End Violent Videogames?!?

We've been hearing about it for years. Parents blaming the woes of society on the typical... drugs, alcohol... and videogames? No big news right? Wrong. As most people know, the state of California has already passed a law that bans the sale of violent videogames to minors. Naturally, it has been challenged as violating the freedom of speech, and its fate is uncertain. Nothing to worry about right? Actually... no. This year, The U.S. Supreme Court has revealed plans to decide on this very controversial issue.

Unfortunately, its uncertainty is exactly what we gamers don't want. According to many surveys, this concept is actually gaining favor among the American people. As of yet, those in favor are still the minority. There are certain compelling arguments. To some, violent games equals violent children. Children who play videogames may also become antisocial and lose touch with reality. To them, its plain and simple. Supporters cry for a nationwide ban on the sale to minors. Some even believe its in the countries best interest to ban videogames completely.

What are your views to this subject? Keep in mind that this is slowly gaining the power to actually do something (even if, for now, its only drawing more attention).

it's like prohibiting alcohol in mid twenties last century. It will work, but will be just ridicolous.
And maybe we should prohibit knives ( to slice bread) - as researches have shown, it's the most popular weapon of home murderers.

I completely agree. However, prohibition had one thing that doomed it to fail. Anyone can make alcohol. The reson I made this was because I find it so surprising that people are considering this. If it passes, it could severely harm the indusrtry. If a total No-games ban passed, it would be the end of an industrty.

its simle supply and demand, limit the supply and the demand will only increase. Think about it. has the war on drugs worked? have they been able to ban guns? did prohibition work? nah, it'll never happen.

Why not? All you have to do is tell companies they cant make them. EA games isnt going to go underground and sell on a blackmarket. We can too easily track profits.

Moral panics have been around since the beginning of recorded history, this is nothing new historically. In the 80's it was Metal music, Dungeons and Dragons influencing Satanic ritualism in youths, back in the 50's some nutjobs thought COMICS made youths go out and commit crimes which has since been rightly outed as utter bullshit. It's only a matter of time before the same happens to the naysayers of violent video games.

If they ban violent video games, they will have to ban violent movies, tv programmes, music... you cannot ban one and let the others continue, It's simply ludicrous and a waste of everyone's time. Everyday life is violent enough, might as well super-glue up your children's eyes and ears.

To be perfectly honest, its always nice for parents of these youths to have a scapegoat for their crimes. It was always something else that influenced them... videogames, TV, music... it was never their upbringing, parents will never admit to that... even though 85% of violent criminals admit to having a shitty childhood. I don't think courts should pander to scapegoating...

I love the fact that the Governments who try an enact these kinds of laws are also the ones that give us the premise to make these kinds of games. Raging poverty, people stealing and killing each other, Nations declaring war on each other, they need to take a look in the mirror and see who is really creating a violent society.
Sociologists will always say that, 'Violent media is not the cause of a violent society, but the reflection of a violent society'...

Last edited January 13, 2011 at 1:58 AM by BurroDiablo

Epic thumbs up for BurroDiablos comment!

This whole debate is just so fucking ludicrous... I honestly don't know what to say on it other than OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES!!! Just because videogames are an interactive medium doesn't mean people who play them are going to turn into serial killers! I feel as though i am reducing my own intelligence by discussing such a stupid matter...

+1 BurroDiablo! The only reason I put this up because it was a recent headliner and I thought people would be interested. It also would have been nice to get a good discussion up. That part failed!  :P

Failed? No, it hasn't failed until everybody has lost interest. I am still interested!

Don't take this the wrong way around, I do feel that dismembering people with a chainsaw shouldn't become a casual leisure for a ten year old kid...

