <kensama@vt.edu> on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @02:06PM (#14661180) Homepage Journal
      Who's going to administer the test to see if you're qualified to have children? As everybody on Slashdot knows, a certification is often just a piece of paper that you can get by spending some bucks and memorizing a book without even really understanding it. How many times have you met a MCSE who can't seem to solve the most basic of problems?

      Unless handled very carefully, the certification process does little to insure that the person is fit for the job. For something like parenthood, it's going to be nearly impossible to come up with a good generalist course and certification exam that covers all aspects of parenthood while not overly burdening the system or the applicants.
      • That one is easy--forced sterizilization at birth and no babies until you can prove that you are at least 25 years old and:

        A) Your criminal record is free from any charges involving crack cocaine, crystal meth, or "punching a cop down at Smithies Bar"

        B) You have never attended a NASCAR race or a cockfight

        -Eric

    • I see your point, and sort of agree with you. I'm a new parent (he's almost 3 months old). I plan to decide what games he can play and what movies he can watch. I watch a lot of movies and play a lot of (PC) games. However, when it comes to music, I'm not at all up on what's current and what "artists" would be considered acceptable to various ages. Now, if the material is rated like movies, and retailers only sell to those who meet the minimum age, there's less chance of my son getting material that I

      • I have an idea...

        Introduce your kid to the OUTSIDE WORLD. Don't think much about which movies and computer games you'll let him play. Encourage him to engage in physical activity that really challenges both his mind and his body and helps him develop real interpersonal skills.

        Television is like suspended animation. It just distracts you and nullifies your mental capacity for the duration. You're not really taught to think or analyze things yourself. It's strictly a one-way medium. And computer games,
        • Yes, and he should eat more vegetables too. Regardless of how much physical/outdoor activity my son is involved in, issues such as which movie to watch, what cd/mp3 to listen to, and what computer game to play are still likely to arise. Trying to ignore that these types of entertainment are out there will not be effective in restricting access to those items I feel are inappropriate for his maturity level.
    • Yes because that whole License to drive thing really got rid of the bad drivers...
    • Have you seen the idiotic things that licenced drivers do? If you think the government can make good parents by giving them a piece of paper, you are sadly mistaken (and that doesn't count the possibly ethnic, cultural, religious bias that could be involved in the licencing process).

      Probably, the best thing to do to stop violence in young people is to treat them, for criminal purposes, as one and the same as their parents. If a parent was punished for an assault on a minor if a kid beats another kid up at s
      • and that doesn't count the possibly ethnic, cultural, religious bias that could be involved in the licencing process

        Well, we certainly wouldn't want to discriminate against the 17-year-old covered in gang tatoos who can't read the license form without help from his meth-addicted girlfriend.

        -Eric

        • But what is a "gang", and what are "gang tatoos"? I knew a bunch of guys who were part of a university fraternity that had frat tatooes, and ran together causing trouble. Where they a "gang"? Did they have "gang tatooes"?

          When it is done by white bougiouse kids, it is a fraternity, and kids having fun. When it is done by poor hispanic kids, it is a gang, and they will get beat up by the gang squad. There is a cultural/ethnic bias.

          You have a "learning disability" if you are a white kid in the suburbs, you are
          • When it is done by white bougiouse kids, it is a fraternity, and kids having fun.

            White fraternity kids don't go around carjacking and shooting people.

            The mafia would be a better analogy, and I wouldn't let them have licenses either.

            upper middle class suburban wasp ideal

            Yeah, I think there are some things we can ALL agree one, independent of our evil biases--things like "Giving a parenting license to a drug addict, serial killer, or pedophile might be a little unwise."

            -Eric

            • How do you know if someone is a drug addicts, serial killer, pedophile, or drive-by shooting gang banger? If people were convicted of these things, they would be in jail and wouldn't be able to have kids the way things work now. And if they are NOT convicted of these things, then you are looking at some sort of indirect evidence ("gang tatoos"... the guy is "creepy looking", he doesn't go to church) in order to discover they are not fit parents?

              Since you are trying to predict crimes you don't know have bee

  • This is a hard call though (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rwven ( 663186 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:51PM (#14661020)
    There have been countless studies based on far more opinion that show that young kids behavior is heavily effected negativley by video game and TV media of a violent nature... Kids watching power rangers do nothing but fight with each other and when those fights turn violent they are using the "techniques" used on power rangers to fight. (attempted karate i guess you could call it) Kids who watch Barney (as silly and sad as it is) are much calmer, they share with each other, and generally get along well.

    I think certain regulations should be enacted, but i also feel that if parents did a decent job AT their job, we wouldnt have these issues. I, for instance, might not want a future 11 year old son playinga game as violent as F.E.A.R.

