Games Ratings in Hot Water
It seems there have been a number of incidents over several years which has bought games under the spotlight in the US. The Comlumbine shooting was one, the hot coffee mod for GTA: San Andreas was another, and the nudity (which was not even full nudity) mod for Oblivion was another. Each one of these cases was high profile news in the US and created a public debate over the way games are rated and the violence contained in video games.
I find it ironic that video games are noted for their violence and not Hollywood movies. Violence in video games is far less graphic than even some lower budget films, but no one seems to be jumping on the band wagon to get movies banned. I watched a movie called Hostel on the weekend and some of the graphic nature of the violence was far worse than I have seen in any video game. Of course, the movie was a part of the Tarantino stable of films (who else gets off on gratuitous violence more than the director of Reservoir Dogs). Hostel shows people getting their heads literally caved in by children (no less). It shows people being tortured and dismembered in some of the most graphic scenes I have seen in a film. But I don't hear people jumping up and down about the graphic nature of this violence. Another film which is extremely graphic in nature is Saw. Yet, people aren't screaming about the violence in this film either. Isn't this a double standard? Cause the violence in films is far worse than that of video games. It is far more realistic than anything that a programmer can put to a PC screen (at the moment).
What has happened in the US is that a Bill has been proposed which would require the entire content of a video game to be viewed by the Ratings Board prior to a rating being determined for a game. How is that going to be possible with a game such as Oblivion which has over 200 hours of game play most of which is non-linear? And Oblivion is one of the games which has caused a part of this controversy.
As far as I am concerned Ratings are not the issue (except we need an R rated category in Australia), but enforcing the age requirements of ratings in retail and rental outlets. What is the use of having a ratings system if it is not enforced in any way? The whole system is a farce because nothing is done to make sure that children under the age requirements of a ratings category is purchasing the game in the first place. If parents choose to purchase a game for their children without first doing the research on what they are purchasing then they are to blame for their choice, not the game companies for providing the content. We live in an information rich age but it seems that most people prefer to err on the side of ignorance rather than educate themselves in the first place. Why review the ratings system if you are going to do nothing at all to enforce them? The government are more concerned with making sure that children under the age of 18 do not buy cigarettes than children under the age of 15 purchasing an M rated game or movie. This is just a complete double standard and an excuse to lay blame on the gaming companies rather than admit that we have a relatively inept system for enforcing game and movie ratings.
I find it ironic that video games are noted for their violence and not Hollywood movies. Violence in video games is far less graphic than even some lower budget films, but no one seems to be jumping on the band wagon to get movies banned. I watched a movie called Hostel on the weekend and some of the graphic nature of the violence was far worse than I have seen in any video game. Of course, the movie was a part of the Tarantino stable of films (who else gets off on gratuitous violence more than the director of Reservoir Dogs). Hostel shows people getting their heads literally caved in by children (no less). It shows people being tortured and dismembered in some of the most graphic scenes I have seen in a film. But I don't hear people jumping up and down about the graphic nature of this violence. Another film which is extremely graphic in nature is Saw. Yet, people aren't screaming about the violence in this film either. Isn't this a double standard? Cause the violence in films is far worse than that of video games. It is far more realistic than anything that a programmer can put to a PC screen (at the moment).
What has happened in the US is that a Bill has been proposed which would require the entire content of a video game to be viewed by the Ratings Board prior to a rating being determined for a game. How is that going to be possible with a game such as Oblivion which has over 200 hours of game play most of which is non-linear? And Oblivion is one of the games which has caused a part of this controversy.
As far as I am concerned Ratings are not the issue (except we need an R rated category in Australia), but enforcing the age requirements of ratings in retail and rental outlets. What is the use of having a ratings system if it is not enforced in any way? The whole system is a farce because nothing is done to make sure that children under the age requirements of a ratings category is purchasing the game in the first place. If parents choose to purchase a game for their children without first doing the research on what they are purchasing then they are to blame for their choice, not the game companies for providing the content. We live in an information rich age but it seems that most people prefer to err on the side of ignorance rather than educate themselves in the first place. Why review the ratings system if you are going to do nothing at all to enforce them? The government are more concerned with making sure that children under the age of 18 do not buy cigarettes than children under the age of 15 purchasing an M rated game or movie. This is just a complete double standard and an excuse to lay blame on the gaming companies rather than admit that we have a relatively inept system for enforcing game and movie ratings.
posted by thecynicalgamer @ 11:37 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home