IJoe wrote:
Don't take this the wrong way around, I do feel that dismembering people with a chainsaw shouldn't become a casual leisure for a ten year old kid...

of course, that's why I'm mad  ;D
just joking, I mean this is parents and only their job to protect children from it. I was 16 (!) when I started playing First-Person-Shooters - my father was so crayze about it... so until then I was playing strategies, and Sim-City-like games. I don't say that I was happy because of this prohibition, but now I understand that they were protecting me from violence. Somehow they did...
Once I was working in game-store. I saw maybe 15-year old kid with dad. He ( the dad) bought him Left4Dead 2. And how can be children protected from violence when his father, who is supposed to do so, buys him one of most brutal games I've ever seen ( that doesn't mean that I don't like playing this game, I'm just mad ;D ).

cephalos wrote:

IJoe wrote:
Don't take this the wrong way around, I do feel that dismembering people with a chainsaw shouldn't become a casual leisure for a ten year old kid...

of course, that's why I'm mad  ;D
just joking, I mean this is parents and only their job to protect children from it. I was 16 (!) when I started playing First-Person-Shooters - my father was so crayze about it... so until then I was playing strategies, and Sim-City-like games. I don't say that I was happy because of this prohibition, but now I understand that they were protecting me from violence. Somehow they did...
Once I was working in game-store. I saw maybe 15-year old kid with dad. He ( the dad) bought him Left4Dead 2. And how can be children protected from violence when his father, who is supposed to do so, buys him one of most brutal games I've ever seen ( that doesn't mean that I don't like playing this game, I'm just mad ;D ).

Funnily enough i was about to say the same thing about parental responsibilities [capson] THE AGE INDICATORS ARE THERE FOR A REASON PEOPLE [capsoff]. LFD2 is low violence compared to alot of games. I would classify Gears with is chainsaw bayonets higher on the gore scale however people dont realise that i dont stare at the gore laughing maniacly all the time (only sometimes hehe :P... im joking) .

Edit: Another factor in these violence problems is whether it is being commited against humans or aliens, bugs etc. The reason why (in Australia) AVP was allowed and LFD2 wasnt

Last edited January 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM by Raider217

cephalos wrote:

IJoe wrote:
Don't take this the wrong way around, I do feel that dismembering people with a chainsaw shouldn't become a casual leisure for a ten year old kid...

of course, that's why I'm mad  ;D
just joking, I mean this is parents and only their job to protect children from it. I was 16 (!) when I started playing First-Person-Shooters - my father was so crayze about it... so until then I was playing strategies, and Sim-City-like games. I don't say that I was happy because of this prohibition, but now I understand that they were protecting me from violence. Somehow they did...
Once I was working in game-store. I saw maybe 15-year old kid with dad. He ( the dad) bought him Left4Dead 2. And how can be children protected from violence when his father, who is supposed to do so, buys him one of most brutal games I've ever seen ( that doesn't mean that I don't like playing this game, I'm just mad ;D ).

Well, parents can't always stand behind every kid's shoulder, nor can they deal with torrent downloads, online games, etc., unless they're good with PC (which a lot of them aren't). And even if they all were that, then there still are friends, school, whatever else. So some extent of legal prohibition is quite welcomed. As it is with heavy drugs. Sure, it doesn't remove the subject completely, but creates serious problems for juveniles to acquire it, and promises potential severe penalty for those grown-ups, who contribute to such illegal acquirements.
After all, it's just a matter of your overall relation to the law in general, and the way you view the state phenomena as such. You should really consider, that a continuous massive neglection of any system usually results in it's collapse. If such a collapse is what you want, then you should definitely continue moving in that direction.

Actually, that's not quite the way it went;

Aliens Versus Predator (2010) was initially banned, but when Rebellion appealed the ban was lifted about a week later, since it was a science-fiction setting.

Left 4 Dead 2, however, is quite a sad story; It was also initially banned, but Valve decided to censor it, which is bad enough as it is. But the things the Australian governmet made them remove were nothing short of ludicrous. Such as cutting out the police (i think they were riot police), because it's violence against 'authority figures', which is wrong on so many levels. For starters, they are fucking ZOMBIES, you idiots! They are NOT people! The do NOT want to give you a parking ticket! They just want to eat your brain (or something of the like)! Furthermore, making them cut it out on the grounds of violence against police is VERY hypocritical, since games such as the Grand Theft Auto series are allowed without alter, which feature the killing of police (as well as innocent civilians). In fact, you could argure that Grand Theft Auto is worse, because you are killing simulations of real people, rather than zombies.

So, in short: The Australian government are fuckwits.

haha, I always thought that drunken people look and behave like zombies...  ;D
I mean if somebody can't see the difference between real world and this ingame should go to psychiatrist.

cephalos wrote:
haha, I always thought that drunken people look and behave like zombies...  ;D
I mean if somebody can't see the difference between real world and this ingame should go to psychiatrist.

