Politician Takes Enlightened Stance on Gaming 68
GamePolitics is reporting that one Australian would-be politician is taking an enlightened stance on gaming in general, and especially with respect to censorship. "Censorship is odious because it removes community choice. Censorship says that the thought is the action; that the common person can't distinguish between depiction and actuality... Censorship says, 'Let me decide who talks.' And games are talking. They're talking very loudly, to a great many people, in strong and clear voices. They're speaking in places that have never read a newspaper and in houses which have never listened to politicians. It's okay to be worried by what games are saying. It's okay to disagree. But it's not okay to stifle those voices. It's not okay to kill the game."
That's good, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yup, Good luck with that. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Nope this view is the similar to those held by the majority of the people in power, except for one particular politician in South Australia...
Unfortunately it requires the approval of the Attorney General of each State to change the classification system for games to the same as that of movies (eg R18+).
Unless this guy is running in South Australia voting for him isn't going to help in this particular issue.
Well... (Score:5, Informative)
...whatever you do, DO NOT USE HIS NAME. Quote him if you must, but again DO NOT USE HIS NAME!
It's Greg Tannahill, btw.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Funny)
Greg Tannahill SOUNDS like a real name, but telling the electorate that they don't have the right to dictate what videogames you can and can't play DOESN'T sound like a real politician.
Most of all though, this "Australia" you speak of does not sound like a real place.
Re: (Score:2)
Now we only need few more revisions (Score:1)
Love That Bias (Score:1, Insightful)
Ah, so it's an "enlightened" stance when it happens to agree with your viewpoint?
Gimme a fucking break.
Re:Love That Bias (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So yes. Biased. But not unexpected.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And if you are wondering... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Mod parent funny. Doubly so if it's true.
It'd be even funnier if one of his opponents also had a WoW account and they could duke it out online. You could record it and release the highlights. People love entertainment, you know. It'd be a modern gladiator fight.
Of course, people wouldn't be thrilled about their elected officials playing video games for hours. They're supposed to be dining with lobbyists or something, right?
Impossible (Score:1)
Censorship says that the thought is the action; that the common person can't distinguish between depiction and actuality...
Respect for the individual? He'll never get elected in today's political climate.
Re:Impossible (Score:4, Insightful)
Or yesterday's, or tomorrow's.
Respect for the individual? (Score:4, Interesting)
Respect for the individual? He'll never get elected in today's political climate.
People who actually give a shit about individual rights don't seek power over others. By trying to become a politician, he's just another Boromir who thinks he can do good by taking the One Ring.
Re: (Score:1)
People who actually give a shit about individual rights don't seek power over others. By trying to become a politician, he's just another Boromir who thinks he can do good by taking the One Ring.
Interesting point of view.
I personally think that anyone who is prepared to take on the system from within is engaged in a noble cause, whatever might happen to him inside.
Noble cause? (Score:2)
I personally think that anyone who is prepared to take on the system from within is engaged in a noble cause, whatever might happen to him inside.
I personally distrust anybody with a "noble cause". Experience has shown me that the more noble the cause, the more ignoble the means used in service to the cause.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
People who actually give a shit about individual rights don't seek power over others. By trying to become a politician, he's just another Boromir who thinks he can do good by taking the One Ring.
By that analogy, are you proposing we throw the government into an active volcano?
Because I don't think that will help.
Re:Respect for the individual? (Score:4, Funny)
Proof (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By that analogy, are you proposing we throw the government into an active volcano?
Because I don't think that will help.
I doubt that tossing Congress into an active volcano will help, as there's no shortage of power-hungry, meddlesome assholes itching to replace them, but I want to do it anyway. I want to hear those bastards scream.
Re: (Score:2)
What about a catapult?
Heard an interesting story... (Score:5, Interesting)
Upon hearing that story I decided that violent video games probably prevent more injury/death than they cause.
Re: (Score:1)
This pretty, stupid, for a lack of better words.
I mean, seriously, kids playing with loaded guns. What could go wrong?
Re:Heard an interesting story... (Score:5, Insightful)
Safe handling of a gun usually excludes the act of shooting towards other people for fun.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
I guess we'd better do a better job of training our military in gun safety, then.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That's more common than you think (Score:2)
Not with "real" guns, but a "friend" of mine used to play this game:
Get two friends and two bb guns. Put the guns on a table (pumped to maximum pressure) then play odds & evens: On the count "three," put out one or two fingers. If all three players put out the same number, the round is a draw. If one of the three is different, he (or she?) runs away from the table while the other two grab the guns and try to hit him in the back.
Oh, hours of fun.
Re: (Score:2)
That is categorically the dumbest thing I have ever heard. That's akin to being bored, so you and your friends drive at 80 miles per hour and try to stop just before you hit a brick wall.
We could power the US off of Darwin's grave-spinning.
Re: (Score:2)
Well if you survive getting shot at or worse getting shot you're fit (enough). Nothing to upset Darwin at all.
Re:Heard an interesting story... (Score:5, Interesting)
Two stories from the seventies in South Australia.
Kids under twelve sometimes had slug guns, especially those in rural and semi-rural areas.
One kid told me of slug gun fights they would have, hiding behind logs and taking shots at each other. Once during a "game" one kid stood up and shot just as another poked his head around a tree. He lost an eye.
