Columns Playing The Blame Game

[CardJoe]

http://www.bit-tech.net/columns/2008...e_blame_game/1

Simon Hill, developer for Outerlight software has just finished reading The Byron Report. As someone clearly affected by any changes that may be made because of the report, Simon has a few things to say, first of which is; Who is to blame?

[UncertainGod]

I personally agree completely with the Byron report that parents in general see the age rating on games as an indicator of difficulty instead of sutibility for an age range. I used to work for GAME when I was at uni and I remember parents picking up 18+ games because there child was "good at these types of things" at which point I had to explain that there was alot of blood and guts in the game.

[HungrySalami]

I believe uninvolved parents are a much more dangerous threat to youth than any game, however violent. Same goes for overprotective parents who use only pre-determined absolutes in raising their children, that would include "violent gaes are bad and if I see you play them, you'll get spanked"-types as well. Raising a kid can't be governed by any book, celebrity or government, it's a threadrope that has to manouvered by the parents themselves.

Concerning politicians, I am reminded of this post on another site which shows what the issue might really be; http://overclockers.com/tips01313/

[Toka]

I am unable to express myself in an articulate fashion, with any sort of clarity, over this issue of proposed censorship of my recreational pursuits. I'll limit myself to the following.

Fu*k off and buy some parenting skills you miserable excuse for responsible adults. If you allow your child to experience unsuitable material, or are unaware of the material they are experiencing, then please hand your kids over to social services and come back when your IQ has struggled over 50.

[Orionche]

Not much to add... the article and posts above say it all.

Its a generation thing, me thinks. Lots of "older" people had fun differently and can't comprehend todays games. Then there's the fear of technology but that's slightly off topic.

Dunno what's the point of all of this, really... The parents who want this probably want the state to watch over their kids with laws and regulations, because they're too stupid/not interested to do it for them selfs. They should educate new parents on raising their kids properly, not wasting money on "reports"...

Personally, I use games as an exhaust pipe for my frustrations, and I believe I'm not alone. =)

[D3s3rt_F0x]

Personally all games should be rated based on there content, although I dont think you could blame them for violence its an easy finger to point, the same as music is because if a murderer listens to Marilyn Manson then they must obviously of done it for that reason. For those of you who have been watching or seen Dexter on TV how many of you has it made to want to go out and chop someone into pieces, I enjoy the show but it certainly hasnt made me want to do that, the same as playing GTA dosnt make me want to go tear arseing around in a car running people over and clubbing em over the head with a baseball bat.

I agree with the point in where in some mentally unstable people it may make them want to follow what they do in games, but if you banned violent games it would be doing something theyve seen on TV or in a movie say Rambo for instance.

For me though with the rating of games it shouldnt be left to the BBFC, its an archaic organisation which just dosnt have the tools of the trade for games imo it barely has them for movies which can be seen from the whole Manhunt 2 fiasco.

[Joeymac]

Lately I have watched the following movies rated 15 by the BBFC.. 30 Days of Night and Atonement. 30 days of night had a man killing his wife and children, a small vampire girl getting her head blown off by a shotgun (off screen), many people getting ripped/cut to pieces on screen. It's one of the most graphic films I've seen, and I've seen a lot of films. Atonement's shots of war wounds want to make you throw up.
I'm also watching Band of Brother's at the moment and that's a thousand times more affecting that any war game I've ever played.

So the line at which games look too real to be good for us? If we were playing games that looked at good as, say, Beowulf, it's still a million miles across that uncanny valley before they approach just those two 15 rated movies. There is ZERO weight to any argument that lumps violent games in the same league as violent movies. We are still very much in Tom and Jerry territory as far as I can tell.

[Th3Maverick]

So, is this gonna end up like the Prohibition Act? Soon, we'll have game-runners driving cross-country in their blacked out Lamborghinis to illicit game dealers, until the world governments realize that it is one of the fundamental rights of being human to kill, maim, destroy, or otherwise d*ck up our lives however we damn well please.

****, it sounds like more fun than playing another round of Tiger Woods 2007.

[Paradigm Shifter]

Hm. Sounds to me like irresponsible parents and incompetent politicians are to blame... and it's obvious that neither of those groups will actually admit to it being their fault, because it's easier to blame it on something that can't fight back.

(Music and movies have big Associations backing them, who have a lot of money... computer gaming is too small and fragmented, and doesn't have the cash to keep top-flight lawyers on retainer to fight idiots who want a scapegoat. As much as it pains me to admit it, computer gaming almost needs a "CGAA", a gaming equivalent of the RIAA or MPAA, to lobby politicians etc...)

[Joeymac]

Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter

Hm. Sounds to me like irresponsible parents and incompetent politicians are to blame... and it's obvious that neither of those groups will actually admit to it being their fault, because it's easier to blame it on something that can't fight back.

(Music and movies have big Associations backing them, who have a lot of money... computer gaming is too small and fragmented, and doesn't have the cash to keep top-flight lawyers on retainer to fight idiots who want a scapegoat. As much as it pains me to admit it, computer gaming almost needs a "CGAA", a gaming equivalent of the RIAA or MPAA, to lobby politicians etc...)