Well, most infants can't tell the difference between a thumb and a titt. Where should they go? OK, that's a joke.
But really, I thought we're talking 'bout kids here - people with underformed and somewhat mobile psychics. You know, when I was like 10 y.o. I remember, how some silly stories scared the shit out of me, and I would have real nightmares that night. And my psychics is considered to be stable.

Last edited January 13, 2011 at 12:24 PM by IJoe

cephalos wrote:
haha, I always thought that drunken people look and behave like zombies...  ;D
I mean if somebody can't see the difference between real world and this ingame should go to psychiatrist.

YES! That's the point i often try to bring up in this debate; The people who want these games banned or censored obviously don't know the difference between games and real life, so in fact THEY are the ones with the problem!

pariah wrote:
Actually, that's not quite the way it went;

Aliens Versus Predator (2010) was initially banned, but when Rebellion appealed the ban was lifted about a week later, since it was a science-fiction setting.

Left 4 Dead 2, however, is quite a sad story; It was also initially banned, but Valve decided to censor it, which is bad enough as it is. But the things the Australian governmet made them remove were nothing short of ludicrous. Such as cutting out the police (i think they were riot police), because it's violence against 'authority figures', which is wrong on so many levels. For starters, they are fucking ZOMBIES, you idiots! They are NOT people! The do NOT want to give you a parking ticket! They just want to eat your brain (or something of the like)! Furthermore, making them cut it out on the grounds of violence against police is VERY hypocritical, since games such as the Grand Theft Auto series are allowed without alter, which feature the killing of police (as well as innocent civilians). In fact, you could argure that Grand Theft Auto is worse, because you are killing simulations of real people, rather than zombies.

So, in short: The Australian government are fuckwits.

Hence why some of us managed to get it from places such as Indonesia and the UK... cough

Yes, that's what a lot of people do, but it's very hard to order something from another country without an Internet connection.

But Indonesia, though? Wouldn't it be best to get it from an English county?

I got it from UK but a friend of mine who goes to Indonesia often decided to get it whilst he was over there as he didnt want the censored version either

I wonder how looks the censored version of L4D2...

OMG LOL
Left 4 Dead 2 - Censor Comparison L4D2

in germany we have pretty strict laws but sometimes it doesnt seem logic how the government (or the organisation who does the testing which is industry funded) does it
LfD for example isnt censorred at all but other games which are way less brutal are cut or banned for minors
most brutal games have an 18 rating so no one under this age can buy them
i think it works fine enough
i have played my first FPS with 16 i think thats a good age

TacticalNuke wrote:
If it passes, it could severely harm the indusrtry. If a total No-games ban passed, it would be the end of an industrty.

No offense, but you do realise that there are other countries/places aside from the USA where we have PC's and consoles capable of running these games and that a bann passed in the USA does not mean that the bann is for each and other country.

On topic:
Walking into a school and shooting up people and blaming it on a video games means 1 out of 2 things:
1: you are going for the insanity plea
2: you are actually not sane and can't differentiate

Either way, it's not the games fault, but rather has to do with your biology or upbringing, hence, banning games isn't the right solution. Furthermore, studies have not proven that playing violent games makes you violent. A rise in hormones such as adrenaline are seen in similar amounts while playing sports, watching films, and seeing accidents.
To put it bluntly, there is not a decent argument to bann violent games.

This is however not to say that there shouldn't be age restrictions for certain games.

Tico_1990 wrote:

TacticalNuke wrote:
If it passes, it could severely harm the indusrtry. If a total No-games ban passed, it would be the end of an industrty.

No offense, but you do realise that there are other countries/places aside from the USA where we have PC's and consoles capable of running these games and that a bann passed in the USA does not mean that the bann is for each and other country.

Yes I did realize that. But as it is the U.S. that is considering the ban, this only represents the industry in the U.S.  ;)
I am also strangely glad that my topic reached over 100 views and 22 post! Yay!

Last edited January 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM by TacticalNuke

TacticalNuke wrote:

Tico_1990 wrote:

TacticalNuke wrote:
If it passes, it could severely harm the indusrtry. If a total No-games ban passed, it would be the end of an industrty.

