Debate: The Content of the Games We Make

[Crispy]

As Mod developers some of us will understand the laws we must abide by when making games. Most are acceptible, IP Law (detailed in the stickied thread in this forum) values artistic creation and protects the artist from having his/her ideas stolen.

But in a recent thread, the following transpired, and I was quite annoyed that our right to artistic self-expression are somewhat confined by society's attitude to computer games, defined by the sad state of society itself. Here's the quoted thread, spurred by this threadstarter:

You've got quite a knack for writing.

I'd avoid situations in which children get killed, though. Its really, really tasteless, and is a sure-fire way for people to try to crack down on you.

Anyways, I give my thumbs up. My initial advice to you, however, is to produce some proof-of-concept maps for people to run around in. It really entices us coders.

-Angry Lawyer

Avoid Killing Children all together? Thats just cowardly. I don't think there's any subject matter that can't be handled in a relevant way that contributes to the narrative as a whole. It's one thing to just kill a child for cheap shock value, but if there's some narrative thrust behind it, and proper gravitas being given to it, I think its something that should be absolutely doable.

Don't worry about killing children. All you need is a disclaimer both on the main site and the download page and you won't get in trouble.

Once it's entered the home would be the responsibility of the owner (or downloader) to make sure this wasn't viewed by young kiddies with fragile minds.

Disclaimers don't give you a legal high-ground, you know

-Angry Lawyer

What AL said is probably, but sadly true. If you very clearly warn people of the nature of the gaming experience which the download will bring to you and state that "by clicking the download button marked AGREE you declare that you are over 18 years of age" then I can't see how people could complain.

It's a really stupid age we live in. Edgar Allen Poe wrote about cutting out cats' eyes, killing your wife with an axe to the head and then hacking up her body parts, putting her head on a stick and subsequently bricking her up behind a wall in the cellar.

Now if that isn't censored then why are computer games? It's wholly built on the media attitude to Computer Games, perpetuating the myth that games are mainly played by under-age kids who are liable to copy what they role-play. It's family values that are ****ed up if parents don't take an interest in what their kids do in their spare time. It's a pity they don't play us that record instead of the broken "games cause violence" one.

I found this link on recent 'game law' in the US. Here are some points that made me quite angry.

"in today's world, parents face unprecedented challenges in monitoring and protecting their children from harmful influences." - That challenge is a result of domestic policies that punish parents to choose between the family and the workplace. Companies are so hell-bent on making money they resort to cutting jobs and forcing those who remain to work longer hours. "This bill will make their job easier" - It only deals with the vendors, it doesn't address the issue at hand. Computer games are played in the home,

"But supporters insisted the government has a duty to help parents shield children from violence and sexuality" - why not teach them about it instead, children are curious beings. This whole culture of witholding information from children does not benefit their moral learning process. They aren't that gullible, just like adults they need sufficient reasoning for not doing something. As our (UK) Trade and Culture Secretary is quoted as saying in the article "Adults can make informed choices about what games to play. Children can't and they deserve to be protected". So it is the adults responsibility and not the games developers/producers.

Case in point: "Don't touch the kettle" (child touches kettle) "I told you not to touch it! Did you not listen to me? Are you stupid or something?" 'No, just uninformed' the child might say if they were me.

Case in point: "Don't touch the kettle, it's hot and you'll hurt your hand" (child knows not to touch because they don't want to hurt).

So why can't parents just explain that games cause violence. That'd work, wouldn't it? No, because we know this is a bare-faced lie. Violent games, especially as they get more and more realistic, might give you the tools to achieve an act of violence (the knowledge), but it is the personal social conditions that might move someone to violence, that is, the moral education they receive from school and the home, the moral support and welfare system they have access to in order to deal with their problems (the motive).

 

[The_One_Free_Man]

Not if that isn't censored then why are computer games? It's wholly built on the media attitude to Computer Games, perpetuating the myth that games are mainly played by under-age kids who are liable to copy what they role-play. It's family values that are ****ed up if parents don't take an interest in what their kids do in their spare time. It's a pity they don't play us that record instead of the broken "games cause violence" one.

this is actually very intresting. There is a man named Noam Chomsky and he talks about many things but one is media. And i haven't listened to any of the lectures but my dad has and says that he talks about "decoding the media" and finds all this subliminal crap. And i think this is the same for some video games. so now why does the government seem to pick on video games more than tv......no clue but i think its unfair that the artists who want to make their art and share it with people have to risk it being squashed.

 

[Angry Lawyer]

Killing kids in a game isn't illegal (yet). Its just that people will take offense over the death of kids (even in a digital world) as opposed to the death of an adult. Considering how fragile mods are, you don't want bad press.

And the disclaimer I posted was more a rather vague allusion to a large number of IP infringing mod ideas that I had to deal with in the past. I'd warn the folks about the problems of IP infringement, but I'd get the reply "Oh, if you put a disclaimer, lawyers can't touch you". I've also seen a lot of people (in the further past) host piracy sites, and say they're legally immune because they put "Users download content at their own risk, and assume all legal responsibility by doing this". It just doesn't work like that.

But yes, it's a sorry state of affairs we have these days. People need a scapegoat, and that scapegoat is computer games. As soon as we get another entertainment medium, that'll be picked on. Its just fear of the new, fear of change. Back in the day, I'm pretty sure Poe got bad press for his violent storywriting. Hell, I'm pretty sure some Christian fundamentalist sorts are still campaigning to get it banned.

-Angry Lawyer

 

[Crispy]

this is actually very intresting. There is a man named Noam Chomsky and he talks about many things but one is media. And i haven't listened to any of the lectures but my dad has and says that he talks about "decoding the media" and finds all this subliminal crap. And i think this is the same for some video games. so now why does the government seem to pick on video games more than tv......no clue but i think its unfair that the artists who want to make their art and share it with people have to risk it being squashed.

Noam Chomsky is widely renowned for his expertise and contributions to the field of linguistics. I've read a bit of his writing on that topic as part of my Uni course (half of one module I took was on how we learn languages). He's also a political activist, but I don't know much about that. His Wiki seems to have quite a lot of info.

As far as decoding media, this is an incredibly interesting topic. It beings with the study of the image and follows through to the study of the moving image (film). The different forms of artistic entertainment media (film, painting, photography) allow and restrict our interpretation of the image in different ways. Every (framed) image we see can be manipulated so that it can be interpreted in different ways by different audiences. I'm currently studying four modules on imagery and film (I have to take two of the six on compulsorary core language modules in French and Spanish) in the hope that will be able to apply this theory to games design (games in my mind being a hugely exciting form of entertainment media, still in a very early stage of growth with lots to explore).

---

What might you envisage as a future entertainment medium AL?

 

[Angry Lawyer]

No idea. Nobody expected us to be sitting in front of plastic-and-glass boxes, watching colourful lights dance about, a hundred years ago. But they'll be something new. And some American Lawyer will bitch about the violence in it.

-Angry Lawyer

 

[crackhead]

order in my courtroom!