    Maybe you think i'm off base, but kids are NOT adults and they can NOT judge things for themselves. They don't always know what things they learn in "fake world" can be transferred to "real world." It's just a set up for things later down the road IMHO.
    • Kids watching power rangers do nothing but fight with each other and when those fights turn violent they are using the "techniques" used on power rangers to fight. (attempted karate i guess you could call it) Kids who watch Barney (as silly and sad as it is) are much calmer, they share with each other, and generally get along well.

      Barney? Ugh. I think I'd rather have the kids who watched Power Rangers.

    • Maybe you think i'm off base, but kids are NOT adults and they can NOT judge things for themselves.

      Ah... ...and maybe adults shouldn't be allowed to judge what media their kids can interact with, either, right?

      My daughter's 4 years old, and plays a pretty mean game of Protoss vs. the Zerg. But perhaps the overmind thinks this is a poor way to bring up a child? Go regulate kids in some other country.
      • Ahh but what happens when she starts building pylons in her room? and trying to merge with a dark templar....then you'll be saying "why!!!!" and the camera will zoom out from you kneeling in the muddy grass.....
        • Actually, she does warp in pylons in her room.

          And she's made mutalisks [wikipedia.org] by taping together two bridge blocks together, (one bridge forming the wings, the other forming the body, taped back to back,) and then taking a little bit of left over shrimp tail from a dinner, and taping it on to one end.

          But I haven't seen her attempt merged templars yet. (Though she's fascinated by them.)
      • who's regulating kids?
        • Parents everywhere?

          The issue is that he seems to be saying that we should be putting control of regulation of what games kids can play into the state, and I'm arguing that it should be the parents that decide what kinds of games their kids can play. (And books read, and movies see, etc., etc., etc.,.)

    • There have been countless studies based on far more opinion that show that young kids behavior is heavily effected negativley by video game and TV media of a violent nature... Kids watching power rangers do nothing but fight with each other and when those fights turn violent they are using the "techniques" used on power rangers to fight. (attempted karate i guess you could call it) Kids who watch Barney (as silly and sad as it is) are much calmer, they share with each other, and generally get along well.

    • If you've read Malcolm Gladwell's best-seller The Tipping Point, you'll recall the discussion of Sesame Street and the controversy about having muppets interacting with human beings on the show. The initial idea was that kids minds are not sophisticated enough to distinguish between fantasy and reality, and that mixing fantastical monster muppets in with actual humans would at best confuse the kids and, at worst, mess with their concept of reality.

      In fact, they discovered that kids are perfectly capable of

    • Barney (as silly and sad as it is) are much calmer, they share with each other"
      RIAA"HEATHENS!" /RIAA
    • As long as we're talking about quite young children, I agree completely. My step-brother at age 5 watched Power Rangers all the time and he was a menace, kicking and punching people at random in imitation of the rangers, with no understanding that he was hurting people. After banning the show for a couple months he got better. Fast forward a few years, and he started taking karate classes with absolutely no problems because 1) he was older and better understood real-world consequences and 2) the sensei f
    • Yes, and that's *your* job, to teach *your* child the difference between what's real and what isn't, and to decide what is appropriate for your child.

      I don't need you to tell me what *my* child can and cannot handle, whether they are mature enough for certain content based on a value denoting the number of times they've made the circuit around the sun. Regardless of my child's age, I will make a value determination as to whether I think they should be exposed to something and regulations can be damned.

      Guide
      • Your only getting half my point here...

        I think of course that parents should do the job right... However, they aren't doing the job right, so that leaves us at a loss as to what to do. Honestly what do you suggest? You can't exactly force values on parents so they'll properly teach their children. Meanwhile, my kids will someday have to go to school with these other kids.

        Honestly if it takes legislation to keep media out of the eyes of kids too young to have it, then so be it. I will properly (in my op
        • I may be considered a socialist since I strongly support public run programs for the benefit of the general populace, but I do not support the idea of government acting as a babysitter. I understand your thoughts, but disagree that someone should be making the choice for those who refuse.

          The government is not the one to be involved in enforced censorship of the people regardless of the justification... because in the end any censorship is promoted under the guise of 'for the good of the people'. What is nee

    • Maybe you think i'm off base, but kids are NOT adults and they can NOT judge things for themselves.

      While I agree my 2 (almost 3 year old) in certainly not an adult, he certainly can (and does) judge things for himself. He's just not very good at it. Although he did judge Mario Party 7 to be a good thing, so maybe I'm doing something right....

