Slashdot Mirror


German Interior Ministers Seek Ban On Violent Games

GamePolitics reports that "Germany's 16 Interior Ministers have banded together to ask the Bundestag (Germany's equivalent of Parliament) to ban the production and distribution of violent video games. Moreover, the ministers hope to see this accomplished before Germany's new elections take place on September 27th." Violent games became a national issue in Germany earlier this year after Far Cry 2 was scapegoated for a shooting. Germany-based game developer Crytek could be forced to move or outsource if the ban goes through. Spiegel Online has the original story (Google translation).

45 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. First Post by hachi-control · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And first to say, the government hatred on freedom of any type has gone too far, and this is a perfect example.

    1. Re:First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While I admire everyone's knee jerk reaction to defend video games via free speech I think this method of defense is inherently idiotic.

      If someone came up to me and accused me of murder I wouldn't base my case on freedom of privacy. I would hope my lawyer could simply disprove the actual charges against me.

      Fighting these sorts of things largely on free speech seems to imply that that video games are actually responsible for some sort of mayhem but should be protected anyway. They aren't dangerous. They don't pose a public threat and they shouldn't even be charged as such let alone 'allowed' to exist in spite of these accusations.

      People need to educate the voting public that the 12 year old next to them on the laughing and bragging about how he shot a rifle through someone's head yesterday and made it explode isn't a deraged lunatic.

      Video games out of context sound insane and dangerous. This is largely an educational problem which needs a good PR campaign. It's easier to defend something which people understand and like than it is to fight an abstract constitutional battle about the conflict between freedom and public well being.

    2. Re:First Post by bertoelcon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Video games can be dangerous, but anything can be used as a weapon. It is hard to inflict physical harm with a nonphysical object thou like a digital download.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    3. Re:First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If someone came up to me and accused me of murder I wouldn't base my case on freedom of privacy. I would hope my lawyer could simply disprove the actual charges against me.

      You have it backwards. It would not be your responsibility to disprove anything. It would be the accuser's full burden to PROVE that you have murdered. Unless they can, then you shouldn't have to lift a finger or be inconvenienced by it.

    4. Re:First Post by KDR_11k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hell, even if videogames DO cause those murders, that's still several orders of magnitude less dangerous than tobacco or alcohol, neither of which is banned. You can probably find food products that kill more people per year than shooting rampages do. Also they're singling out videogames. Why not movies, books (I hear religious texts have inspired a lot of violence, those really shouldn't be in people's hands), music and maybe news reports about violence? Easy: Because these politicians already subject themselves to that kind of stuff and realize it's not a prolem (or if it was wouldn't want to declare themselves psychos).

      This is a completely ridiculous pile of bullshit. Shooting rampages are so rare and cause so few deaths that special legislation is not warranted against such a broad subject as videogames even if it were at fault (last time one happened the father got tried for severely lacking firearm safety and of course the kids in question are always in a situation where they get treated like dirt by everyone else anyway).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:First Post by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have it backwards. It would not be your responsibility to disprove anything. It would be the accuser's full burden to PROVE that you have murdered. Unless they can, then you shouldn't have to lift a finger or be inconvenienced by it.

      That is where the metaphor breaks down, as there is no such burden in the court of public opinion, and public opinion unchecked causes these things. If we ignore it and do nothing to correct people who for some reason think there is a proven link between violent videogames and actual violence, their elected officials aren't going to say "no, sorry, prove it."

    6. Re:First Post by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hell, even if videogames DO cause those murders, that's still several orders of magnitude less dangerous than tobacco or alcohol, neither of which is banned

      And ALL of which have big powerful industries behind them. We're talking about videogames like they're endangered. There is huge industry with lobbyists on our side. And anyway, senior citizens who think games are the devil are dying everyday, while kids who grew up playing games are reaching voting ages every day. Momentum and lobbyist money, if not organization and self-righteousness, are on our side, we don't need to panic every time some idiot government official says something stupid about videogames.

      Not to say "Let's not worry about it" lets just keep some perspective that these things aren't gaining much steam.

    7. Re:First Post by Nyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe someone should point out the lack of video games didn't keep the Germans from oppressing most of europe during the first half of the 1900's.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    8. Re:First Post by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you think racism goes away when we're all one big happy color, with all the infidels weeded out, well, I've got new for you, you're missing it big time. Don't you see, first you kill off all the other races, then you start killing off all the other religions, then you start killing off the left-handed people, then you start killing off each other over the length of your crew cuts, until finally there's only one guy left — and no doubt he'll attack the mirror.

      Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

      —Dennis Miller, The Rants

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:First Post by easyTree · · Score: 2, Funny

      Where would we be today if not for the master race? How many great videogames involve shooting nazis ?

      Wolfenstein 3d ...
      cod5

    10. Re:First Post by TheSambassador · · Score: 2, Informative

      I might add that there seems to be at least some support that violent video games increase "aggression."

      Please note that aggression is a hard thing to define and measure, and that lab settings have used... somewhat odd methods to do so. For example, one study had participants either play a violent video game or a non-violent video game, and then were given the opportunity to add whatever amount of hot sauce to another person's food (who wasn't in the room right then) that they wanted to. They DID find that those in the violent game category put more hot sauce in the food... but is that really aggression?

      It seems obvious that video games don't cause violence... and that is the myth to go after. However, some validresearch has pointed towards increased aggression. Once you get there though, do you ban something that merely increases aggression slightly?

  2. NOOOOO! by genner · · Score: 5, Funny

    If this keeps Crytek from making games it has become the worst kind of tragedy.
    The kind that affects me!

    1. Re:NOOOOO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Crytek doesn't make games as it is, they make tech demos.

    2. Re:NOOOOO! by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, it will deal a very harsh blow to the German video game industry. Essentially, we have CryTek. And Factor 5-- nope, they first left Germany and then went out of business. Rainbow Ar-- no, they died in the 90s. Okay, Sunflowers and Zuxxez are still alive. And Blue Byte.

      So essentially we have Anno and The Settlers. plus Two Worlds That's two moderately successful series and a rather forgettable game. Gothic doesn't quite count; I don't even know if JowooD is going to have someone develop a fourth game after they scared the original developers away.

      On the other hand we have Crytek, who are internationally reknowned for making a kick-ass engine that generates sales on its own and have pushed out a number of AAA titles. Yeah, we really could stand to lose that. I mean, who wants foreign companies licensing a locally-produced game engine for lots of money? Or a locally-produced game being a hot seller worldwide?


      Of course laws should be more than a business decision but the tenacity with which some German lawmakers keep trying to ban violent video games (violent shows and movies are A-okay, as long as they have an age recommendation) leaves one wonders if they shouldn't invest some time actually reading about the subject (and not just from one source) and thinking about the possible consequences.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  3. Re:And this is the government... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned. In this particular case, a few are loonies and a few have good sense. Don't assume it's the same few people in each case.

  4. What about a ban... by Criceratops · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... on violent German regimes?

    Or a ban on violently bad singers. That could kill off their Hasselhoff hassle.

    --
    crappy triceratops
    1. Re:What about a ban... by ILoveCrack83 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But let us be honest. The people ruling that country now, do not even know what you are talking about. The whole world needs to grow up instead of looking for a scape goat.

    2. Re:What about a ban... by bertoelcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The whole world needs to grow up instead of looking for a scape goat.

      Everytime the world tries to grow up in one area it takes a step back in ways we already had correctly. It really just needs a happy medium on all levels.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    3. Re:What about a ban... by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The joke being that the more they restrict freedoms the more they become like they were before. I've read articles in the past of game developers being spit on in germany, Crytek has had it's offices raided in the past (with shotguns in peoples faces). How long will it be before they're being lead to the game developer death camps?

    4. Re:What about a ban... by easyTree · · Score: 2, Funny

      What's a Hasselhoff?

      It's a life-sized gay-looking optional mascot/adornment for trans ams... much favoured by germans, apparently.

  5. Crytek by jgtg32a · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hopefully they do leave Germany one of the things that annoyed me about Crysis is that the Koreans didn't respond to dead bodies. In Crysis you can't move dead bodies because it is against the law or some foolishness in Germany. Instead the bodies just disappeared after a little while

    1. Re:Crytek by artor3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, but if they leave Germany, do you really think all the devs are going to follow? They'll end up with an entirely new team making games on the old IP, and it won't be the same.

      Hopefully, the politicians behind this get some sort of backlash from their constituents, and back down.

  6. Godwin's law... by mail2345 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just got proven again with the tags. Is 10 min a new record? Anyway, what do they mean by violent? "Violent" could be twisted into a lot of things.

    1. Re:Godwin's law... by tenco · · Score: 3, Informative

      IMHO this is a lax translation. I'll try an exact one: "for games, which major element of the game's plot is the virtual exercise of realistically depicted acts of homicide or other gruesome or otherwise inhuman violences against human beings"

  7. Recession...not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hey we're really hurting on the economy, let's ban the idiots that dare run a successful business and bring needed tax revenue in! That'l fix the situation! How dare you try and run a business that may offend people in some way!

