Violence,sexism and other controversial content in video games

[Samven]

To address both points at once, I actually agree with what you're both saying.

I know that not all games from Genre 1 are going to be better at showing how something can be portrayed more maturely than Genre 2 and I didn't actually say that I thought RPG's were always going to be better at dealing with mature issues than shooters. I was just giving a personal example that was actually more about the reactions of my family than my overall outlook on games.

And, my clearly-failed attempts at self-depricating humour with how I began that last post aside, I do truly believe that games are art. To answer Confederacy's second point: again, yes, I'm aware but I'm idealistic enough to believe that it someday won't be the case.

 

[The Infamous Bon Bon]

Thank you for summing up the plot of Halo for me Touch, I can't play it because it triggers my motion sickness and get really disoriented when playing (this is true of most FPS). Sounds like a cool plot.

I liked your joke Samven.

As for the actual topic, I don't generally play really violent games as much anymore, but it's more of it being boring than having an issue with it. When I was young I really enjoyed violence, but I need something deeper these days. Tastes change with age, which brings me to my next point.

The industry changes with the audience, as we the Atari/ NES generation get older we will probably buy different games which somebody will cater to I'm sure. But there will still be games for younger generations that I'm sure we'll ***** about because that just seems to be how it works.

 

[Samven]

As for the actual topic, I don't generally play really violent games as much anymore, but it's more of it being boring than having an issue with it. When I was young I really enjoyed violence, but I need something deeper these days.

Mhm. You get desensitised to things, I think. The more you see of it, the less it really matters.

 

[The Infamous Bon Bon]

Well I've become pretty desensitized to violence, but I was at a very young age. No what I mean is that what I find entertaining has changed drastically from when I was younger. For example I would rather watch a romantic comedy than a slasher flick. I don't need greater levels of violence to be entertained I actually desire less now.

 

[Sagitar]

I don't think the problem is the level of violence in violent games, but rather the amount of games that are built around violence. Every single AAA title that comes revolves around fighting or killing as a core mechanic, which simply isn't the case in other entertainment mediums. There needs to be a wider variety in the sorts of games that developers are given license to create. That's why even though Wii party games or mobile games like Angry Birds don't have much appeal to me personally, I'm all for them as they're blowing the door wide open to all sorts of content and ideas that are able to find commercial success.

The problem is that when you look at a big development studio, making a high quality game with a team of 100+ over 2-3 years costs astronomical amounts of money. That's why publishers are churning out the same kinds of titles (filled with violence and sexism) because they're safe. Taking a chance on a creative idea or a new IP without a guaranteed audience simply costs too much money for some publishers to be able to afford.

For the really cool, creative stuff, you're almost forced to turn to the indie scene... games like Journey and Limbo are amazing and drastically different than anything else out there.

The indie and casual game markets are starting to really grow, and a lot of experimental and interesting games are coming out. They may not have the same large budget as huge studios, but they can still produce something that's outright fun to play. They also have a lot of titles that don't include violence or sexuality. Start supporting them instead, and encourage others to do the same.

Having an alternative to violence/sexuality would do a lot more good than just talking against it.

I support this comment! (except I think the problem is too much sexism, not sexuality, which is rarely explored in games outside of shameless exploitation) Honestly, the fact that indie developers are at the forefront of our industry in terms of exploring creative ideas is why I'm so excited/proud to be part of the RM community ^_^

 

[Touchfuzzy]

Honestly, my problem with a lot of this is basically...

I get tired of everyone telling everyone else how they are having badwrongfun when they aren't hurting anyone. I've played all kinds of violent games. I've played all kinds of games that some would probably call sexist.

I've never committed a violent act against another human being other than in self defense. I've never robbed anyone. I've never done all manner of myriad things that people should really actually CARE ABOUT.

But I'm having badwrongfun because I'm enjoying games that they don't.

 

[Levi]

I was born just before internet "got big"... I started using the internet in the age of Ogrish and Rotten. So for me, nothing is off limits. I personally believe that nothing is sacred... and I know many many people believe otherwise.

Really... I'm just as fine with a rainbows and puppies game as I am with murder/torture. I don't think anything must be "banned". If people want to play a game where you kill hookers, let 'em. They don't have to answer to you. It's their right. If you don't like, don't buy it.