You're kidding right? You've not heard of Microsoft or Sony? Plus I believe the games industry rakes in more dough than the music and movie industry combined.

[Computer Gremlin]

The blame lies directly with the parents and the children. Without a doubt if they did not take the extra couple minutes to look up the game rating online before buying a video game children would be exposed to less graphic material. This leads to another issue as well, real violence in and outside the home. Blaming video games for all the ills of society cannot hide the fact removing offensive material from children and making them aware that bad things happen to good people is impossible.

Video games are not very violent. From personal experience dealing with animals on a farm all the articles on video game violence are not founded in good faith. Unstable and violent children can be dangerous regardless if their parents buy a mature rated game or place them in a plastic bubble for the first 18 years of their life. Most children do change but it takes a strong will to make it happen and it is something the government should have no part of in the family.

[Paradigm Shifter]

Originally Posted by Joeymac

You're kidding right? You've not heard of Microsoft or Sony? Plus I believe the games industry rakes in more dough than the music and movie industry combined.

That may be, but Microsoft and Sony don't represent the computer gaming world as a whole. They're far less likely to be the targets of politicians and parents wanted to place the blame somewhere other than themselves, as they have too much money. The smaller developers, though - and particularly the developers rather than the publishers - need better protection from bandwagon-jumping it's-not-my-fault-it's-theirs' attitudes.

Sony and Microsoft are big enough and bad enough to look after themselves - they've got their collective fingers in so many proverbial pies that even if someone did manage to blame them for "my little Mikey didn't murder half his classmates on purpose - it was the game that made him do it" and get the court to fine them, they'd barely notice it. And if someone had to go to prison for it... well, they can always string up the little developer that made the game.

...

Anyway, my point was that music and movies are not considered "soft" targets... computer gaming is.

[C-Sniper]

Originally Posted by Computer Gremlin

The blame lies directly with the parents and the children. Without a doubt if they did not take the extra couple minutes to look up the game rating online before buying a video game children would be exposed to less graphic material. This leads to another issue as well, real violence in and outside the home. Blaming video games for all the ills of society cannot hide the fact removing offensive material from children and making them aware that bad things happen to good people is impossible.

*snip* From personal experience dealing with animals on a farm all the articles on video game violence are not founded in good faith. Unstable and violent children can be dangerous regardless if their parents buy a mature rated game or place them in a plastic bubble for the first 18 years of their life. Most children do change but it takes a strong will to make it happen and it is something the government should have no part of in the family.

I completely agree. my mother was raised on a farm and when I got my first video game in 1997 (Goldeneye 007 for N64) she looked at the rating and talked about it first before letting me play. Even then when i got half life in 1999 she made me take it back for 2 years until i could buy it again. I think that most of the parents buying these games for their kids is that they don't know how to say "No". This is a problem i have seen in many parents as they want to be perceived as the "cool" parents that allow their child to have free reign over their lives.

Originally Posted by Computer Gremlin

Video games are not very violent.

I will agree that they have been "dimmed down" over recent years. An my example is that you don't see anymore exploding body parts like in Half Life or HL:OP.

[xPaladin]

Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter

(Music and movies have big Associations backing them, who have a lot of money... computer gaming is too small and fragmented, and doesn't have the cash to keep top-flight lawyers on retainer to fight idiots who want a scapegoat. As much as it pains me to admit it, computer gaming almost needs a "CGAA", a gaming equivalent of the RIAA or MPAA, to lobby politicians etc...)

There is the Entertainment Consumers Association (www.theeca.com), but it's no *AA -- thankfully -- since it's a grassroots campaign.

[cyrilthefish]

Part of the reason this report was commissioned was because of the stabbing of a youth in Leicester by a kid who was said to be obsessed with the Rockstar game Manhunt. This led to the mother of the victim calling for violent video games to be banned and her view has been backed by many other loud voices.

Gah!
makes me cringe to see this reported over and over in the media...

Quoting Gamepolitics:

When 14-year-old Stefan Pakeerah (left) was brutally murdered in 2004, there were claims that his killer, 17-year-old Warren LeBlanc, was inspired to commit the crime by playing the original Manhunt video game.

That position has largely been discredited over the years. A Scotland Yard investigation of the crime showed that, while Pakerrah himself owned a copy of the game, his killer did not.

massive text added for emphasis

[Jodiuh]

What the hell? I expected a picture of the chic?!

[BlackMage23]

I used to work for CEX, and just like UncertainGod said in the first post, there are a lot of parents and grandparents that have no idea what they are buying for their children, they just pick up the one the child asks for, and are nomally shocked when told what the content of the game is like.

[dr-strangelove]

I agree that the problem is that parents and politicians don't really understand the world of technology, at least the ones calling for the bans don't seem to, I'd say in about 15 years you'll see people who've grown up with video games in government & becoming parents, then they'll understand what they're dealing with and won't be so damn scared of it.

[Jordan Wise]

that byron is DOG UGLY

[Javerh]

I resent this kind of discrimination of one or two types of medias while others come through unscathed. Why is it that books and cd's don't have ratings? Would you buy Eminem's cd for a five-year-old? Or read him a bed-side story from Steven King's Salem's Lot?