Halo In Church Points Out ESRB Flaws
The recent controversy over church groups making use of Halo 3 to attract young men to their services continues to be a subject of debate outside of the fan press. GamePolitics notes that the debate is indicative of flaws in the ESRB's system, and in mainstream culture's understanding of those ratings. "When you look at it like that, it's hard to blame those who criticize bringing Halo into sacred space. For the most part the critics are not gamers and have no concept of the vast difference between Halo and GTA. All they know is that the games share a common M rating, a designation assigned by the game industry itself, theoretically for the protection of impressionable youth. For the uninitiated it's only logical to assume the content must be of a similar character as well. As someone who has played both, I'd argue that there is a world of difference between Halo and GTA."
When you have to pidgeon hole all media into about 5 slots, you're going to have differences between boundary conditions. Like how 2 R rated movies aren't necessarily the same in terms of content.
"Gharbad no Hurt!" -Gharbad
A game based on parts of the Bible could get an M rating as well. The bible is full of violence and sex. People just seem to gloss over that these days. Much like the people who say drinking is a sin, and over look that water to wine section.
Think Deeply.
I submitted this to our own pastor and some of the others involved with youth and fellowship in our church. And I suppose being a gamer myself it just makes sense to me. The fellowship committee in our church is there to create activities that are not necessarily 'church' related, but help bring us together as a community, to get to know each other, and just to have fun. The youth groups do the same things. I don't see why it seems like such an alien concept that one or the other should use video games for that purpose. I mean, come on I'm a geek and 31 (and still thinking he's in college at times). Do I look like bingo or knitting are activities that I'm going to sign up for?
And I agree with the summary that it only seems strange to those who don't know about gaming, and while I can understand their initial confusion, I'd hope that after an explanation and (at most) a demonstration, that they'd see that. For the most part, I've run into very little concern about these type of things from anyone (and yes I'm going to stereotype) who was not under 65 or so in our church. But I think it's our part as gamers/geeks/fill-in-your-term-here to explain away the FUD that some people seem to spread.
I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
That's always struck me a bit odd... Halo's a fairly clean game. There's very minimal swearing (I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure there's a at least one "shit" uttered at dispariaging moments...), and the violence is really on the cartoony side... It's not realistic at all, there's very little blood, absolutely no gore, and when people die they just fall over, as opposed to being ripped apart or dismembered.
Heck, most of the things you're killing are aliens or, online, Spartans who are encased in full-body armor with no skin visible.
Personally, I would have rated Halo 3 as a T, not an M. And personally I think it's even on the tamer side of T.
The ESRB rating system should be used by parents to review the content of games for what they believe to be acceptable for their children. And yes, different games may get the same rating for completely different reasons. IIRC, SWAT 3 got an M rating as well. However, anyone could look at the 2 or 3 lines of text underneath the rating to find out exactly why the game was rated what it was. Using the example of Halo 3 in a church outreach or fellowship activity to say that the ESRB rating is flawed is exactly wrong.
The ESRB rating tells you what is there. Some parents and church leaders will decide to not allow M rated games. Others will look at the descriptors and prohibit certain games based on that. But this shows that the system, properly understood as a tool that informs parents and responsible adults, is not flawed. What is flawed is the idea that some regulatory body, whether mandated by government or not, is responsible for what children and teenagers see and experience in video games today. That responsibility should always rest on the parents.
Meh, a real sig would take too long, and I have an MMORPG to play with....
You're trying to pretend there is a difference between killing and killing a killer, or that it's somehow OK to kill during war. I don't really have any strong believes in anything but I have very strong morals on this topic.
Killing is Killing and it's bad to kill people! The passage in the bible is mis translated in some bibles. The exact passage translates more closely to "Thou shalt no murder". In certain notable translations it's translated "thou shalt no kill." This isn't double speak. most languages do not line up 1:1. The original text used a word that is more in line with the word "murder" then "kill" but for one reason or another certain translations used "kill".
Your morals are irrelevant to the translation of the word. You may believe killing a cow is wrong but it doesn't effect the translation of exodus.
If you investigate the history of Judaism and the early Christian churches you'll find neither religion does not agree on your view of "killing". Both outline circumstances where killing is morally correct. Some off shoots (modern and ancient) of Christianity might be more to your liking but it does not change the original word used int he 10 commandments.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Although the game may be non-violent, it is equally dangerous due to its irresponsible depiction of an unhealthy diet. Won't somebody think of the obese children?! I'd change your game to have the player (a loquacious charming-but-tomboyish little girl) deliver cold, refreshing, Free Trade mountain spring water.
Also, the use of the truck promotes both inactivity and CO2 emissions, so the character should deliver the water from a bike, wearing a helmet and wrist, elbow, and knee guards of course. If you run a stop sign or ride on the sidewalk, it's an immediate game over, and you have to ride slow enough that your riding partner, a slightly retarded child with a heart of gold (of indeterminant ethnic minority status) can keep up with you so the buddy system stays intact.
You only have one cup that everyone drinks out of so as to minimize waste; a mini-game sterilizes the cup with antibiotics between uses. Points are scored for each person served, but taken away for not keeping your heart rate up, not wearing a flag lapel pin, supporting the iraq war, or passing a breast cancer donation box without throwing in some change.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
Many of which are morally reprehensible to any modern civilization.
Translating the commandment as "murder" turns it into a really impotent commandment. As long as the people already had a concept of "wrong" killing and "right" killing, then telling them "wrong" killing is wrong is pretty useless. The history of western civilization should prove that some stronger language was warranted.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace