Last night, I took a serrated knife to a dog's throat.
I'm not embarrassed by it, nor ashamed - and I didn't allow myself to get angry as metal kissed windpipe. I'm just that kind of guy, I guess.
Indeed, there was only one occurrence this weekend that made me feel at all confrontational: When a leading politician told us that 'nobody' gives a flying expense claim about video games age ratings.
If Iain Duncan Smith MP would have been in my living room to behold poor Rover's demise - and he's always welcome - he would have witnessed an adult male engrossed in one of the most thrilling, captivating, remarkably ridiculous stories in modern entertainment. A story we pay him to help ensure a child's eye will never see.
Okay, I've been a little flippant; this particular canine was infected by Resident Evil 5's fictional Uroboros virus. And a fleshy, human-munching growth that would make Bear Grylls defecate (in the woods) had just burst through his skull.
But as Iain's obviously keen on omitting enlightening facts, I thought I'd fall in line.
For those who haven't seen yesterday's story, Duncan Smith put RE5 and kin centre stage in what he perceives as the destruction of UK children's innocence.
"[Violent video games] are meant to be 18 [rated] but nobody cares what it says on the label," he said, presumably straight-faced.
I'd wager that Duncan Smith's colleague Ed Vaizey MP also 'cares' - as one of the few politicians who understands how hard the games industry has worked to protect kids from adult software.
On the 'we care' pile, let's also chuck EA, trade body ELSPA, GAME, SEGA, HMV, Codemasters, Ubisoft, Activision... organisations who understand that selling an 18-rated game to kids is one of the dirtiest, most counter-productive ways to make a buck - and who have fully supported a legal framework to prevent them from doing so.
With these firms' full blessing, Parliament last year passed a new, statutory games age ratings system for the UK - which cross-party politicians agreed best protected our youth.
The PEGI model was voted for by MPs from all sides. I'd like to think they 'cared', too - wouldn't you?
Now, let's be fair: Whether it's born from electioneering or genuine concern, Duncan Smith's ultimate wish - for kids to stop being corrupted by adult video games (and, no doubt, other media he conveniently forgot to mention) is something on which we surely can all agree.
Despite the PEGI system's best efforts, children are still getting access to violent entertainment, and it needs to stop - video games included.
But we won't get there whilst MPs like Duncan Smith are lashing out at an industry which wants to achieve exactly the same as him. (An industry which is making this recession-hit country a bundle of cash while it's at it, by the way. There is some black irony in the fact that it was GTA - one of the most lucrative and intelligent entertainment offerings in UK history - with which Duncan Smith took particular umbrage).
At least in irresponsibly condemning the creators of adult games, Duncan Smith has actually highlighted the root of the problem. And guess what? It's not the odd bit of claret on the Xbox.
Kids will always have their head turned by violent entertainment. It's cool, it's exciting, it's unknown.
But unless our politicians make sure parents 'care' enough to say "no" - by backing Parliament's own legislation - we're fighting a losing battle.
"But unless our politicians make sure parents 'care' enough to say "no" - by backing Parliament's own legislation - we're fighting a losing battle."
On the other hand, it's this very legislation that causes parents to not care- why bother paying attention to what games your kids are playing when you could just go "Well, the shop shouldn't have sold it to him, should they?"
How does this comment 'lash out' at the games industry? Tim it seems that IDS has said things which are true, and you agree they are! Is RE5 not violent then? Are underage kids not playing 18 rated games? Are you not taking his comments hugely out of context?
I think a great way to put the blame back on the parents (where I believe it belongs) is with the Parental locks that are now present on at least the PS3 (I dont know about the other two). This combined with a password on your console does more than the age laws can and is very, very simple. If your kid does manage to purchase a 15-18 rated game they will have wasted their pocket money. Your kid is'nt gona go buy themselves their own console to get round this unless you are paying them above minimum wage in pocket money, in which case they are probubly on crack and beyond help
How does this comment 'lash out' at the games industry? Tim it seems that IDS has said things which are true, and you agree they are! Is RE5 not violent then? Are underage kids not playing 18 rated games? Are you not taking his comments hugely out of context?