No offense, but you do realise that there are other countries/places aside from the USA where we have PC's and consoles capable of running these games and that a bann passed in the USA does not mean that the bann is for each and other country.

Yes I did realize that. But as it is the U.S. that is considering the ban, this only represents the industry in the U.S.  ;)
I am also strangely glad that my topic reached over 100 views and 22 post! Yay!

Ok, just checking and congrats;)

The "coolest" Cut in Germany is in World in Conflict
The NUKE is named BFG in the german version, but it looks just like a nuclear attack....also the Napalm-Strike is named Anti Vegetation Strike but it is actually the old Napalm Attack
so stupid...

I think that if someone would seriously dismember someone with a Chainsaw or commit another serious crime like that, belongs to a ''Nuthouse''. No clear minded human would do something like that, unless something has ''snapped'' in that persons mind.

Yeah, but surely it's O.K. to go on a killing spree when you're bored? Right?...

Tampio wrote:
I think that if someone would seriously dismember someone with a Chainsaw or commit another serious crime like that, belongs to a ''Nuthouse''. No clear minded human would do something like that, unless something has ''snapped'' in that persons mind.

Well, lets make some pedophilic scenes in games now. I mean, it could well suit some in-game scenarios. And that, still, would be just a game, right?
Just a joke (not a real suggestion).

There already is, man... Have you not heard of Rape-Lay?

pariah wrote:
There already is, man... Have you not heard of Rape-Lay?

Oh, FFS! You gotta be kidding, right?
Where the hell is this world rolling to?!  :o

Actually, porno games are very popular in Japan....

pariah wrote:
Actually, porno games are very popular in Japan....

I'm not talking 'bout some jerkoffs, who masturbate on some porn scenery. I wrote about paedophilia specifically. This would be some really crazy (and illegal BTW) shite.

Personally, i don't see the difference.

They can't ban video games, not when Skyrim is only a few months away!

If they ban violent video games, 40% of the nation is doing something illegal. Lets make America look even worst :(

pariah wrote:
Personally, i don't see the difference.

It's really simple: f.cking is legal, but f.cking children is not.

Yes, but rape is illegal, no matter the victims age. And in my opinion, rape games should be illegal as well.

But not games like Call of duty >:( >:(

Eh, it wouldn't bother me if Call Of Duty was banned.

Especially the later ones.

Well, I usually play COH with a friend. I would be pretty sad if this was taken away because people want to blame all this violence on something.

What do you mean by "this" violence? You mean real-life or in videogames?

Seeme wrote:
. Lets make America look even worst :(

ROFL!

Banning video games wouldnt do athing, the damage has been done.

Umm... What damage?

pariah wrote:
Umm... What damage?

... to the reputation, I guess.

Yeah, all this controversy shit has indeed damaged videogames. >:( I really don't know why everybody has to be hating on them. :'(

Because we always need something to blame. It conveniently shelters people from the fact that maybe they're just bad parents, or maybe someones just a bad egg in the bunch.

The best way what to do is civil disobedience- You could buy violent video games in Mexico/Canada/Cuba/Japan/Russia(not sure about Canada- since they banNed Dire Straits "Money for Nothing" I could expect that there is a restriction of destribution of "immoral games"), then go into middle of your city with a huge banner I'M SELLING VIOLENT, IMMORAL AND BANNED GAMES. Probably most of teenagers would buy something and if cops arrives and they will arrest you, you can go to court and say, that authority limits your law to dispose of your property.

Xantor wrote:
The best way what to do is civil disobedience- You could buy violent video games in Mexico/Canada/Cuba/Japan/Russia(not sure about Canada- since they banNed Dire Straits "Money for Nothing" I could expect that there is a restriction of destribution of "immoral games"), then go into middle of your city with a huge banner I'M SELLING VIOLENT, IMMORAL AND BANNED GAMES. Probably most of teenagers would buy something and if cops arrives and they will arrest you, you can go to court and say, that authority limits your law to dispose of your property.

And then? You know, they can limit your "right to dispose of your property"(don't think that's legally correct). Even more so if you want to dispose of property you illegally obtained. Just think about, if what you said would be a proper legal defence all the drug dealers or people dumping waste in rivers etc. could do it too.