Games & Gore WARNING: Created With The Intention Of Discussing Game Related Violence

Retr0gamer

I think it's up to the publishers discretion. Although all publishers will go for the rating if a game deserves one, it's still a bit silly that they don't have to go for a rating. Also the rating is based on what the publisher recommends and not on the game content. I think they may show a few scenes from the game but they can leave stuff out.

Jimi-Spandex

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Kristok, Jimi-spandex: You honestly dont believe that exposing young kids to such graphic violence doesn't have an affect on them? Many of these game-related murders aren't from psychopathic kids, they're from normal kids who are desensitised to violence, who want to copy their favourite video games because their cool, not because they want to hurt somebody.

Honestly, I believe if a kid can't distinguish between acts in video games and those in the real world, there is something wrong with that kid. Perhaps they are not psychotic but there's something drastically wrong if he can't distinguish between beating someone up with a baseball bat in GTA and doing the same in real life.

At the same time, I don't think kids should be sold these games, should be playing these games or see these games.

kaimera

Tbh, I was watched that manhunt vid and felt kinda sick watching it. Twas a weird feeling because I have the game and I love the ott violent kills but there was something wrong with watching someone else do it.

On the whole, I have no issues with violence and gore ingame, alot of the time it adds to the game.
Max Payne had violence and gore but it was of the classy type and if anything, more realistic than manhunt or anything else.

I think young kids should not be playing 18+ games but you can only tell parents so many times. For eg, my housemates young nephew is only like 5 and his fav game is GTA. I mean wtf? Youngs kids are so susceptible to what they are exposed to, how are they to know right from wrong if GTA is what they grew up with?

You are a direct result of your immediate surroundings imo.

ObeyGiant

Personally, I agree with the detractors when they say that there is no point comparing videogame violence with movie violence. They have virtually nothing in common. In one, you are a completely passive observer of the vilolence. It can still have a rather chilling effect on you, but your brain isn't really doing much except taking it all in. With videogame violence, you are actually performing these acts of violence. In the game world, your brain is engaged in actively hunting down and killing these virtual enemies. You press your mouse button and your on-screen enemy dies - gore or not, you are actually a part of this death.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that it was this on-screen violence that prompted Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold to go on a rampage through Columbine. Nor do I feel that it was these games that trained them to kill - Brenda Ann Spencer, the mammy of high-school shootings, managed a 50% hit rate in 1979. Pong didn't teach her how to shoot a gun, just like Doom didn't teach Eric and Dylan. Nor am I suggesting that the violence, the games, or the game makers gave them access to the arsenal to do it with (despite what CSI: Miami would have us believe).

But I do personally feel that it can't be dismissed with a wave of "well, there's been violence on TV and movies for years and we're okay!" They're not even the same league.

Zombrex

projectmayhem wrote:

PEGI does a fine job. the logo's and age rating are clear to the most dim-witted idiot of a fool. if you buy a game "not knowing" it has violence or strong language then frankly, you should get some glasses...

You would be surprised. A lot (a surprising lot in my experience) of parents believe the age rating on the box of a PS2 or XBox game are a rating of the level of the skill required to play the game, not a rating of the maturity of the content. And they feel it is no harm giving there little Timmy a adult rated game because they think Timmy has loads of video games, he will surely be able to play this one no trouble.

I can only imagine that this comes from the age ratings on other toys which do rate the skill required to use the toy.

Call the parents stupid, but remember a lot of them grew up before videogames and as such no very very little about them.

Retr0gamer

Wicknight wrote:

You would be surprised. A lot (a surprising lot in my experience) of parents believe the age rating on the box of a PS2 or XBox game are a rating of the level of the skill required to play the game, not a rating of the maturity of the content. And they feel it is no harm giving there little Timmy a adult rated game because they think Timmy has loads of video games, he will surely be able to play this one no trouble.

I can only imagine that this comes from the age ratings on other toys which do rate the skill required to use the toy.

Call the parents stupid, but remember a lot of them grew up before videogames and as such no very very little about them.

Thats not stupidity. It's ignorance as well as something else that transcends stupidity.

I wish Max Payne was banned. Would have 8 hours of my life back so I could play a decent game.

monument

Everyone vote FG! Then we might have a chance of seeing some games banned.

Thankfully, we have a liberal minded Film Censor, and our current Minister for Justice, Michael McDowell, (with all his faults,) actually has taken the view that for the most part children’s access to the internet and other mediums is the parents’ responsibility….

Irish Film Censor, possible extended remit - Justice Minister
http://gamestoaster.typepad.com/games_toaster/2004/09/irish_film_cens.html

Dont be at yourself

The parents aren't taking responsibility though. If they're taking that stance, there needs to be a serious information campaign by the government aimed at parents. At the moment, most seem to go along with either what their kids tell them, or what the papers tell them, and I don't know which is worse!

Kristok

Why should the government waste money telling people to look at the big label on the front of the games to see if you kid is old enough for the game ?

At the end of the day they should be enforcing shops making sure they dont sell to minors as they should do with all media with age restrictions but after that its up to the parents.

Dont be at yourself

Shops by in large dont't sell games to minors though. They sell games to uneducated parents on behalf of their children.

Kristok

Well then in fairness its their fault. I know id personally not be too bothered as long as I knew the kid was able for it but if their not it would be my fault for supplying it.

Dont be at yourself

Is it? If the government are going to leave it up to parents with regards to censoring games, don't they have a responsibility to educate the parents so that they can make informed decisions?

Kristok

Why games ? Surly they should start a campaign about movies and music ? why entertainment, what about kitchen knives surly more damage is done with them ? If you rely on the government to tell you what to do then you live in a nanny state and most people dont want that.

My point is common sense should be assumed here, if the parents dont give a crap then thats their fault and an advertising campaign will only have limited impact. Any campaign will probably just result in some kid getting stuck with mario party when he wanted resident evil because his parents saw an ad on telly saying he was too young for it while the kid whos parents dont give a crap in the first place wont pay attention to any ads they see and just buy their kid whatever they want. Its only a fraction of a percent of kids who are stupid enough to do these things the rest shouldnt be punished.

Tusky

If you are raising a child you should be responsible enough to know what they are watching/playing and if they are able for it. My parents always knew what I was watching/playing from a young age. I still saw predator, terminator, aliens and the like when I was about 10 or 12 but they watched them with me to make sure I was ok with it. Thats how it should be, but unfortunately, its not. Alot of parents are happy that their children are locked in their rooms and not moaning at them for money or making noise around the house. I dont think any ammount of government pressure on parents is going to change this. There is ALWAYS going to be negiable parents, there is always going to be disturbed children who will act on things they see in games, movies, tv & music. I think its just something we have to learn to accept, stop blaming the media & start blaming the ****ed up kid(& his parents) who killed his friend with a hammer ala manhunt.

ambro25

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

At the moment, most seem to go along with either what their kids tell them, or what the papers tell them, and I don't know which is worse!

[rant]

(not ranting @ ya Nekkid )

How about thinking for themselves? Or look into it for themselves and make up their on mind? FFS! :mad: Has occidental society by and large gone so soft in the head with pc-this and warning-that and liability-there that this is it? This is now all we're reduced to? Await and accept whatever dogma (not in a religious sense) comes out of the rag or the tube?

With regard to the problem itself, it is no more different than for other media. But the reason why videogames are such a softer target is because they lack mouthpieces of the calibre of the music/movie/TV industries (yes, advertising $$$ should speak: Mr Sun/News of the World is not so quick to villipend the last gangsta cop-killing-advertising rap album when EMI winks and nudges at the rag MD/editor, pointing to their advertising budget with the rag).

Enough of this horse**** already :mad:
[/rant]

Absolam

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Is it? If the government are going to leave it up to parents with regards to censoring games, don't they have a responsibility to educate the parents so that they can make informed decisions?

Hmm.. follow that logically, if parents should be educated (at the taxpayers expense?) in how to decide what games are suitable for children, then really they should be properly educated in all aspects of child rearing.. in fact perhaps an examination system would be in order? While we're at it we could then introduce a punitive tax for those who have children without the relevant qualifications.. it could pay for the childrens allowance received by those who have proven they're sufficiently well educated to have children.... You never know, the PDs might be persuaded to include this as an election platform!!!

Smellyirishman

Absolam wrote:

Hmm.. follow that logically, if parents should be educated (at the taxpayers expense?) in how to decide what games are suitable for children, then really they should be properly educated in all aspects of child rearing..

Hurray for thread resurections.

Anyway, your point is way off track. Parents are educated about what to feed their kids, no exam required. Why not do the same for games. Simple. Posters in retail outlets etc...

tba

A fundamental flaw in parents attitudes to games is the root of these problem. Many parents still see games as a form of childrens entertainment, like a hula hoop or a colouring book, they see them as a toy. When in reality they are advanced forms of multimedia entertainment, A movie is the nearest comparison. And like movies games come in different categories childrens and adults, would you sit a three year old down in front of "American History X" or "Thomas the Tank Engine".

Take this to games and you are presented with a pickle, the games industry is growing up and forgetting a major demographic. We wane on about how great it is that we have games that touch on our interests as grown ups, but Kids don't give a crap about that, they want ten minutes of bright colours and hopping on bouncy flowers. Done right these games can interest adults too, "Physconauts" is a good example.

Let us not abuse the parent though, they are victims in a sense too, these new forms of entertainment can be confusing, they may well want to play with their children (thus allowing them to supervise while doing) but find it alienating and confusing, it not quite the same as previous evolutions such as TV, as it requires input and skill learning. As more previous gamers become parents we may see this problem disappear to the homes of disfunction, I know there are parents here, and I am willing to bet that there are precious few games they would like to play with there children, there is a market there that needs to be filled.

BopNiblets

I've been playing the Ambulance and Firetruck missions in San Andreas too much, "OH NO I WANT TO GO OUT AND PUT OUT FIRES AND DRIVE PEOPLE TO THE HOSPITAL!" :eek:

Smellyirishman

Columbine RPG responsable for recent montreal attack?

the_syco

Smellyirishman wrote:

Columbine RPG responsable for recent montreal attack?

Saw this one in the papers. Disturbing how many people die or get injured in the "safe zones" America has (schools, etc).

Having played Wolfenstein3D, Doom1, Doom2, RTCW, Doom 3, Halflife1&2... I haven't yet killed someone. Nor has a few million Americans.

=-=

NEWS JUST IN :
People killed other people before TV was even invented. I wonder what excuse, and who was blamed, back then?

ShiverinEskimo

Use videos such as in the OP in the ads to educate parents.

Telling a parent that a game is rated 18s and therefore shouldn't be played by a child younger than that isn't going to achieve much - show them footage of manhunt, GTA, etc and it might open their eyes to whats really contained in the game.

Any developer that wants to be seen cooperating with a scheme would happily allow their material to be used.