This. I'll be the first to defend the industry against the rabid attacks of the Daily Mail and their ilk but this guy has made a lot of salient comments. Seems that those who have an interest in gaming can be just as reactionary as those who would look to prohibit many aspects of it.
I'm 50/50 about the whole thing to be honset, I mean, surely its a parents decision what their child see's it goes back to the argument off people who emulate video games and kill people, clearly these people were unbalanced in the first place, as people mature their sense of right and wrong matures drastically, for instance I wouldnt kill someone because A. no human has that right and B. prison doesnt appeal to me, but if you show a kid who isnt mature a game with violence they might not understand it's wrong, i've been playing 18's listening to music with parental advisory stickers and watching films like Alien from the age of about 8, it hasn't affected me, but if you were to let a kid of 8 who wasn't raised well and either hadn't matured yet or had a mental defficiency, of course they're going to replicate what they say, its a base instinct, but PARENTS should be responsible for it, if a parent comes up to me at work with their kid and a copy of GTA in their hand all I say is "you are aware this is an 18 rated game" and if they say yes, and I sell it to them, i'm not breaking the law and its on the parents head if their kids cant handle it
Whilst I'd agree that children's 'innocence'* is slowly being chipped away; playing violent video games is just a symptom of the problem. It's just easier for politicians to blame games than the real cause: you can't really tell the voters they're doing a terrible job of raising their kids can you? Mind you the problem probably goes much deeper than that: our society has dug itself into a pit, putting more value on material goods than family cohesion, or respect for others etc... Basically we're f**ked.
* Of course childhood 'innocence' is a rather modern/western invention anyway. A hundred years ago little Johnny wouldn't have been playing GTA, he'd have been working down the pits, or up a chimney... and kids in developing countries now get to work in sweat shops so we can buy cheap trainers. But I doubt IDS wants to draw attention to the fact that none of us particularly care about kids outside our borders, so long as we get to wear the latest fashion for no money at all...
I remember when my mum bought me a copy of Night Trap for the mega cd, she had to sign a register to say that she bought it, and consented for me to play it, I think that was the first time all this b0llocks kicked off. I watched terminator when I was 8. Robocop not shortly after, aliens, and all manner of other "video Nasties" Age rating does not work, never has, never will. We all know this but this is how we keep our hobby away from politicians from all parties not just conservative. However we cannot let the liberal police get ther mits on our games, they have ruined the movie industry by diluting it. Dont let them do it to games. if age rating is the way to stop censorship and dilution then im all for it even if its a load of old tosh.
Posted: 25 Jan 2010 09:49 Post subject: Whilst I'd agree that children's 'innocence'* is slowly being chipped away; playing violent video games is just a symptom of the problem. It's just easier for politicians to blame games than the real cause: you can't really tell the voters they're doing a terrible job of raising their kids can you? Mind you the problem probably goes much deeper than that: our society has dug itself into a pit, putting more value on material goods than family cohesion, or respect for others etc
This.
and
I'll be the first to defend the industry against the rabid attacks of the Daily Mail and their ilk but this guy has made a lot of salient comments. Seems that those who have an interest in gaming can be just as reactionary as those who would look to prohibit many aspects of it.
I think retailers should really start to improve on this. High street stores are not so bad but online retailers are woeful. I remember ticking a box saying I was between 14-17 and was still able to buy 18 rated games! Console parental settings should also be promoted much more than they are.
I think he's just been misquoted. The general populace doesn't care if a game is 18 rated or not. To some parents, its part of the growing up thing where children are exposed to things they shouldn't be, but its those parents who are most likely to make a fuss when something does happen that is inspired by something in a game.
I did a study of video game violence in college and found that kids are just as likely to imitate something in a film as a game, even imitate common TV shows. I can't remember a time in primary school where we didn't at some point assume the role of our fav' South Park characters, and we were 10 or 11 back then.
Needless to say we were old enough to know what was going on by the time GTA: Vice City hit our TV's and we could tell the difference between right and wrong.
I don't believe childrens "innocence" is being erroded much more than it is now, I'd say its been like this a long time. Hell, time ago kids where 14 when they were considered adults. Sure they weren't exposed to Manhunt or GTA, but they were exposed to real life which in my experience is far worse than anything vurtual.