For all these parents that are so concerned that games make their kids violent/evil/morbid blah blah blah.... just keep your goddamned kids on a leash then. My parents were very lax with it (and I turned out fine...ish), yet my sister doesn't let my niece or nephews near anything worse than Wii Boxing. It's the parents' responsiblity and at the parents' discretion... no one elses.

Don't expect Game Developers to cater to your sensibilities. It's up to you to shelter your own kids. I don't want some oversensitive "boohoo-ing" fatcats stamping "acceptable" on anything. This is a new age. Violence is a product. People buy into it. 50 years ago couples couldn't hold hands on television... but I vividly remember when Saddam was hanged, as I watched it the next day on the News.

It's an evolution. Nothing is going to stop it. Smoking is a massive burden on our Government... it is essentially prolonged suicide... self-poisoning... but it makes money so nobody will stop it. So, why then would anyone, especially in times like this (open-mindedness up the hoo-hah), care about mental/spritual poisoning?

Anyways... [/rant]

 

[Lunarea]

Yes, it's the parents' job to keep an eye on their kids. It's also the players' job to figure out where they draw the line in terms of what they find acceptable in a game.

However, I think developers should still have some accountability in what they produce. I do think there should be a line drawn somewhere about things that developers shouldn't explore in the name of art. I'm all for expression, but I don't think it should be used as an excuse to get away with things. You can't walk up to someone, murder them, call it "art" and expect no repercussions.

 

[Levi]

Yes, it's the parents' job to keep an eye on their kids. It's also the players' job to figure out where they draw the line in terms of what they find acceptable in a game.

True

However, I think developers should still have some accountability in what they produce. I do think there should be a line drawn somewhere about things that developers shouldn't explore in the name of art. I'm all for expression, but I don't think it should be used as an excuse to get away with things..

I agree... but that is already the case. Of course there is a line... and it's typically in line with the law. [Edit: To clarify... when is the last time you saw pedophilia in a AAA/mainstream game? There are laws surrounding the depiction of minors engaging in Sexual activity. It spans all art. So to restrict Violence in Games, it similarly must span all art.]

You can't walk up to someone, murder them, call it "art" and expect no repercussions.

Well that's a terrible comparison. Murder is against the Law. Putting murder in a game is not against the law. In the same way that painters, writers, film-makers, song-writers etc can depict murder... so do Video Games.

If they censor games, they then must censor artistic freedoms across the board. Some people hate that fact, others find it to be a blessing

 

[Lunarea]

Well that's a terrible comparison.

It wasn't a literal comparison. Just an example of how the label of "art" doesn't absolve someone of all guilt for doing something illegal (or immoral). I would extend the same to video games. I've met people who feel that no topic is taboo in video games because it's not real and developers are exercising their freedom of expression. But I disagree with that.

 

[Levi]

It wasn't a literal comparison. Just an example of how the label of "art" doesn't absolve someone of all guilt for doing something illegal (or immoral). I would extend the same to video games. I've met people who feel that no topic is taboo in video games because it's not real and developers are exercising their freedom of expression. But I disagree with that.

Fair Enough. I agree that video games are a form of art. But I think "standard" violence/gore/sexuality has become the norm (the same goes for Film). At this point, it's considered socially acceptable (for the most part) to include blood, death, full frontal nudity, drug use etc. I think video games have moved from purely "childs-play" to a more Mature artform. Books have been depicting everything that Games do for hundreds of years. Besides, games and films are a new media... so it takes them a while to "catch up". In game's early days there wasn't the ability to depict gore (when a character is a few hundred pixels overall, it's difficult to add much detail).

Anyways... this is a much more complex topic than "A, B, C, or D". And there aren't necessarily "right" answers. Regardless, it's fun to talk about

 

[Espon]

Yes, it's the parents' job to keep an eye on their kids. It's also the players' job to figure out where they draw the line in terms of what they find acceptable in a game.

However, I think developers should still have some accountability in what they produce. I do think there should be a line drawn somewhere about things that developers shouldn't explore in the name of art. I'm all for expression, but I don't think it should be used as an excuse to get away with things. You can't walk up to someone, murder them, call it "art" and expect no repercussions.

But there are no outside repercussions in a game, you're not hurting anyone by killing a virtual NPC. This is why violence in games doesn't bother me, the actions I do affects nobody in real life.

