[Junkface]

I don't understand the rock and roll comparison... I mean the whole point of rock and roll is that it's evil... it's like an even more visceral and sexual form of Blues, the ****ing devil's music...

But anyway, in as much as I have something actually relevant to say, I think that statement from the American Psychological Association is highly suspect. I mean, what does "hostility toward peers and authority figures" even mean? I mean, I've been hostile towards peers and authority figures for as long as I can remember, but it rarely manifests itself in violence. It wouldn't surprise me if playfighting quoting aggressive lines and playfighting as characters from the games were characterised as hostility, which I think is an extraordinarily long stretch. There's also the possibility that kids who like violent video games will be hostile or aggressive towards those pricks who want to ban them such games; I mean, I know I ****ing am.

Another thing I take issue with is the tendency to treat equivalent content in different mediums with different severity, e.g. Raiders of the Lost Ark is a great family adventure movie, while No One Lives Forever 2, with equivalent or less explicit violence is an M rated game which needs to be protected against, or the situation in Australia up until recently where ratings guidelines actually called for games to be treated less leniently and stipulated than any game with nudity for a non-educational purpose should be banned.

On a semi-related note: these asterisks feel so limp and effete... they provide none of the boost in self esteem I usually feel from such vitriolic sentence construction...

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by Martin Gantefoehr

There should rather be an open, honest discussion about what's considered remotely civilised.

I agree, with the stipulation that people accept that "uncivilised" material will always exist and still has a rightful place.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Some interesting points in an article in a Malaysian site...

Video games: Fun or deadly? | Sun2Surf.com, 11 Nov 2005

...clinical psychologist Dr Alvin Ng...said international studies have shown that the negative effects of violent video games are highly debatable.

"While there is evidence showing that violent games can breed violence in children, it is insufficiently significant to say that these video games actually cause violence. Studies on media violence have shown it has no significant effect on juvenile crime either," he said.

Ng said the studies also show that children tend to have a good grounding in boundaries when it comes to violence, and only a small percentage go on to become violent as a result of playing video games.

"Many studies in this area are correlational studies which show conflicting results on the relationship between violent video games and teen violence. Moreover, correlation does not mean causation."

To date, there is no way to tell to what extent violent video games contribute to aggression and violence in children.

"There are many other factors that play a role in violence among children, like cognitive abilities, emotional instability, impulsiveness and systemic factors like socio-economic status and family and school environments.

"However, these factors make a complex web of human motivation that may or may not end in violence," Ng said.

Playing video games can also influence the actions of children, especially those aged between four and nine.

"They may act out moves in the games they play as they enjoy personifying their favourite fighting character, quite similar to adults personifying their favourite soccer player.

"These are usually harmless but need to be carefully monitored, and children will need to have appropriate boundaries set by adults."

Addiction is a concern, but not all young people are susceptible to addiction or violence.

Ng said many who play with violent and destructive games, which are sometimes laced with gore and sex, are aware of the difference between games and reality.

"Children are capable of learning boundaries in behaviour, so they need to be monitored and trained to understand these boundaries, what more with the real concern about how violent games may glorify senseless violence, sadistic torture and to a certain extent, sex."

"Children turn into violent characters when their behaviours are accidentally or mistakenly rewarded by others," Ng said.

"A common situation is when children are physically punished for being violent. This condones violence and aggression as a means to stop someone's seemingly bad behaviour."

To prevent children from becoming violent gaming characters, he recommends that they be taught appropriate social and emotional skills like empathy, emotional expression and listening skills.

"Positive behaviour management with minimal punishment will also help, besides ensuring that the children are exposed to other aspects of life that are not media- or games-based.

"Groundings in morals, ethics and spirituality must be instilled, and guardians should teach children to denounce violence - that violence in any way is just not the way to go. Instead, promote respect."

In other words, where the f#&k are the parents? Why are they not keeping more vigilant eyes on their kids, especially when the kids are online or playing a console game? Why are they not sitting down and discussing games openly with their kids?

Where are they when their kids need them for love and encouragement? Where are they during moments of great stress for the child when he's going through peer pressure at school, struggling with questions of identity, sexuality, and ethical dilemmas? Where are they when they should be attending events critically important to their kids, like school functions, graduation ceremonies, and fundraisers?

And the games industry doesn't seem to be doing enough to establish a more healthy and positive image of games and gaming culture, imo. Where the hell are they and what have they done? There seriously needs to be a highly concerted, industry-wide effort to spread the word that not all games are violent, that there are a huge many different kinds of games (not just Grand Theft Auto), and that gaming can be and is a family activity. Are there even public service announcements paid for by ESA that promote more active involvement by parents to monitor their kids' gaming? What about commercials reminding everyone of the ESRB rating system and how it works? What about having celebrities (rap stars, supermodels, actors, musicians, etc.) endorse the ESRB system and more healthy, family oriented games and gaming sessions?

Tiger Woods and Derek Jeter have appeared in ESRB commercials.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Not enough. Why not have 50 Cent, Ray Liotta, and Patrick Stewart promote ESRB ratings? Show those commercials during the TV programs parents normally watch?

Like I stated, the games industry should be just as aggressive (if not more so) as Thompson or Senator Lieberman or Hillary Clinton to counter the negativity these people have built up against games. The games industry can afford it, they're worth $11 billion.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

What about having celebrities (rap stars..) endorse the ESRB system and more healthy, family oriented games and gaming sessions?

"(I got a gatman)
There's a problem I'm a solve it
A ***** movin' 'round
With a big ass revolver and a
(batman)
Motha****a you retarded
You touch Shady I'll leave you dearly departed


... Uh, check the rating." - 50 Cent

Otherwise, yeah. I agree. And I suppose there are some rappers who could do it without being hypocritical. Kanye West, Talib Kweli, even Coolio.

Actually now that I think about it, 50 does have a new game coming out. It might be good for him to do an ESRB ad.

[Melanie68]

Here's a new article on Jack Thompson from The Escapist.