I don't condone the sale of games or kids playing games before their applied age, except in the case of 18 rated content. Games need to be thoroughly reviewed before applying an age rating, perticularly if the game is better of with a 17+ rating.
Unfortunately we live in a society which likes to point its finger before looking to itself for blame and by now we should all know that the games industry is one of the biggest scapegoats for this.
I think the current system is ok to give vague advice to parents but I don't tend to take it seriously. I don't think it should be a legal thing and to me it makes no sense to divide it up into age groups.
If people followed age ratings to the letter then some would end up joining the army 2 years before they'd be old enough to play Modern Warfare 2.
* what violent games there kids play and you buy them * what violent movies there kids see * what violent things there kids do * what violent music they listen to
if a politician believes violent media is more influential on a young persons mind than the person in there life shaping them, then maybe we should ban parents. and let the state bring them up
its black and white for me
the current system should be used by them, I think they can manage to understand what the 18 is on a package... just as they take note of other packaging and don't wash there kids in bleach....
having said that, some games don't deserve the 18 rating and common sense and a little google search can be a parents best friend when deciding on a purchase, just as it would be with film.
I'm really not surprised at this one bit but instead of the out of touch old fossil from the old public school out of touch party standing there spewing waste of time crap. Why does he not use the amazing brainwave of actually frigin advertising the games age rating system on radio, tv and in national newspapers for a month. Ask a parent who Pegi is and they'll no doubt refer to the big breasted character in Eastenders......... But alas I live in a lonely dreamworld that any politician will truely grasp intelligent commonsense......... Parents can't do the job without the tools and knowledge, MPs apparently can?
I know it wouldn't totally solve the problem but maybe consoles should be sold with the parental lock settings on full by default? Details to unlock would supplied alongside the console obviously but it might at least get the parents thinking. Hell most of em probably wouldn't know what the parental lock was until little Johnny shows up seething that his latest Texas Chainsaw Theft Evil 7 isn't working. At that point perhaps his parents may take a look at it and even take an interest? Either that or maybe retailers could ask customers what level of security they would like on the machine and set it up prior to purchase. Granted this wouldn't go too far to solving the problem of irresponsible parenting but it may just make a difference in the cases when the parents literally have no idea what they're buying for their kids. If top retailers advertised a free service along these lines I think it would make a massive difference awareness wise.
When a game like GTA, or RE comes out, we all know its going to be awesome. There's also a large amount of hype surrounding it, and just like us older gamers, the kids like those games for the same reason. It's the same thing with new release movies. The ratings on the box are just an obstacle - when there's that much hype and exposure, and young people know how good that final product is going to be, nothing is going to stop them getting at it. And in all fairness, who can blame them? I can't imagine missing out on the incredible experience that was MGS1 on the PS, just because I was slightly underage. Whatever it takes, these kids are going to get their hands on that game, whether it means buying it through alternative channels or playing it at a friends house. Just as they've all watched movies which are beyond their age too (which, by the way, are on TV every single night and hugely accessible to them - definitely more so than games).
Let's be honest, for what is probably an unfortunate minority, the rating on games serves to allow those very conscious parents to monitor and control what their children are exposed to at home (but don't think for a minute that they won't be exposed to it elsewhere). For the rest? Ratings allow certain authorities to declare that they have done what is in their power to stop these products falling into the wrong hands, and the blame is not on them.
The constant hope that society will sort itself out and must police itself is something we look forward to but sadly we all blend into that far to easily. The individual is to blame. All of us individually to blame for all the things we think we can get away with.
I do believe we need ratings as they are a guide to the content within. I believe the consumer would benefit from a more grown up approach to the displaying and organising of stock in stores. Sadly arranging games by alphabet and console doesn't quite cut the mustard these days as you could have Manhunt 2 next to Mario and Sonic at the Olympics. Film isn't just films, games shouldn't be just games.
Personally i'm not looking forward to trying to stop my children from playing rated games as I know there will be other parents lowering the standard and making other peoples life harder. We just have to stand firm and know that our children hate us.
