Digital Cream

I support the industry’s voluntary ratings system, which in the USA is run by the ESRB, an independent ratings board. Game makers must pay the ESRB to rate their games. It’s pretty similar to the movie rating system in the USA.

A report by the FCC, not one to look the other way as naughty (and, sometimes, wobbly) things are being shown to impressionable youth, finds that the rating system is working very well. This proves that there is no basis for legislation which enforces such ratings and age restrictions. Such legislation has already wasted millions of taxpayer dollars as grandstanding politicians make showy bills which fail court challenges on First Amendment grounds, and act as a placebo for the illness of antisocial behavior and violence in society.

Sites which cover this general issue are:

• http://www.igda.org/censorship/
• http://www.videogamevoters.org/action/

At the latter site you can take action to inform your representatives and affect the legislative process.

Here is a repost from Wired Magazine online which I like a lot. It illustrates how the threat of corruption from new forms of entertainment have long arisen in society. 

The Culture War: How new media keeps corrupting our children

US senator Charles Schumer says some videogames aimed at kids “desensitize them to death and destruction.” But dire pronouncements about new forms of entertainment are old hat. It goes like this: Young people embrace an activity. Adults condemn it. The kids grow up, no better or worse than their elders, and the moral panic subsides. Then the whole cycle starts over. Here’s how the establishment has greeted past scourges. (continued »)

From The Observer: 

Playing computer games may actually be good for children, according to a government study that found no proof that even violent games triggered aggressive behaviour.The games can improve children’s decision-making and instil ‘positive learning traits’, some research suggests. At least one study argues that make-believe violence helps children ‘conquer fears and develop a sense of identity’, as gruesome fairytales once did.

The review was ordered by ministers over concerns about possible links between bloodthirsty games and real-life violence. The fatal stabbing of 14-year-old Stefan Pakeerah, whose attacker was said to have been obsessed with a game called Manhunt, prompted a campaign by his mother to have violent titles banned.

The review concluded fears about violent games reflected deeper social concerns about ‘the changing nature of childhood in a modern world’. Most research suggesting a link came from America and did not take into account the context in which children played.

Ministers have discussed age-labelling of games and are understood to be planning talks with the industry about helping parents choose titles.

Video Game Voters called on developers to write a testimonial for lawmakers to read, so I posted a response. (continued »)

Of course lots of Political Left publications are wary of government regulation of video games, but some on the Right, such as the author of an article in the National Review, also agree it’s none of the government’s business to do so. I welcome any allies in this battle.

While debating with someone here about a recent study again showing a correlation (once again, not causation) between game playing and a violent mindset, he asked what study I would support if I had any amount of money and time. Here is my answer: (continued »)

I was interviewed for an MSNBC article about parenting and video games by Thomas Loftus. Most of what I have to say is in a sidebar article alongside the main article. Thanks to Jason Della Rocca (IGDA president) for the referral!

Do you think I should someday write a book such as “The Gen-X Parent’s Video Game Survival Guide”? Leave me a comment or drop me a line if you think I should move it toward the top of my to-do list…

Here are the full notes I sent to Mr. Loftus, which talk a lot about my approach to video games in my home, as both a father and as a game developer. (continued »)

This is due to the HotCoffee fiasco which I presume everyone already knows about.

I think the action by the ESRB forcing an AO rating onto GTA:SA is justified. Rockstar needs to be spanked in order to bolster confidence in the ESRB rating system, which is (at least for now) protecting our industry from heavy-handed governmental regulation.

The political grandstanding about this is, as usual, both amusing and revolting. But that’s to be expected. Rockstar were idiots to allow this to happen and I want to personally slap those responsible.

I’m more willing than anyone to see an AO game be made and sold to enormous profit… but it must be clearly rated as such. Rockstar has set things back considerably.

Gerard Jones published an opinion piece in the LA Times; we all discussed it on the IGDA anti-censorship list and I gave him comments as he was editing it. It’s a good response to legislation regulating video games.

A report discussed how to view violence as an infectious disease. It specifically deals with being exposed to actual violence, not mediated, but it seems relevant to video games.

I’m interested to know if the methodology holds up, so if anyone has good analytical skills I’d love to see their analysis of this study method.

Though this may (and probably will) be turned into an argument to prevent kids from seeing virtual violence as well “just in case”, the argument could be made the other way: (continued »)