    1. Re:Recession...not? by koreaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Gay marriage redux?

      In my opinion, it's the same issue. Self-righteous moral assholes trying to interfere with our private lives, to the detriment of everyone affected and sometimes even to everyone not directly affected (by reducing the economy...)

  8. Free Speech? Really? Best Defense? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I admire everyone's knee jerk reaction to defend video games via free speech I think this method of defense is inherently idiotic.

    If someone came up to me and accused me of murder I wouldn't base my case on freedom of privacy. I would hope my lawyer could simply disprove the actual charges against me.

    Fighting these sorts of things largely on free speech seems to imply that that video games are actually responsible for some sort of mayhem but should be protected anyway. They aren't dangerous. They don't pose a public threat and they shouldn't even be charged as such let alone 'allowed' to exist in spite of these accusations.

    People need to educate the voting public that the 12 year old next to them on the laughing and bragging about how he shot a rifle through someone's head yesterday and made it explode isn't a deraged lunatic.

    Video games out of context sound insane and dangerous. This is largely an educational problem which needs a good PR campaign. It's easier to defend something which people understand and like than it is to fight an abstract constitutional battle about the conflict between freedom and public well being.

    1. Re:Free Speech? Really? Best Defense? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm a grown up, the things I read, watch or play are my problem and my problem alone. If they were talking about banning games for kids, we could take another angle and argue over the influence of videogames. I'm an adult, I don't want to be considered like an irresponsible that will go on rampage because he watched Terminator or played Far Cry 2...

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  9. People don't want to believe in bad people by DreamsAreOkToo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People don't want to believe in bad people. Lets face it, some people are just rotten. It wasn't video games, it wasn't the comic books, or the rock music. Maybe something caused it other then nature, but if that's the case, I'm sure it was exposure to a lot of lead or a head injury that damaged a specific portion of the head during early childhood.

    Until we realize that some people are rotten, and everybody is responsible for themselves, we're going to continue to creating stupid laws that make the word a worse place to live in.

    1. Re:People don't want to believe in bad people by e9th · · Score: 3, Insightful
      People don't want to believe in bad people? This thread is inherently Godwinned, so I can point out that A. Hitler enjoyed popular support until it became evident that the war was lost. People wanted to believe in him, even elected him Chancellor, because he promised them solutions. Yete nobody wanted to analyze what those solutions entailed.

      It wasn't until after the war was over that you couldn't find even a single person who had ever supported him.

    2. Re:People don't want to believe in bad people by eiMichael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Right, people just come out of the womb stabbing and biting everything in sight. Stop blaming shit on genetics just because it frees you of responsibility for your community. Worst case they have some testosterone production issue that makes them more aggressive, but even that doesn't make them rotten.

      Putting some teenager into murderer/rapist/assault prison for smoking a particular plant is rotten. Having to leave children at home unsupervised because both parents must work just to get paid minimum wage and can't afford proper child care is rotten. Calling other people rotten to free yourself of any responsibility for what happens on this planet is rotten. Grow up.

    3. Re:People don't want to believe in bad people by SquirrelsUnite · · Score: 2, Insightful

      More like people don't want to believe in complex problems that require a lot of attention and might not be possible to solve completely. They want simple solutions like banning violent games or installing metal detectors in schools.

      As for lead poisoning or head injuries being a major cause: that's a pretty weird guess. How about constant bullying combined by a (possibly in part genetic) antisocial personality and a tendency towards revenge. With some neglect from their environment these kids might not have the coping mechanisms some others do and violent games show an example for how to handle these situations.

  10. The True Sad Fact of this by arbiter1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Pretty much any game made now days could be considered violent, any game that you use a gun or weapon to attack something else. Hell even C&C could and games in that area since they have you trin to destroy the enemy.

    1. Re:The True Sad Fact of this by DeadPixels · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Show me a game that can't be painted as violent, and I'll show you Solitaire.

  11. Why not ban TV? by MartinSchou · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not for the violent tv-shows, movies etc ...

    No, I'm not going to go along those lines - that's just adding to the fire of "ban violent [something]", and we haven't seen any good studies showing a link between virtual and real violence.

    However, we HAVE seen how effective TV, radio and movie theaters are in turning a population against others, raising support for horrible behaviour, war ... lots of other stuff.

    It's actually documented in Germany's own history. Yes, I almost Godwin'ed myself, but in this case it's quite relevant, even though it is slightly trollish.