This debate is has been talked about for friggin ages. It was GTA on the playstation that got the age rating introduced if im not mistaken. And it does come down to the parents wanting to choose what games should be played on the system.
And I think that Microsoft and Sony should make parents more aware of the age rating on the system to stop children under the legal age of games playing 18+ rated on their profile.
I for one get angry that parents (I have a child myself) allow their children to play games on live that are not age rated for them. its like thier invading a community that dosnt belong to them, but most parents seem to think that video games are a way to keep their little darlings happy and quiet for a few hours.
This debate is has been talked about for friggin ages. It was GTA on the playstation that got the age rating introduced if im not mistaken.
You are mistaken. IIRC BBFC age ratings on games have mostly been a voluntary measure by the industry (certainly for anything under an 18 rating); and sometimes just to get increased publicity - for instance one of the first games to get an age rating was 'Dracula' in 1986!
Let's be honest, for what is probably an unfortunate minority, the rating on games serves to allow those very conscious parents to monitor and control what their children are exposed to at home (but don't think for a minute that they won't be exposed to it elsewhere).
Are they really so unfortunate just because their parents actually bother to take the time and effort to determine whether games are appropriate to them? Surely the problem is that parents rarely bother to worry about such things and don't give their children enough attention? To my mind that's the real concern, not violent media...
As a side note to this article I find it disappointing that the comments sections for pieces like the above receive so little attention. Any article of 'my consoles pork sword is bigger than yours' is hounded over and then they moan that 'society' needs to grow up and grow aware when it comes to games. Very disappointing.
As a side note to this article I find it disappointing that the comments sections for pieces like the above receive so little attention. Any article of 'my consoles pork sword is bigger than yours' is hounded over and then they moan that 'society' needs to grow up and grow aware when it comes to games. Very disappointing.
Kudos to the people who care.
I suppose that's just the result of the dumb argumentative masses who make up a fair chunk of the gaming world.
for anyone reading this who finds themselves on a daily basses reciting "shut the **** up you n00b" you can be a hardcore gamer and pleasant you know.... its allowed
and I agree with you. I feel more inclined to comment on this than the usual slogfest.
I think as gaming becomes more ingrained into society like film has , these issues will slowly just fall away.
now i must dash , ive played a bit of gta recently so ive obviously suddenly got an urge to go mug a granny.....
Let's be honest, for what is probably an unfortunate minority, the rating on games serves to allow those very conscious parents to monitor and control what their children are exposed to at home (but don't think for a minute that they won't be exposed to it elsewhere).
Are they really so unfortunate just because their parents actually bother to take the time and effort to determine whether games are appropriate to them? Surely the problem is that parents rarely bother to worry about such things and don't give their children enough attention? To my mind that's the real concern, not violent media...
My apologies for the poor wording. What I meant to say was that it is unfortunate that parents who care are a minority.
@Charlie Bell - ah - that's less open to misinterpretation
As a side note to this article I find it disappointing that the comments sections for pieces like the above receive so little attention. Any article of 'my consoles pork sword is bigger than yours' is hounded over and then they moan that 'society' needs to grow up and grow aware when it comes to games. Very disappointing.
Kudos to the people who care.
I can't really blame the gutter-press though: sure there are plenty of lame teenagers on here spouting absolute rubbish about how they want to play Manhunt "'cos they get to kill people"; but then we have the games 'journalists' who don't seem to have evolved from that level writing 'articles' on the fact a game features violence and jiggling breasts; as though that were all we gamers are interested in...
The laughable thing about all this is that there's far worse and damaging material available on the internet; but that somehow seems to have managed to avoid becoming the latest scapegoat for politicians.
I think what is really sad about this debate, is that games designers are redesiging and honing how a game plays and tells a story. GTA really pushed the genre forward, in both its story telling and how much Rockstar allowed you to venture into the world.
The same with 'No Russian'(depending on what you thought of that level) but with out tha age ratings on these games we would not be able to experience these games.
Games designers can now push the boundries further with the age rating system. And I still think that Microsoft and Sony need to make adults more aware of the parental set ups on the system. They are there for a reason and are there to protect children from the adult rated material.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
