This is an article i wrote for my campus newspaper that may never get published because of its subject, and its vocal language. To explain the opening paragraph...i write for a college campus newspaper which, the college is notorious for extremely low parking availability. This creates huge lines at the parking services building in the Fall semester.
Gaming And America
Imagine the video game industry as the parking services building at the beginning of the year, and each lawyer, disgruntled organization, misinformed parent or any other general miscreant as the students in line. When one problem is finally resolved, the next person steps up to the front of the line, thinking their problem is different from the last.
So what is the big deal here? Why do so many people whine and complain about the violence in video games? Are these games going to fry impressionable young minds? Contrary to what Mr. Joe Lieberman, well known violent video game critic, might tell you, I grew up playing Mortal Kombat, Doom, and Killer Instinct, and, although it might be debateable, I grew up just fine. My own mother was a worry type about these games, and did I play them anyhow? You betcha. Hi mom. Do I still play violent video games now? You betcha.
So you’re probably asking yourself what this article is about? Quite frankly, I’m going to take articles complaining about violence in video games, and bash them. Unabashedly. Before this circus gets underway, let me say this. If a game is rated M (for Mature), that means it’s for people years 17 and older. It isn’t for little 12-year-old Johnny, unless his parents deem him fit. The M rated games should not be in a separate part of the store. If these hokies got their way, we’d probably have back-alley game stores, kinda like the back-alley porn stores, complete with funny smells. Wonderful, next time I go to buy an M-rated game, it’ll be tucked away in the section by the Playboy videos.
So how is America misinformed on the topic of violent video games? We’ll start with the most accredited university in America, and discredit them. Harvard released a study at http://kidsrisk.harvard.edu/faqs3.htm in which they talked about violence in E-rated games. E-rated games, ladies and gentlemen. That’s the ones that even little Johnny can play. In this survey/study Harvard took 55 E-rated games, played them, and came up, in Harvard-like style, came up with statistical percentages that tell how much violence is in each game. Of the two main categories,” Which game contained the most violence as a percentage of game play time?” and “Which games contained the most deaths per minute of game play?” Harvard came up with one dastardly game: Centipede. Yes, Centipede. That cute little game that has you shooting at a large pixilated centipede, a-la Galaga (or Galaxian for the other two who know it by that name), before it gets to you. Centipede has a crazy percentage of 23.76 Deaths per minute. This number is astounding. According to this study, the Columbine shooters must have been playing Centipede as their anger grew. This study makes Centipede look like the equivalent of nuclear warfare in the video gaming world. Just to let you know, a Pokemon game also made their list of terrible E-rated games. If Pikachu is evil to six-year-old’s, that means sports stars shouldn’t be role models anymore. Oh wait…
So Harvard is wrong. Who’s next on the list?
Ah, the APA, or the American Psychological Association looks like a fine place to move to next. They begin their journal at http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp784772.html with another Columbine/Doom reference. I simply abhor the fact that anyone can use a ten-year old game to prove a point. Doom as a “murder-simulation”? Please. I’m shooting off the forces of Hell in Doom, not the jock who keeps taking my lunch money. The APA refers to Doom as a “bloody, shoot em up.” Clearly, they haven’t been playing games recently. If I truly wanted a useless murder simulator, I’d pick up Postal 2. Much bloodier, and much more realistic. If news reporters and these organizations want to complain about violent video games, at least blame the ones that look like I’m actually killing someone.
Oh this next one looks like fun. The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility.