  12. Every election the same farce by meist3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really, this is supposed to be the fabled "democracy" ancient greeks thought up? Oh no, wait. We've transformed that into a PR farce that every four years proves how rotten the people at the top are. Your votes don't matter. They are merely a numeral representation of how much you "don't" have to say. Lies, populism and ignorant phrase flinging wherever you look. None of this will matter AFTER the election that's why everything they tried to introduce lately was meant to be established before voters aren't important again. Look at our ministry of family and health. They neglected their resort for 3 1/2 years and all of a sudden when the election goes into the confrontation phase they start tossing around stuff like "DNS filters" and "address filtering" against alleged child pornography. All of which could be removed through application of existing laws but since they chose to balance the budget by cutting funds to investigators and connecting departments they now have to start flapping their arms REAALLY fast.

    Politicians are lying pricks that are always a couple of decades behind when it comes to reality. Unfortunately this generalization stands to be disproven for all of the major parties in my country. They can't stop anyone from selling these games to me and if they do I'll personally book a cheap ticket to one of our less ridiculous neighboring countries. Other than that I or someone else will sue at the surpreme court that no government can tell an adult tax payer what to watch or what to play. Not unless they give up all their ludicrous make-belief jobs. This will all die down when these shit elections are finally over. Remember: Vote Pirate!

  13. Pointless legislation is pointless. by kheldan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They can't control the production and sales of games OUTSIDE of Germany. People who want them will just order them from elsewhere. What are they going to do, make it ILLEGAL to own games like that? Stupid and pointless. They should spend their time and energy solving REAL problems.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:Pointless legislation is pointless. by icsx · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thing is, most games are already censored (no gore, no limbs and bodyparts are replaced with toys in Team Fortress 2) in Germany. Some games you cannot even sell there! For example a dude in Germany cannot buy Wolfenstein 3D from Steam. Now total ban for violent games? Pssh. Talk about overreacting. TV is the biggest source for Violence. Ban it first.

  14. Re:And this is the government... by laron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Control freaks will suffer no other control freaks in their territory.

    --
    "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
  15. Germany has a problem with democracy by speedtux · · Score: 4, Informative

    German law is full of such bizarre restrictions on freedom.

    For example, in addition to the usual laws against slander and libel (which have some justification), Germany has laws and penalties for insulting someone, even in private and even if you don't state anything factually wrong.

    Germany also has laws against any speech which might "disturb the public peace" or offend. What's the point of having free speech if you can't offend anybody? Didn't opposition to the monarchy or Hitler offend someone? Didn't Luther's 100 theses nailed to the Catholic church door offend the church?

    There is essentially no anonymous speech, since all communications ports need to be registered and all electronic communications are tracked and logged. Registration, tracking, and surveillance of citizens in Germany seems to be so widespread that people don't even care anymore and just think it's the same way everywhere. People have the attitude that "as long as the government does it, it's OK, at least we aren't like the US, where Google tracks everybody", which is a bizarre view given Germany's history.

    And it's not just the government that does it: some of Germany's biggest corporations have been illegally listening in on employees and customers and even forged communications.

    It has to be said that Germany's government currently appears to be using its powers for benign purposes: policing, anti-terrorism, etc. But if parts of the government were abusing those powers, say to blackmail political opponents, who would know? And you only need to look at the 1930's to see how a progressive and liberal German government can turn into a genocidal regime bent on world conquest.

    Somehow, the idea of "free speech" seems to have gotten lost in the translation after the Western allies laid the foundations for German democracy after WWII.

    1. Re:Germany has a problem with democracy by speedtux · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But who do the States protect us from?

      The US isn't trying to protect Germany at all, it's trying to protect itself: its markets, its access to resources, and its citizens. Democracy in Europe is, and has ever been, only a means to that end.

      Iraq is a prime example of the States invading a country just to get at its natural resources.

      And if so, so what? Iraq was a corrupt, murderous, and genocidal dictatorship. What is wrong with attempting to democratize it and install a free market economy that is actually willing to trade with the US and Europe? Everybody wins that way. Hey, the US did the same thing in Germany and it worked out well for Germans, didn't it? The other victors would have been happy to dismantle Germany completely or treat it like the Soviets did with East Germany.

      Besides, the US isn't just getting natural resources for itself, it's also getting them for Europe. What do you think European economy and politics would look like if the US didn't do these things? Europe can't even ensure a reliable flow of heating gas from Russia.

      China? In fifteen years the Chinese will simply buy their way past anything the States do.

