Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Open Letter to the IFCO
Options
-
19-06-2007 8:18pm#1
Comments
-
-
Nicely put. Would be a great moment in videogame history if both classification boards actually decided to go back on their decision due to a public outcry. (A public outcry in favour of games, of course
)
Somehow I can't see this happening though.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
tman wrote:Aye... I'm sat in the "meh, it was going to be crap anyway" boat eating a cheese sandwich.
Haven't *SLAP* played *SLAP* it *SLAP* yet *SLAP*
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
keep seeing this argument, and I don't buy it (no pun intended).
If a parent knowingly buys their kid a game that someone has gone to the trouble of rating as unsuitable for kids, then the parent alone is failing in their responsibility to said child. No one else is responsible.
It's like saying ban alcohol because some parents let their kids drink.
That's all well and good in theory, but in practice that school of thought leads to small children playing graphically violent, unsuitable videogames. I wish that parents would educate themselves about videogames and monitor what their child plays - but by in large, this does not happen, and until it does, the IFCO will have to try to limit access to these violent games. Manhunt 2 was deemed unsuitable for adults, so do you really want 6 year olds playing it?People don't get desensitized playing a game. I've played games where I've run people down, driven through crowded streets at high speed pummelled people into the ground with my bare hands yet when I see joyriders/crashes/fights in real life it just as shocking and unnerving as it is to anyone else. People completely differentiate between games and real life and if anything I would say movies come closer to making it feel real than a game does.
That's debatable, and I disagree. Obviously, in the majority of cases, exposure to violent videogames alone is not enough to override one's own moral fiber and turn the player into a thug. That said, they must have some impact on the psyche of the player - especially younger players, who form their opinions and attitudes from the stimuli they're exposed to. Sit them in front of WWE all day, and they'll be practicing wrestling moves in school. Sit them in front of Rambo, and they'll want to be a soldier. So why should violent videogames, where it is the player themselves that perform these acts, not have a similar influence on kids?
Then on the other hand, you constantly hear calls from the industry that videogames are an artform, capable of provoking wide-ranging emotions. You hear Tony Hawk players who catch themselves spotting sweet gaps and awesome grinds when they're walking to the shop. So really, they can't have it both ways. Either videogames leave no impression and provoke no response from the player (in which case, why bother playing them?), or they can indeed influence the player, for better and for worse.
And just by saying that you weren't influenced by them isn't an argument. You'll need a slightly bigger sample group!
On another note: do we need Manhunt 2? For me, it is everything that is wrong with the industry. The original Manhunt was a commercial disaster, and it was only after the spike in sales when the Daily Mail attacked it that a sequel was considered. It is a game that seeks to cash in on the hysteria surrounding violent videogames, that seeks to glorify graphic violence and killing in order to achieve maximum publicity.
It is a horrible indication of the mental age of the industry. If through its banning, publishers and developers can shake their hard-on for violence and produce more creatively worthwhile videogames, I will fondly remember the day Manhunt 2 was banned.0 -
-
They're not (rightly so) banning this to protect the children and haven't done in the past with other violent games and movies.NekkidBibleMan wrote:That's all well and good in theory, but in practice that school of thought leads to small children playing graphically violent, unsuitable videogames. I wish that parents would educate themselves about videogames and monitor what their child plays - but by in large, this does not happen, and until it does, the IFCO will have to try to limit access to these violent games. Manhunt 2 was deemed unsuitable for adults, so do you really want 6 year olds playing it?
We're not talking about children who shouldn't be playing this either way.NekkidBibleMan wrote:That's debatable, and I disagree. Obviously, in the majority of cases, exposure to violent videogames alone is not enough to override one's own moral fiber and turn the player into a thug. That said, they must have some impact on the psyche of the player - especially younger players, who form their opinions and attitudes from the stimuli they're exposed to. Sit them in front of WWE all day, and they'll be practicing wrestling moves in school. Sit them in front of Rambo, and they'll want to be a soldier. So why should violent videogames, where it is the player themselves that perform these acts, not have a similar influence on kids?
Lets say this is true for a normal person, what makes it worth worrying about? Every normal well rounded person has the ability to think logically and morally. If we didn't everything we see could influence to carry out a certain action. If this happened surely every fight/car chase/shoot out would cause a reaction if it was violent or just on some kids show.NekkidBibleMan wrote:Then on the other hand, you constantly hear calls from the industry that videogames are an artform, capable of provoking wide-ranging emotions. You hear Tony Hawk players who catch themselves spotting sweet gaps and awesome grinds when they're walking to the shop. So really, they can't have it both ways. Either videogames leave no impression and provoke no response from the player (in which case, why bother playing them?), or they can indeed influence the player, for better and for worse.
This comes from talking with friends and similar opinions on here.NekkidBibleMan wrote:And just by saying that you weren't influenced by them isn't an argument. You'll need a slightly bigger sample group!0 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement