Soapbox Saturday: The Importance Placed On A Word…not the meaning
Saturday 26 September 2009 @ 2:35 am | By Sol 10 Comments
When one thinks of Left4Dead, what is the first word that pops in your head? Hell it may not be the first word, but a some point “zombie” is sure to surface. Also, you might say, violent… This frames what will be our discussion: real-life vs fictional violence and zombies.
Each of these topics can be thoroughly exhausted, but what got me writing on this topic was the recent classification of Left4Dead 2 by the Australian ratings board (their version of the ESRB) as “refused classification”. This essentially means Valve’s zombie hit will not be able to be sold unless changes are made to the final product.
Why was it refused? It’s all in the terminology. In Left4Dead you play against the “infected”.
“The game contains realistic, frenetic and unrelenting violence which is inflicted upon “the Infected” who are living humans infected with a rabies-like virus that causes them to act violently.”
So the infected are living humans and not living corpses. As Fidgit editor, Tom Chick points out, “Since the Infected aren’t dead, since they’re simply sick, there’s a much different moral quandary when it comes to killing them. It’s a whole different kind of violence!”
And there lies the difference: Shooting sick granny, over bloodthirsty, violence induced granny causes you to act morally different. And for the developing psyche of an adolescent, who knows what damage may be done coupled with their loud rock music and loose morals. *points to DDN younguns* This is clearly someones issue, but I’m not sure why. I can understand if in the course of zombie/infected hunting you have a story track where you get to shoot the non-infected human, thereby making you a de facto death panel, but games are games right?
I think the bigger argument encapsulated in this is: “think of the children”. As a now, dusty semblance of an adult; I can argue parents should watch what their kids buy and monitor them so that if they find something objectionable, take it away. However as a kid, when my parents didn’t want me to watch Bevis and Butthead I just went over to a friends house. The same can be said for videogames. What really strikes a cord with me is I consider this unnecessary regulation and censorship. While I’m glad it isn’t in my home country, much like the German assault to videogames, I consider it my personal duty to rant.
It bothers me, but is it really that important? Similar to how American standards of decency have changed over time, do you think I should just cool my heels? In the grand scheme of things it doesn’t directly affect me.
If You Liked This... Share It!
Or share it by email or anywhere else with
Loading ...
Abraham 'Velcor' Duarte
David 'KidKobun' Bruno
Ivan 'Nahu' Lozano
Random J
Man this is pretty much the most annoying thing about living in Australia. This isnt the first time games here have been refused classification and it never gets less irritating.
i think there should be no censorship on videogames, i just think that parents should monitor what kids buy… i mean, the first time i played half-life i was 9 years old and i haven’t hit anybody with a crowbar (yet) nor anything like that. I don’t know, it’s just I hate that japanase get awesome games and then here in america we receive the same game but with an american flag and without blood and gore.
I love japanese games!!!! ^-^
Even if it doesn’t affect us, we should still weigh in our opinion on it. I really hope that Australia gets a 18+ rating for video games. The games are growing up (even though some would say not) and are increasingly dealing with subject matter that is intended for older audiences.
No, you shouldn’t “cool your heels”… Even if it is indirectly, this does os could affect us in some way or another… Maybe legislation or policy along the same lines could be adopted in our respective countries some day if some quack says they were effective in reducing violence or similar hoo ha. Or maybe censorship could drive up development costs because time has to be spent “editing” games for different markets.
Sure, now in my 20’s I say: “Parents should watch what their kids, see, read, browse, play, etc.” But really… Didn’t a TON of us en up playing Halo, GTA, and other M rated games? Didn’t we look for porn and feet like badasses for doing it? Didn’t we listen to whatever “dirty” music we liked? Yet how many of turned out to be a social fuck-up?
Where there’s a will there’s a way… And parents who reeaaally want to keep their kids away from certain stuff (as they should) should just work harder at it… Not expect governmet to act like a nany and make things “easier” by censoring things…
CENSORSHIP IS BAD, PEOPLE! I thought we all knew this already… ;) Or maybe not… D;
THE U MUST HAVAE GUD GRAMMER NAZI IN ME EMERGES:
or*
how many of us turned out*
governments*
The serious comment: perhaps the developers should start doing content that is NOT censorable right of the bat, and on the other hand, while we all like to have our ‘daily dose of fictional violence’ i prefer that the final solution on a third-person game is not death by means (say arms, items, spells, energy, or anything that blows up a living, infected, zombified being or similar) In the end this is just my opinion.
The senseless comment: it annoys me to no-end that a casual and almost kiddie-like console like the DS has more console sales than the PSP. Maybe violence does not sell as much as it should? Or maybe every parent around likes to keep their kid entertained with something that is “kid-friendly”. There is much to debate on this one.
The stupid comment: There is this musician, Rob Zombie. Does this mean that when he goes to Australia he must not refer himself as Rob Zombie, otherwise he will permit third-persons to blow him up?
Also, i dislike that some Nintendo-publications like “Club Nintendo” in Mexico fawn their consoles as something imaginative that does not promote gratuitous violence, and similar comments. As always, there is stuff to debate on this one.
ahh, CN. Good I stopped collecting them on issue #200 :p
Let me show you my opinion on both sides of the issue of violence in video games.
Rational: If you don’t want your children playing video games you find inappropriate watch your god damn fucking children.
Irrational: All video games have the potential to end up in the hands of children and i am too much of a lazy ass piece of shit to watch them, so all video games i find that took a long time to make for not-children i will try to ban from my country unless everything in it is shooting rainbows and farting lollipops!