Byron report states obvious

“The report, commissioned by the Prime Minister in response to a growing moral panic about video games”

If anyone sees evidence of this “growing moral panic” could they let me know.

Written by Jonny Boy on March 27th, 2008 at 12:31

I wish something like Manhunt was actually worth defending but it’s a pile of rather nasty crap. I do actually find violent video games pretty offensive – mostly because they’re badly made and usually involve WW2/Arabs.

If we all played Zelda and Mario instead the world would be a better place with all the hooligans running around saving Princesses and skipping through enchanted forests instead of being all violent and drunken.

Written by Gerry on March 27th, 2008 at 12:43

What, zelda which encourages you to ‘explore’ people’s houses, destroy their jars and steal their rupees?

Or Mario, which encourages you to jump on people’s heads and squash them?

Ok, I’m being flippant. But it’s interesting how if you put something out there using cutesy graphics it somehow becomes more acceptable. Equally, in films, just because their subject matter may not be real (i.e. orcs, trolls and the like), should the violence on show be viewed any differently to those of ‘realistic’ films?

That said, I agree with you regarding Manhunt. It’s just a shame it will blatantly sell truck-loads after all the publicity and will probably encourage others to follow suit with yet more shock-and-gore tactics.

Written by Adrian on March 27th, 2008 at 13:27

Point taken – Zelda and Mario are probably responsible for much rupee stealing and squashed old ladies… ;-)

On a more serious note I think a lot of the problem has come with the ever more ‘photo realistic’ graphics.

In the days of 16 bit/32 bit consoles killing people on screen didn’t so much look like the real thing rather than a mess of red pixels.

Now if you play a game the people in game have a certain level of realism when it comes to the way they act and the way they respond when you take them out (shoot them in the knee they’ll react as if they’d been shot there etc).

Not that I’m condoning the knee-jerk reaction (geddit?) to this whole subject.

Written by Gerry on March 27th, 2008 at 14:52

What is interesting to ponder is the role and methodology of the BBFC in the future regulation and classification of games. Very much in the vein of the work undertaken to expose the MPAA in This Film Is Not Yet Rated isn’t it time someone had a look at the BBFC? And what makes the BBFC so suitable to rate games anyway? Do they apply the same rules in their classification as they do for films? Is this appropriate?

It’s all too easy to whack a certification sticker onto something and claim it’s official and resoned when you don’t ever have to reveal your methodology…

Written by Adrian on March 27th, 2008 at 16:08

Do they apply the same rules in their classification as they do for films? Is this appropriate?

They obviously don’t considering the hooha about Manhunt 2 while the myriad of horrid grindhouse/torture films got a free pass into the cinemas.

Written by Gerry on March 27th, 2008 at 16:43

We were considering doing a feature on censorship for the current issue, comparing Iran to the UK. We didn’t run with it in the end but initial research suggested that, in fairness to the BBFC, it’s actually quite open, especially compared to the US (This Film Is Not Yet Rated is an absolute jaw-dropper). Things were different back in the day under James Ferman, who was a notorious scissor hands, but even in the ’70s the Board passed Last Tango In Paris and The Exorcist as ‘X’ certificates in the face of local council opposition (who have the legal right to ignore BBFC rulings).

On the subject of video games, yes there are developers who overstep the mark from time to time, but it seems painfully obvious that the real problem are parents who wouldn’t dream of letting their kids watch an ’18′ film but have no problem buying them GTA. Also, publicity hungry MPs like Keith Vaz don’t exactly help: http://news.spong.com/article/14928.

Written by Matt on March 27th, 2008 at 19:12

And I suppose the recommendations will prevent little Ian from playing a game such as Manhunt at his friends’ house?

I’m trying really hard not to roll my eyes.

What sort of explorations have taken place to determine what type of games youngsters actually play or have access to?

I haven’t seen any youngsters playing games that were any more violent than the films that their parents let them watch.

Written by Deirdre on March 27th, 2008 at 20:04

Yet another review of something that already exists… it’s all down to the ‘Daily Mail crowd’ who find things to complain about. I remember video nasties. Those utterly rubbish movies deemed too violient to be seen by the public. Once upon a time it was rock music. Now it’s games that make us all psychopathic killers. If any of this was true I would be the most insane psycho killer on the planet! Gore movies, Rock music, video games….I blame the internet myself! (Dear Daily Mail…)

Written by replicant-5 on March 28th, 2008 at 04:41

Speaking of the Daily Mail, I’m glad to see that they’ve wheeled out an expert to discuss this one. Namely Anne Diamond.

Link (pops)

“Resident Evil 4 shouldn’t be allowed to be sold, event to adults.”

Interestingly, I thought that Good morning with Anne and Nick shouldn’t be allowed to be viewed, event by adults, but each to their own.

Written by Jonny Boy on March 28th, 2008 at 15:34

Guardian
story, by MUD creator Richard Bartle, pretty much summing up everything the
anti-anti-game generation have wanted to say for a while. Good old boy.

Written by Adrian on April 29th, 2008 at 12:46