      My view as a parent of a two year old is to know what the heck your kid is playing, legislation or no legislation. I don't need laws to tell me what not to bu

    • kids behavior is heavily effected negativley by video game and TV media of a violent nature

      Hogwash! Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go beat the crap out of my cousin with my broom-handle "lightsaber".

      -Eric

    • Power Rangers and Barney are made for two different age groups of kids. Power Rangers are for lik 9 to 13 year olds, where Barney is made for 1 to about 8 years old. Perhaps a better comparison is loony toons to Barney, as both are made for about the same age range.

      Personally, I hate the new G.I. Joe, He-Man, and Transformer cartoons. I think they made them too soft from the original series'. In all three original series' there was always something to learn at the end of each episode, including lessons abou

  • Public executions and censorship (Score:5, Informative)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @01:55PM (#14661071) Homepage
    Saudi Arabia still has public executions. They're usually held in "Chop-Chop Square", in Riyadh. Fridays at noon.

    A minor official from the Interior Ministry read out the charges against the kneeling prisoner. The executioner--a large black man with a scimitar--approached the kneeling prisoner from behind. After the sentence was read, the executioner jabbed the prisoner in the lower back with the tip of the sword, causing the prisoner to involuntarily jerk up. When he did, the sword flashed down. At that moment the head is sliced off and sent flying across the square. Blood jets from the severed carotid arteries and jugular veins, spraying into the air like a fountain. The frenzied crowd screams in choreographed unison, "Allah Akbar"!

    The Saudi "General Presidency for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vices [hesbah.gov.sa] has a page listing some things they prohibit. [hesbah.gov.sa] There are pictures of prohibited items, including some of video games. Most dolls are illegal. Barbie is definitely illegal. Valentine's Day gifts are illegal. Spandex seems to be illegal.

    No prohibited weapons, though.

    In the US, it's amusing that the anti-video-game people are often the same as the pro-gun people. "For only a little more, you can own the real thing!"

  • Isn't this just the catharsis argument? One study's opinion:

    "Catharsis theory is elegant and highly plausible, but it is false. It justifies and perpetuates the myth that viewing violence is healthy and beneficial, when in fact viewing violence is unhealthy and detrimental. After reviewing the scientific research, Carol Tavris (1988) concluded, 'It is time to put a bullet, once and for all, through the heart of the catharsis hypothesis. The belief that observing violence (or `ventilating it`) gets rid of ho

  • Or think about now: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Irvu ( 248207 ) on Tuesday February 07, 2006 @02:02PM (#14661147)
    Football (American, Austrailian, etc.)
    Soccer (Yes the game is minimal contact but the fans aren't).
    Hockey (goes without saying).
    NASCAR (For those in the U.S. Just how often do they replay the crash scenes).
    Boxing
    Karate ...

    In my experience most of the people clamouring for games legislation a) ignore these things and the very real links between them and aggressive behavior, or b) even promote these very violent endeavors as "healthy excercise". IMHO much of the Game legislation, like calls for tv censorship in the early days and warning labels on CD's has to do with new tech. Whatever the new things kids do (D&D, Dancing, Heavy Metal, Video Games) is always blamed for all social ills because, at a basic level, it is't what we did.

    That having been said I do think that some games (GTA) are in a special category by themselves and should be considered carefully. Banning them won't really work we ban kids from having alcohol, cigratettes, and porn in the U.S. but despite all that they still got them even before the internet. Ultimately its all about educating parents so that they realize that a game called Grand Theft Auto isn't exactly Sesame Street.

    • While I completely agree that violent video games, movies, etc. do promote violence and that kids who engage in these things are probably more likely to be violent as they will find it more acceptable, laws that regulate who can buy what won't help anything, because ultimately, as a parent, the best thing you can do for your kids is to raise them such that they choose not to be violent. because while reasonable control laws might make it a little harder for your kids to obtain the media in question, they w
  • i don't believe the whole "violent videogames are causing kids to be violent" thing a bit. i pretty much grew up playing violent games, watching violent tv shows and movies. i havn't ever even come near doing something violent, never gotten in a fight in my life, i'm a pacifist really, i don't care about fragging someone in a game because IT'S A FUCKING GAME. if kids parents raised them correctly this would be moot, as all the posters above me pointed out.
    • Exactly. The video games don't make people violent, it's the people who make people violent. "The video game made me do it" is not an excuse for being violent (or for anything else). People who use that excuse just want somebody to blame for their bad behavior. If you want to play a game, understand that it's only a game, and don't go crying about how it made you kill someone.

      They don't sell R-rated movies to a 14 year old. They don't sell "explicit lyrics" records to 14 year old. But they'll sell an

Slashdot Top Deals

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Close