Slashdot Mirror
A History of Video Game Controversy
Decaffeinated Jedi writes "Sex, violence, animal cruelty, and scandalous pixels -- GameSpot has posted an in-depth feature examining the history of controversy in the video game industry. The feature examines several "major offenders" dating back as far as Death Race in the arcades up through more recent games like Grand Theft Auto III and Manhunt. Also included in the feature is coverage of the so-called "retail rogues" (games controversial enough that they were pulled from the shelves), as well as a docket of game-industry lawsuits and a look at the lighter side of game controversy. Who wants to bet that that the use-confiscated-drugs-for-short-term-benefit gameplay of Midway's upcoming NARC will make the cut in future articles about video game controversy?"
Only effect the ban had was that every youth absolutely had to copy the game.
japanese pr0n games for nintendo? Did anyone really get off to these things? Has nintendo ever made any statements about these games? Do they make games like this for current consoles?
"Who wants to bet that that the use-confiscated-drugs-for-short-term-benefit gameplay of Midway's upcoming NARC will make the cut in future articles about video game controversy?"
Can anyone say:
Fallout 2
Any game with 'stim pack' such devices
Mind you, having the cool jitters can actually add depth and understanding to the drug usage, and hopefully become so sick and tired of the jittering controller or the blured screen that they actually get steared away from drugs. But that's not news so the first time someone gets high and blames NARC, you'll see headlines from here to Baghdad!
Bye!
The majority of the video game market is males, aged 18-35.. Google yourself for the demographics, I'm too tired too.
Bitching "what about the children!?" is pointless. There are plenty of age appropriate games out there, Mario, Sonic, Crash Bandicoot are still about.
But, there now exists a generation of adults who grew up on video games. They aren't kids stuff anymore.
The latest big budget kill-fest video game should be measured against the yardstick of the latest big-budget R-rated movie, not the latest disney flick. Compare it to HBO, not Nickelodeon.
A 20 year old gets the jokes and satire in the GTA3 series. An 8 year old doesnt. Games are rated for a reason. Time for some personal and parental responsibility.
That is all.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
The earliest game I can remember that caused concern was Barbarian. This was a combat game for the Spectrum and others that had lots of blood, decapitation novel for the time. I think the cover of Crash magazine (Oley Frey, I think the artist was called) caused most of it, I reckon!
Syndicate was another memorable game, one of the first to allow mass carnage and easy access to fire.
Powered by onion juice.
You can get away with near infinite violence in the media in the US.
You can get away with far less in terms of nudity. I mean look, we had a little breast flash on national television a little while ago, and everyone went agog. From what I have been told, europeans have far less tolerance for violence, and more tolerance for nudity.
-- benton.
I used to compete in laser tag. We actually had tournaments (Mad Props to those in Irmo, South Carolina). It contributed more to my last shooting abilities than any video games. Now, when we talk about knowing specifics to weapons, Counter-Strike has told me to hide behind a wall of 2X6 boards if a 9mm glock is firing at me and to hide behind 3 feet of concrete if a Desert Eagle is firing at me.
.50 Calibre pistol vs. a Glock 9mm, I am more willing to pass them the money I have. Afterall, with the .50 calibre pistol, you are fighting for you life while a Glock carries some chance of survival.
If nothing else, the games have taught me the limitations and information a spec sheet could not. Theif flashes a
My parents never taught me about death. I learned my ways of sacrificing animals and fighting from the Old Testament of the Bible.
SP --- Finding evil in all things, just to keep it fair.
One that I never hear mentioned is Bloodsword for the Apple II computers. It was a 1v1 fighting game, and it came out around 1985. Needless to say, it had the blood of the early mortal kombat games with the ability to chop someones head off in mid combat. Then a goblin would come out and kick around the severed head like a soccer ball. You never heard of it, because it wasn't popular enough to be blamed for something. It's only the popular violent games that get pegged by people looking to place blame rather than assign personal responsibility
Take Doom and Colombine for example. Instead of blaming the teachers for letting those kids be teased everyday, or blaming the kids themselves for venting their frustrations in an unacceptable manner (ie shooting up the place) the media and the parents had to blame doom. Does anyone really think if doom wasn't around those kids wouldn't have shot the place up anyway?
A friend of mine's older sister would buy anything for her kids, who were like 10 and 5 at the time. Although the older one got his pellet gun taken away because he kept shooting out the car and house windows. But the younger one got to keep his, since he was mostly good with it. But they certainly get all the violent video games they want. Why? Because otherwise they wouldn't like her. Last time she wouldn't because they didn't have the money, the 5 year old said "I hate you!" so she bought it. When she wouldn't get them icecream before dinner, they said they would kill her so she bought it for them.
They've learned they can do anything to the babysitter and they won't get in trouble. Last time she took their precious Playstation away for fighting, so they wedged the bedroom door closed with a chair while she was putting it in the closet. She tried to call the parents but they cut the phone line! She climbed out the window but they had locked the front door. Then they started shooting at her. She ran 2 miles to the next door neighbors (They live in the boonies, you see) and the mom came home and yelled at the babysitter for bothering her and taking their games away, then bought the kids ice-cream. (They didn't even have to threaten to kill her this time!)
On top of they, she is convinced the older one is the smartest person on the planet. He gets straight A's in elementry school, you see...mostly because she does all his homework and projects for him...but only because he's too smart to waste his time with them, you see ;)
Long and the short of it, she doesn't want Wal-Mart doing her parenting beacuse she doesn't want ANYBODY doing her parenting. She doesn't want her kids being repressed and deprived. And she certainly doesn't want them mad at her
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Or at least, should have been sold only in adult bookstores. Custer's Revenge? That's fucked up right there. It doesn't mean I think it shouldn't exist, pretty fucked up no matter how you look at it.
A note on Wolf3D: Germany bans anything naziesque, whether you're being nazis, or killing them.
Incidentally I played (most of) phantasmagoria and aside from deciding it was a really cheesy game, I was nauseated by the experience of having my female character raped to further the story line. Given their track record i'm not sure "banned in Australia" really merits inclusion on the list. Although, I can't remember, if that's the game that has the sequence of a woman being killed by being fed her own guts through a funnel, I guess I can understand it. However, that's not mentioned here. The game was made by a woman though, the ever-famous Roberta Williams who is responsible for (in the old days) some fantastic games and (more recently) the stupidest puzzles ever known to man. So given that the main character is female, the author is female, I'd say it's man-hatin' if anything. Which should also hardly put it on the list.
The games that I feel are most justifiably contraversial are Grand Theft Auto 3/VC and Postal/Postal 2 (each game's second installment is basically the same game with different enhancements.) I feel this way because of all the different more or less realistic ways you can kill people in them. Postal (2, at least) is obviously goofy, like you can blow people's heads off while they're vomiting and vomit will come out of their neck. (Time for a MAD-style "Yeeeecch.") The thing that makes them different from, say, Unreal Tournament is that they are such a plausible setting, using (mostly) realistic weapons that the average person can get their hands on. (Obviously Postal has many departures from this, and GTA has a couple.) At least in games like Half-Life you're in a totally mythical situation.
Now, I like these games, I don't think they should be banned - but I can see why people get into such a froth about them. The bottom line though is that parents are responsible for parenting, not game companies. You don't let your kids eat rat poison and wash it down with antifreeze, even though rat poison looks like candy and antifreeze looks kinda like mountain dew. Why is this any different, besides the fact that we don't know if playing violent video games is actually harmful?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This proves that more violence doesn't necessarily make a game better.
Well, that doesn't address the issue of what the game is FOR, now does it?
If the purpose is to make money, "better" means "make more money". Violence is a tool to attract male teenagers with pocket change in the "young warrior" stage of maturation. So the profit maximization function may include putting as much violence in as possible without getting banned from the arcade.
If the purpose is to propagandize the player, then it depends on what you want to propagandize him WITH. Violence remains a tool to attract players. But now it must be tied to a propaganda message. Which can be done by the effects of use of violence in gameplay and the situations where using it improves, rather than harms, the score.
But then the issue becomes "what message do you want to propagate"? Political Correctness? The current legal system's rules? How to be a better warrior?
The Roman Games were viewed, by the rulers at the time, as a way to (in modern terms) desensitize the Roman population to violent death, in order to make them better soldiers.
Which brings us back to the fundamentals of US law.
The choice of "message" in any form of communication or art is a free speech issue. As such it's very heavily protected by the First Amendment. This is because government selection of moral codes is, in the view of the country's founders, more dangerous to the population than letting them select for themselves.
Violence in video games may not be "nice" according to some moral codes. But limiting communication to a particular set of moral codes is NOT within the government's power.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way