Another boy was sitting in his bedroom with his Dad's .22 aiming it all over the place. He then lined up his mum through an open window. She was putting washing out. He pulled the trigger. Why the gun was loaded, noone knew. One shot through the eye killed his mother.
I myself at about the same age found an uncle's slug gun and despearately tried to find slugs for it. I settled for cocking and firing it unloaded, even though I heard it was not good for it.
I don't know what guidance these boys had about gun safety. Sometimes it is lost when a bunch of young boys goad each other on.
Shooting at pixels on a screen sure beats real life for irresponsible boys.
Self filter? (Score:2)
I don't see why most games can't give users the tools to self filter. At that point, it's the parent's responsibility.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Before too long you have a kid kill a bunch of people and if the media determines the kid played violent video games then they sensationalize it. Yet, you never hear the media tell the story of say, LeBron J
Re:Self filter? (Score:4, Interesting)
Or the kid listened to Heavy Metal, or played Dungeons and Dragons, or dressed funny and wouldn't stay off my lawn. They never seem to point out the things like "started fights regularly in school" or "had a history of sudden violent outbursts" or "used threats of suicide to manipulate others" or "would mutter angrily to himself while polishing his gun"; but if the kid plays violent video games Watch Out!!!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that is the point of the ESRB (regardless of personal opinion about its effectiveness). The biggest problem with the ESRB "tool" is that many (not all) parents either don't understand how to use the tool, don't think that the game content is an issue for their kid, or just don't care.
But once you give them the tool, it doesn't matter if they choose not to use it. The ball is in their court.
My wife and I do edit the content our kids see. I wish it were easier.
Re:Self filter? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see why most games can't give users the tools to self filter. At that point, it's the parent's responsibility.
They do. The consoles have parental controls built in. Parents just don't seem to want to bother to use them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I know that Valve's games (or at least, the older Half-Life period ones) came with parental controls to lock out blood. I think that more should follow this strategy.
Or, just have a paintball mode like Goldeneye.
Blood tends to be a consequence of violence. Locking out blood seems pretty pointless in a violent game. A paintball mode might work for some games, but it would seem pretty out of place in others. Sometimes parents have to tell their kids no. When they're ready to handle games with more adult content, then let them play them. Trying to nerf games that involve lots of violence doesn't seem like a good idea, nor should game developers try to please everyone with every game. Some games just aren't for k
Re: (Score:2)
Typical twisted American logic: violence is OK if there is no blood showing!
I'm tired of that bullshit. Shooting people is shooting people. Blood happens because that's what being shot at does. Removing blood does not magically turn violent acts into non-violent acts, it only makes them slightly less realistic-looking. In the end this is still the exact same level of violence, you haven't changed any of it.
Blood is a fundamental part of our bodies, it serves as a vessel for oxygen and nutriments, but has no
I look forward (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't - when that day comes he/she will be just as out of touch with the young people of the time as the caggy old bastards we have now are with our current issues.
Re: (Score:2)
But we'll be older then too, so they'll be right in line with our positions.
Now get off my lawn!
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up, I've already posted and cannot!
I'm only 26, and already feel pretty out of touch and generally disgruntled towards and distrustful of kids these days. And I'm not near at the point yet where they're using all kinds of technology I don't understand.
Kids are dumb.
I look forward to our first Mario president.
Are games really just a depiction? (Score:2)
Please note that I in no way endorse game censorship of the sort that Jack Thompson advocates.
However, I do think that Video games should be handled differently than books movies and television. Videogames are more than just a depiction of an action or narrative. Videogames are an interactive immersion in an action or narrative.
It is one thing to portray a torture scene in a TV show such as 24. But to put the control of those actions in the hands of a player is different. It is not such a stretch to thi
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like they should have a whole different ratings system, wherein interactive acts of violence gains you higher ratings more quickly than passive scenes in a TV show?
Re: (Score:1)
It is one thing to portray a torture scene in a TV show such as 24. But to put the control of those actions in the hands of a player is different. It is not such a stretch to think that what may be acceptable in a movie may not be acceptable in a game as a result of the presence of the aspect of choice.
On the other hand, Kiefer Sutherland had to actually, phsyically act out those scenes, yet he hasn't turned into a serial killer. And by taking the role, he chose to do so, as do the people who watch the show. Which is pretty much the same as a person choosing to play a game, and choosing to perform those acts in game, except in a far less realistic manner.
Then you have the conundrum that, if the gamer is truly given the choice of performing these acts in a game (and lets face it, the actual feasibility
Just in case you're wondering (Score:3, Informative)
The candidate's name is Greg Tannahill he maintains a gaming blog and a political blog.
Gaming blog: The Dust Forms Words [blogspot.com]
Campaign blog: Greg Tannahill for Canberra [gregtannah...nberra.org].
Just a pity... (Score:2, Informative)
... that he's standing for the Democrats; they're one of the saner parties out there with real, considered positions, but their voter base is 1 - 2%, going on the results of the previous election (2007).
Re: (Score:1)
Greg Tannahill's blogs (Score:2, Informative)
Gaming blog: The Dust Forms Words [blogspot.com]
Campaign blog: Greg Tannahill for Canberra [gregtannah...nberra.org].
Gaming fodder (Score:2, Informative)
What happened to parental responsibility? (Score:1)