I agree... but that is already the case. Of course there is a line... and it's typically in line with the law. [Edit: To clarify... when is the last time you saw pedophilia in a AAA/mainstream game? There are laws surrounding the depiction of minors engaging in Sexual activity. It spans all art. So to restrict Violence in Games, it similarly must span all art.]

That's one of the areas I would consider it possible to go too far, but even this exists if you look at things like certain eroges from Japan. Not something I would play but I've seen people on certain sites that are into that kind of stuff. >_o

 

[Levi]

But there are no outside repercussions in a game, you're not hurting anyone by killing a virtual NPC. This is why violence in games doesn't bother me, the actions I do affects nobody in real life.

Although I see where you're coming from, just to play the devil's advocate... selling Weed in itself is a victimless crime... it doesn't hurt anybody, yet it's a crime non-the-less.

In my opinion, it comes down to the Guardian's decision for Minors and personal choice for adults.

That's one of the areas I would consider it possible to go too far, but even this exists if you look at things like certain eroges from Japan. Not something I would play but I've seen people on certain sites that are into that kind of stuff. >_o

I agree that it is too far. And yes, I'm aware of those crazy Japanese and their super-tentacle-child rape porn... but the law over there (for whatever reason) decides that it is okay. Over here (In my case, Canada) it is not okay.

 

[Lunarea]

But there are no outside repercussions in a game, you're not hurting anyone by killing a virtual NPC. This is why violence in games doesn't bother me, the actions I do affects nobody in real life.

That's a bit of a gray area for a lot of people. We don't know entirely what psychological effects video games have on people. I'm not in the camp that video games cause violence, but they can still change the way we act. There are stories of people neglecting their children or going on violent rampages because of video games. And while video games may not be a direct cause of those event, they're still a contributing factor.

This is why I think it's important that the people in general need to be aware of how a medium like video games (or TV or books, or whatever) affects them. And video game developers should be doing the same (i.e. reflect on how their games are affecting players). Some self-reflection is a good thing. In my opinion, anyway.

 

[Levi]

That's a bit of a gray area for a lot of people. We don't know entirely what psychological effects video games have on people. I'm not in the camp that video games cause violence, but they can still change the way we act. There are stories of people neglecting their children or going on violent rampages because of video games. And while video games may not be a direct cause of those event, they're still a contributing factor.

Very gray indeed h34r: Really, everything can change the way we act... and I agree that Video Games can have an effect on a person (as this does happen, to some extent). But it varies wildly because of different personalities/tendencies. For example... a fellah stabbed a guy in the head over a game of counter strike. A bunch of people instantly jumped up and screamed "GAMES ARE THE DEVIL!!". But that person was surely already prone to violence... since the other several million Counter Strike players have never done that. Some people are very malleable and easily influenced... while others are not at all.

This is why I think it's important that the people in general need to be aware of how a medium like video games (or TV or books, or whatever) affects them. And video game developers should be doing the same (i.e. reflect on how their games are affecting players). Some self-reflection is a good thing. In my opinion, anyway.

I think this is the smartest thing said in this thread yet! Couldn't have said it better myself!

 

[Xeon]

I think that as long as no laws are broken and appropriate content warnings are provided, this should be a non-issue.

-EDIT-

To clarify, I think that's all you can do. Beyond that, it's a societal issue to handle. Sure, content developers can reflect on what they are creating, but I am steadfastly against imposing any restrictions on them.

Violent behavior doesn't come from video games. Violent behavior in society is the reason it's in video games in the first place. Video games are just a vehicle. The same thing happens in all forms of expression.

 

[Touchfuzzy]

That's a bit of a gray area for a lot of people. We don't know entirely what psychological effects video games have on people. I'm not in the camp that video games cause violence, but they can still change the way we act. There are stories of people neglecting their children or going on violent rampages because of video games. And while video games may not be a direct cause of those event, they're still a contributing factor.

In most cases where someone acted violently, they were nutters already. The only part that video games contributed is possibly the EXACT methods they mimicked. Is it really worse if they killed someone by using them as a human skateboard over shooting them in the head?

As for the whole neglect thing, that can be said of almost ANY hobby. And it hits every video game all the way from farmville to starcraft (Actually, in the US, I've heard more about casual facebook games causing this than any other).

