Seriously, our country is run by Wesayso ...

[RedPiggy]

These people whined and moaned and bickered and pressured the government to come up with a games rating system and a TV ratings system ONLY to completely ignore them. The ratings should be enough. We shouldn't water down everything even further because some 10 year old's incompetent, never say no parents bought him GTA, and are shocked by a secret naked code.

You would think the "no government interference" folks would slobber all over this one. Anyone who believes in personal responsibility should tell parents it's not our fault they don't want to do their jobs. I mean, the idea that California would have to put big thick black borders on "M" games and above ... seriously, folks, was the cover art of the guy with the gun and the title being "Lying, Murderous Psycho" too difficult for you? Does the video game store clerk REALLY need to hold your hand and say, "Golly, gee whiz, I do believe there might be inappropriate VIOLENCE in this game!"?

 

[Drtooth]

You would think the "no government interference" folks would slobber all over this one.

I could get on them SOOOO hard right now. No. They just don't want companies to stop selling us lead painted stuff with bad breaks fueled by exploding oil rigs. Nor do they want a health care system run by people who DON'T invest in fast food companies pressuring them to make fried chicken sandwiches with the fried chicken in place of bread (some life insurance companies DID). But these are the same people who freaked out when Janet Jackson's wrinkly old boob popped out and wanted the government (the FCC) to fine anyone who did anything to offend them. Basically we have people who don't want to police the people who hurt and take advantage of them, but they want to police them so they don't have to police their own kids.

Plus, they actually believe the corporate sponsored Hooha that says that government regulation will hurt the small people big business was trying to crush under their feet for years.

Anyone who believes in personal responsibility should tell parents it's not our fault they don't want to do their jobs. I mean, the idea that California would have to put big thick black borders on "M" games and above ... seriously, folks, was the cover art of the guy with the gun and the title being "Lying, Murderous Psycho" too difficult for you? Does the video game store clerk REALLY need to hold your hand and say, "Golly, gee whiz, I do believe there might be inappropriate VIOLENCE in this game!"?

I've been saying this for YEARS. You want a V-Chip? You got one! Use it! You want ratings systems and harder regulations about R rated movies because some kid shot up a high school and they didn't want to punish bullies back then? Even though R ratings aren't indicative of what you're gonna see, and you can wind up with The Birdcage (my first R film... come on! It had Timon AND the Genie in it... you can tell I was young when I saw it) which has no violence whatsoever in it... well, you got them. pay attention to it.

Same with video games. GTA is for OLDER gamers (frankly, I'm not considered a gamer, but I'd fall into the older category, and I'd rather play older stuff). And a lot of the older people who play these games go out and shoot people too. But there is something to be said about the term age appropriate.

Now, off subject... I always had this musing.... Aren't people who play violent video games just naturally inclined to violence anyway? I'm not all that violent (got a Donald Duck style temper, though)... cartoons didn't want to make me drop anvils on anyone and eat spinach and punch everyone out. I usually shy away from ultra violent stuff, and gravitate towards the more cartoonish looking things like Sonic and Mario and Megaman. Though i did play some Fighting stuff, I never really played Mortal Kombat all that much... though i did enjoy a little of what I played.

I remember at the time, Nintendo self policed its own products. they wouldn't even let a Monopoly style Megaman game into the country because they had a ban on gambling games (dude that ran the company's US branch looked like Howdy Doody)... and when MK came out, they watered it down even AFTER giving it one of the first warning notices. Kids flocked to the Sega version, which, while it had the same warning, managed to keep all the Arcade violence in.

And YET, Nintendo had to forcibly shove "adult" situations into Conker's Bad Fur Day to even get it released (as it would have been another Banjo Kazooy type knockoff otherwise).

And it's not that questionable content games have NEVER existed. No way. Don't look it up, but Custer's Revenge for Atari. SHudder.... I had the misfortune of being just adventurous to try it out. it sucked and it was ugly and I was embarrassed to look at it. And then of course, PC games like Leisure Suit Larry which I know little of. These have ALWAYS been around. I guess stores were just better about making sure kids didn't get them.

 

[RedPiggy]

Well, at least in terms of me, I don't really mind violence if it's part of the plot. I'm a practical pacifist: avoid it when you can, get out the guns when you can't. In real life, I'm not a violent person. My aggressive tendencies are tightly controlled. I'm a nurse ... it has to be that way. I can't risk losing everything because of one stupid fight. Still ... as unless anyone proves otherwise, digital characters don't really exist and I can express myself as much as I need to. I remember reading how Japan had special places where you could paint your coworkers' faces on vaces (LOL) and smash them to little bitty pieces. I know psychology has mixed opinions (leaning on disbelief) about catharsis, but it's always been a part of my worldview, and I've never seen anyone OTHER than really messed up kids/adults who transfer fantasy aggression to real aggression. The same types of people who will bring up an old psych vid of kids watching and then imitating the punching of a doll will never seem to bring up play studies. You know why those kids punched the doll? You showed it to them and, without any other input, just left them by themselves. What do you think will happen? That's what PARENTS are for. You tell them it's appropriate to hit things that aren't alive (pillows, dolls, etc). You tell them it's INAPPROPRIATE to hurt living things. If they're unclear, make them watch that song in Sesame Street about being alive. However, every time I've ever seen studies about play, human or animal, it's always brought up that play is a necessary component. It enables to work out things WITHOUT doing it in reality. Chess was a "war game" invented to practice strategy without all the trouble of actually fighting anyone. It was the HALO of its day. We don't treat it like that anymore, but I'm sure if you dug around, just about any old "safe" game had violent or at least selfish intentions (I'm looking at you, Monopoly). GTA (games I can never win, as it seems like missions go from rather simple to dang impossible rather quickly) is weird because it "promotes" violence ... but the plot makes it very clear we're not dealing with "happy" situations. Corrupt law enforcement, rampant crime ... I don't know how those games end, and I can hazard a guess the protagonist isn't going to be all peaceful when it's over, but a PARENT can talk to their Caucasian middle-class suburban kid and explain that the protagonist FEELS that this is necessary because of all the stuff that's going on. He doesn't get a break. There IS no legal recourse. This would be a good time to discuss having empathy for those less well off while not particularly agreeing with their tactics.

 

[Drtooth]

We don't treat it like that anymore, but I'm sure if you dug around, just about any old "safe" game had violent or at least selfish intentions (I'm looking at you, Monopoly).

Oh my... you don't...? well... I'm not surprised.

Well, I'm going to have to derail this thread now.

Know one REALLY knows the story of Monopoly.

Unless of course, you happen to watch the History Detectives on PBS, that is.

Monopoly IS supposed to be a negative game. The earliest edition of the game, then called The Landlord's Game, was basically dealing with teaching a certain philosophy that very basically deals with ANTI-Monopolies, and landowning, and all that stuff. Trying to make a VERY long and complex story short, the game dealt with satirizing and teaching how big companies and people who buy large tracts of land hurt people. Of course, when the game was sold to Parker Bros decades later, that seemed to be watered down. But it still manages to make the point about how dangerous monopolies and trusts are. Unfortunately most people don't exactly know that.

Think of the game play. A small number of players have to buy up as much as they can so they can charge the other guys to basically sit there all the while putting up as much real estate as possible to drive up the costs (unless I'm getting something wrong). You have to admit, it SEEMS like it teaches greed, but it also teaches what it can do to the others, the smaller guys. So I have to be the guy who says this, but you actually have got it reversed.

In other words, no one playing Monopoly likes the guy who's winning, has all the money so no one can do or buy anything, and can charge people without that money whatever they want. Dude... that's still an allegory of our system.

 

[Yorick]

Well, that's why they always come out on top. I could NEVER call the Republican party stupid. They are a cold, manipulative, calculating machine that knows how to play the system for ALL it's worth. The term evil genius comes to mind. I unfortunately agree with that quote 100%. The Dems keep bombing all their chances because they made stupid choices. It's almost as if the Right said, "Okay, left, you take the caring about the poor, caring about the environment, caring about the working class, and basically caring about all that. We'll take religion, security, and money."

Now, how can you manipulate people with the stuff the left has? Other than getting people to pretend to care about recycling for a week. Now look at money and religion. Religion has been a weapon of choice of some of the worst dictators in history. To question someone's beliefs and use those systems of beliefs against them is pretty cruel. It gets people to go out and ignore half the stuff they believe in. Security? You have to make up monsters for kids to want you to come look under their beds.

Fear will beat out hope every time. You can bully people with fear... remember the quote... Nice guys finish last. And the stuff the left actually has, they manage to use against them. Sloth and excess beat out environmentalism... you tell the working class anyone looking out for them is a Communist (we didn't sell weapons to terrorists to fund far right wackjob drug dealers to fight far left nutjob drug dealers to make way for Communism, you know).

Exactly... The right is all brain.. And that's not a good thing.

Great post! All I would add is the following:
"(And even the stupid ones gain popularity for some reason.)"

 

[Drtooth]

They could easily say the same for themselves... G.W. Bush... Sarah Palin... even old Mr. Potatoe head Dan Quayle. The Party I can't call stupid, but some of the people they have in it...