I think this one press statement sums up the general stupidity on the part of every violent video game critic. Well maybe not stupidity as much as ignorance. But, since this is a rant, its stupidity. This “joint statement” (who is joining them in this?) was released on November 23rd as part of a so-called “conference on violent video games”. Who knew they had one? Anyhow, they give “special concern” to games like Halo, Half-Life, Doom, and the Hitman series. Fair enough, these games are pretty violent. What’s not fair enough? Lets take a look at their little list, which they deem, and I quote “Worst Violent Video Games”. Worst violent? As opposed to the best violent games? If they’re saying violence in video games is bad, than shouldn’t every violent video game make their esteemed list? Anyhow, this list is compiled of this year’s “worst violent games”. Games that came out in 2004. So, here is their glorious list. Grabbing the worst violent game is Doom 3. Ah, fair enough, it’s bloody, it’s scary, and it’s violent. Second is Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, which is considered by a lot of video game critics to be the Mecca of what’s wrong with American society. In third comes Gunslinger Girls 2. Wait…what? I’ve never…heard of this game. After a little research, it turns out this is an import game. That means a game that comes from the land of the Rising Sun, and, chances are, won’t sell well here anyway. Besides that fact, the title is named incorrectly. Gunslinger Girls Vol.3 is the one that came out this year. Alright, so a seldom played game here in the states takes the third spot. Fourth and fifth are Half-Life 2 and Halo 2, respectively. Violent? Sure why not. Taking the sixth spot is Hitman: Blood Money. Wait a minute…that doesn’t sound familiar in that series. Nope, it shouldn’t. Why? The dern game isn’t even out yet, and isn’t even scheduled for release yet. Look for that one to make the “Worst Violent Games of 2010” list. Chalk another one up for the brains over at the ICCR. Next, in the seventh spot, comes that evil game from Rockstar called Manhunt. There’s no doubt about it. This game is violent. Kids under 18 shouldn’t play it. Period. So what’s the problem here? The game came out in 2003, not 2004. Taking the number eight spot by storm is Mortal Combat. That’s right. Mortal Combat, with the “C”. Please, if a game is so coveted to make your highly misinformed list, at least spell it right. Ok, we’ll assume they meant Mortal Kombat, since one with a “C” in “combat” has never come out. But speaking of coming out…do they mean the one that came out this year? By this we can only assume they mean the original, which came out a little over ten years ago. No specifications, no positive answer. Stamping up the number nine spot is Postal 2. Insert your own remark about that bad joke here. Alright, violent game? Check. Lots of blood? Check. Gary Coleman with a big gun? Check. Game out in 2004? Not a check. Postal 2 was released in 2003, which shouldn’t technically qualify this game for this list, but, obviously, anything’s fair game here. Finally, rounding out the number ten spot is Shadow Heart. Shadow Heart? Whew, that’s almost going back to the Doom reference. That game came out in 2001. Anyhow, here’s that statement, if you don’t believe me. http://www.iccr.org/news/press_releases/pr_jtstatement112304.htm
How else can I take a shot at the media today? Lets take those Washington snipers into account a few months back. I remember a distinct segment on the “Today” show talking about a game called “Snipers”. They showed footage of the game and talked with an esteemed violent video game critic. It was a good interview done by Matt Lauer that was conducted well. So where did the “Today” show make their flaw? The game they picked. It’s terrible. I mean, horrendous. Just try to shoot someone in this game. No, really, go for it. Honestly, if I had to review that game for here, it would’ve maybe gotten half a star. Only out of pity that someone actually spent time to make this thing. I understand why they chose the game with the name and all, but please, at least blame good violent video games.
So what does this all add up to? A whole lot of ignorance. Do I think parents should be informed on what their child is playing? Of course. Should it be up to the parent to decide what is right for their children? Of course. But should we blame violent video games for overweight, anti-socializing kids? No, we blame the person who didn’t introduce them to the outside world otherwise. If a kid has mental problems, and constantly plays violent games, then yes, there is a problem. Get him/her away from those games. Relatively recent, there was a young adult who committed suicide over Everquest, the highly addictive online MMORPG, after finding out that he was essentially “ripped-off” online. After he committed suicide, his mother lobbied a suit against Sony Online Entertainment, the people who run the online world of Everquest. What was her eventual downfall? Her son had a history of mental problems, and shouldn’t have been playing games all day anyhow, yet she failed to act when her son would get seriously distraught over this game. Needless to say, she’s a little too far down that line to come back now.
So who’s to blame in all this? Is it the game producer’s who should be making more content for children? Is it the consumer’s who should be watching what they buy? Or is it the highly uninformed media, who just take shots at whatever looks like an easy scapegoat? Whoever it is, don’t you think we’ll still be playing violent video games in the future? You betcha.
Also to update this article,since its unchanged since i wrote it...the "C" in "Mortal Combat" has been fixed to a "K".