Before I buy that video games HAVE ACTUALLY HURT SOMEONE, and that it was at least somewhat unique to video games themselves, or at the least storytelling as a whole (I'm ok with lumping it with violent TV because there is some parallels), and that it is perpetrated by someone who wasn't ALREADY CRAZY before he started, then I see no way to go around pretending we need for the "Oh no, how am I affecting people".

I live in the US, not everyone does, but here you are innocent until proven guilty, and video games have constantly been a target of a crusade that puts forth nothing but biased studies that have decided video games are guilty before they even start.

I'm sure I sound angry. This just DOES anger me.

I enjoy games, I enjoy ALL kinds of games. Yeah, I like violent games. They aren't all I play. I love games like Hot Shots Golf too, which are as nonviolent as I can imagine, and fairly cutesy on top. I've never hurt anyone (at least, not violently, I can't say I've never clumsily hurt someone). So I want people to stop trying to take away my games or try to make studios self censor them.

Children are the responsibility of parents (and even there, for well adjusted kids, I honestly don't think there is a horrible impact, but that is not the point here). Crazy people doing crazy things? I don't see any evidence that crazy people wouldn't do crazy things ANYWAY. And I've never heard a case of a well adjust individual being driven to violence by video games. Ever.

EDIT: Not angry with anyone here, just angry with the situation as a whole.

 

[Lunarea]

That's precisely why I say contributing factor, versus actual cause. Would those people have done something completely insane if video games never existed? Probably! I mean there were violent crimes long before video games came about. So, it's not like video games themselves put bad ideas in peoples' heads (although you would think so if you talked to some people). But maybe they caused stress. Or maybe they created such an enticing escape from reality that people with problems just took it a step too far.

I don't blame video games for such things.

However ... I think it's important to note that video games are so pervasive in today's culture that they can be used for things like challenging social norms, commentary on philosophy, religion or morality, introducing new concepts or reinforcing values. I mean, you have a very receptive audience and you can really make them think. Now, I'm not saying that every single game needs to be an educational masterpiece of some sort. Games are, above all, meant to be fun. But we can be open to the idea that a video game can teach us something. Just like books can. And it helps if developers are aware of what they want people to walk away with when they're done playing the game.

(And yes, I get the anger too. It's pretty infuriating to see video games or books blamed for things they don't actually directly cause. I had a lady at the library trying to sign some petition to ban one of the books because she felt it would -and I quote- turn young people homosexual. There are nutcases everywhere.)

 

[crimcrim]

Adding to what Touch said, if you take anything seen on your TV screen as a literal truth, then there really is something wrong with you prior to this whole situation.

 

[Kaiser]

To me I get angry at the stupid parents who purchase an M or T rated game when their child is at a young age because it looks cool or they say is a good game. My parents were those parents. My first M rated game was Turok on the N64, but I found it way to hard and just stuck with Banjo Kazooie and Diddy Kong Racing (until I got Mario Party but that's another story). My second was South Park Racing...worst mistake they made...then after me being softened up by Mario 64, Zelda, and Megaman I found Conker's Bad Fur Day. And I turned out perfectly f**king fine!

Parents usually don't read, in fact people usually don't read at all! To games, to instructions, to even the ingredients on a box of food it's a powerful fault to humans. If you're a parent that was raised in the 8 bit era and had to use imagination and limited resources to make games fun, you would be worried about the safety of your child with this new toys called Video Games, but of course same thing goes with their parents as well. All it takes is reading. Now back to the games. Developers wanna make what they wanna make (unless you work at EA then sucks to be you) no matter what. Soccer Moms and their overwhelming power should not control what developers do. But regulate what their child sees and plays until the time is ready for them to play more violent games and more mature topics.

Finally since I know no one likes reading walls of texts on forums I'll skip to the point and summarize. Let violence be seen at a young age (not to young were it floats over their heads) and teach children on how screwed up the world is. Show them that the world is not sugar boats and double rainbows, but boats 'n' hoes and weapons of mass blow stuff up while keeping it dumb enough for them (and most politicians). If that's possible and as well as more education, good morals may come back where the new generation will not try to do the bad stuff that they saw on TV, internet, and games. Oh if only.