Slashdot Mirror
Government Love and Hate for Video Games
hapwned writes "Jason Della Rocca, the executive director of the International Game Developers Association, unmasks the hypocrisy of governmental interaction with the video game industry. He expounds: 'Why is it that the cultural and artistic merit of the game medium is so hard to accept? Are games simply too complex for digital immigrants to grok? Why can't they see games for the powerful medium that they are? Is the word 'game' honestly so damaging as to demean the entire creative output of the industry, to reduce it to an empty pastime? Or, are the politicos enacting an entirely different drama where the industry is their hapless whipping boy and the sincerity of their intentions to "save the children" need to be questioned altogether?'"
The article heralds gaming as being a priceless cultural artifact and a savior of national economies.
Honestly, I don't think that video games are really that important. I grew up playing them, and to this day it is still one of my favorite hobbies, but I think that all of the fanfare regarding it is kind of a product of the overactive marketting.
The one very good point that I see the article raise is how games are treated very differently from films. In Australia, why aren't games allowed to have adult ratings when films are? I do agree that games that are overly violent or sexual in nature are bad particularly for young children (and adults, mildly), and that's why I agree with censorship and regulation.
I always thought that a good happy medium could be found in countries like Germany, where games that are for adults only are kept behind the counter in stores; they can't be displayed where children can see them, which is okay, and they can't be sold to minors at all, which I think is a good idea. At the end of the day, though, the games are still on the market, and they are still finding their way into the hands of the people that are most fit for playing them.
The socialist libertarian inside of me says that parents should always have the ultimate choice as to what their kids' game consumption habits are, but I think a society that takes some measures to protect children is a good one, as long as these measures don't stifle beneficial aspects of the industry.
When all is said and done, however, what's the big deal? I think that the train of thought that leads to discussions like this stem from that pervasive fear that games are corrupting our children. But, in the past, other mediums like televisions and books were doing the same.
Let's face it; we have to look out for our children, whether we're trying to "save" them from games, movies, comics, Ozzy Osbourne, Socrates, of liberalism (I say that facetiously). However, I think that what truly corrupts a human being takes place at home, and bad parents/societies should stop using scapegoats like video games, which fosters discussions like this.
The government response went something like "OMG our families will be destroyed by an infestation of video filth, think of the children!!!!". Exactly the same thing happening here. Once a generation that has grown up with videogames gets old enough to run for office the problem will disappear, just as the last one did.
I am trolling
It's all about the votes. If people are afraid of video games, if they're mad at video games, then it's time to regulate video games. The content doesn't come into play for the people making the decisions.
Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
Did you know theres more explicit sex in a romance novel in a grocery store checkout line than there is in GTA? True fact!
The funny thing is violence in video games suits the government just fine when it is used as a recruiting tool for the military as "America's Army" the video game.
You can't sell a violent game, but the army can give it away for free.