      I don't want to live in a world dominated by China, Russia, and Islamic nations. I suspect neither do you. Maybe we can't do anything about it in the long term, but I'm glad at least someone is trying in the short term.

      I do expect us to do warfare on them - economic warfare.

      The US and European economies are too tightly linked; you'd just end up destroying both. That is why European and American politicians keep talking.

      Right now the USA are an aging superpower on its way out, desperately trying to somehow keep themselves relevant

      Europe could easily replace the US as the world's superpower: spend half your national budgets on the military instead of social programs and start acting like a superpower. Americans would be overjoyed: we didn't want to get into the superpower business, it was repeated European screw-ups that forced America's hand.

      But what you do instead is lecture the US on what one should and shouldn't do, avoid any kind of responsibility yourself, all the while enjoying the economic and social benefits that you derive from US military power.

      Personally, I think the US actually should get out of the superpower business; I think trying to protect Europe from itself is a lost cause and sooner or later we can't afford it anymore and have to stop anyway. But my fellow Americans aren't willing to pay the steep economic price for that. And make no mistake: the consequences for Europe would be disastrous.

  16. Bizzaro-America by Bones3D_mac · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's interesting how much of a cultural inversion Germany is from the United States. Here in the U.S. we practically cherish violence in our culture, while the Germans seem opposed to most violence we'd often consider "tame" by our standards. Yet, it's exactly opposite when it comes to sexually "explicit" content. We fear it so much, we actually fight among ourselves over whether or not we can safely discuss sex with our children outside of telling them "don't do it." In the meanwhile, you could practically go up to any magazine rack in Germany and find magazines for children featuring pictures of topless women that would only pass as pornography here in the U.S.

    An interesting case in how differently we view violence as acceptable would be some past games like "Carmageddon", a title that was loosely based on the 70's movie "Death Race 2000". In the U.S., you could kill regular people in the streets with your car in the game. In the U.K., this was switched to zombies with green "blood". In Germany, this was replaced with robots.

    --


    8==8 Bones 8==8
  17. some explanations for non-germans by marksu · · Score: 2, Informative

    The 16 Interior Ministers are ministers of the 16 states. There is a seperate minister of the interior for germany. The states ministers control the police of their state. They have no legislative power. In theory they can ask the Bundestag as much as I can although they obviously make a bigger fuss...
    This year is a year with a lot of elections in different states, european and communal votes (all on different dates). That makes idiotic statements by politicians more likely.
    Also Spiegel Online noticed that there is a generation gap between those who 'understand' the internet/games and those who don't. As this gap is roughly at the age of 35-40 most of the people in the power are in the 'don't' category. But recently there has sprung up a movement to give those who do a public voice. An online petition to the Bundestag against censorship has recently gained over 100000 supporters.
    And lastly theres very often that 'free speech' argument. Different to the USA free speech is not the number one in our constitution (Grundgesetz in Germany) - it is the dignity of the person. IMHO neither option is better than the other but it makes public discussions work different here than in the USA. You can't use the free speech thing as an argument against 'killer games' here - 'think of the children' comes first.

  18. German Slashdotters: F*cking do something! by Qbertino · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is yet another slew of ultra-pointless pre-election gibberish. Extremely violent videogames such as Manhunt are allready factually banned for public sale and sale to minors in Germany, based on laws existing since the dawn of the republic.

    The rubbish on Computers, Videogames and the Internet that the ruling class in Germany has been putting out in recent years has reached staggering heights that are compareable to the situation in the US.

    I for one am going to send in my support signature for the Piratenpartei (German branch of the Pirate Party) and do an all out vote for them whenever the occasion arises. If all German INet savy people do that, we could have the 5% hurdle for the Bundestag in no time. That'll teach them.

    And if you are german, how about pitching in? Your signature paves the way to the Bundestag. For once get off your fat lazy unpolitical geek ass and help roll Schäuble and Zensursula straight out of office. And screw the Greens (Grüne) on this one! Don't forget that Tritin and Fischer had a big hand in passing that Internet law a few years back ('Gesetz zum verbesserten Schutz des Urheberrechtes im Internet' aka 'German DMCA')!

    Beweg' Deinen Arsch und tu' was! (visit links above)

    My 2 Euros.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:German Slashdotters: F*cking do something! by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2, Informative

      Especially after this news: http://www.ka-news.de/nachrichten/karlsruhe/Karlsruhe-Killerspiele-Gruene;art6066,199419 Here the Green party is asking for "a clear signal against killer games". Sorry I'd like a clear signal for individual freedom instead.