The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
As the Gaming Industry starts to overtake the Film and Music Industries in terms of Dollars generated, and as their influence on people becomes ever more widespread, the gaming industry is going to have to take some responsibility for its output in the future.
With Film, for example, we have censorship bodies controlling a lot of what we can and cannot see. They are there for a reason, and whether we agree with those reasons or not, age classification of films, as most parents will agree, is a necessary evil.
With video games, this type of classification is currently volutary, there is nothing as yet to prevent a video game being released that contains all manner of evils being sold to a minor, the ELSPA information on the back of a disc or cartridge box is there as a guide to the buyer, not as a restriction on the seller.
But content is not the only thing to worry about, it's the whole business in general. Already games have diversified into separate genres (shooters, RPG's, racers, sports sims and so on), but what percentage of all the genres combined could be classed as educational? I would suggest less than 1% at a guess.
Being such a big industry, and growing larger every day, the games manufacturers are realising that they have a great influence over the youth of today, and that influence is growing. Nowadays, instead of looking up to screen idols of old like John Wayne, Mel Gibson, James Bond and so on, today our idols are characters from games like Cloud Strife, Link, Sonic....(although we may be loathe to admit this in public).
What could the ramifications be of this shift? Both on and off screen, a movie actor or a sports hero recognises early on that they have a great platform from which to make a change for the good. Tiger Woods for example does an awful lot for kids, and so does Princess Anne, the Princess Royal. And when a superstar does wrong (pick Mike Tyson here at random), they are seen to be punished for their sins more often than not.
But with games characters, their platforms are just as large from which to make impressions on people, but they cannot be judged for their sins, so if they can be seen to do any wrong, they cannot be seen to be punished for it.
So with their new powers, the games industry really should start to look hard at how they regulate themselves, and quickly, before the draconian measures of enforced censorship are thrust upon them by a society that has no other choice in the matter.
With Film, for example, we have censorship bodies controlling a lot of what we can and cannot see. They are there for a reason, and whether we agree with those reasons or not, age classification of films, as most parents will agree, is a necessary evil.
With video games, this type of classification is currently volutary, there is nothing as yet to prevent a video game being released that contains all manner of evils being sold to a minor, the ELSPA information on the back of a disc or cartridge box is there as a guide to the buyer, not as a restriction on the seller.
But content is not the only thing to worry about, it's the whole business in general. Already games have diversified into separate genres (shooters, RPG's, racers, sports sims and so on), but what percentage of all the genres combined could be classed as educational? I would suggest less than 1% at a guess.
Being such a big industry, and growing larger every day, the games manufacturers are realising that they have a great influence over the youth of today, and that influence is growing. Nowadays, instead of looking up to screen idols of old like John Wayne, Mel Gibson, James Bond and so on, today our idols are characters from games like Cloud Strife, Link, Sonic....(although we may be loathe to admit this in public).
What could the ramifications be of this shift? Both on and off screen, a movie actor or a sports hero recognises early on that they have a great platform from which to make a change for the good. Tiger Woods for example does an awful lot for kids, and so does Princess Anne, the Princess Royal. And when a superstar does wrong (pick Mike Tyson here at random), they are seen to be punished for their sins more often than not.
But with games characters, their platforms are just as large from which to make impressions on people, but they cannot be judged for their sins, so if they can be seen to do any wrong, they cannot be seen to be punished for it.
So with their new powers, the games industry really should start to look hard at how they regulate themselves, and quickly, before the draconian measures of enforced censorship are thrust upon them by a society that has no other choice in the matter.
You ever notice in the gaming press, particular in the magazines, under the 'Jap News' sections, that the Japanese tend to get all the soft porn games which are never released over here?
Maybe this is just a way the demographics differ between our two countries in terms of the agegroups that play games, or maybe it's just because the Japanese have a much more relaxed approach towards sexuality than in the UK?
I'd like to know if they have any censorship laws pertaining to games over there, because they must get all the games well in advance of us in the west, therefore they are more likely in some respects to have restrictive and censorship laws passed in relation to the gaming industry. Does anyone know if they do have laws like this over there?
Maybe this is just a way the demographics differ between our two countries in terms of the agegroups that play games, or maybe it's just because the Japanese have a much more relaxed approach towards sexuality than in the UK?
I'd like to know if they have any censorship laws pertaining to games over there, because they must get all the games well in advance of us in the west, therefore they are more likely in some respects to have restrictive and censorship laws passed in relation to the gaming industry. Does anyone know if they do have laws like this over there?
With the vast improvements in graphical standards which are inevitable, games are also becoming very, very realistic. This also is a good reason for games to have strict age limits. It's never really been appripriate in the past as games have lacked the appearance to be considered 'lifelike', however violent they were. Now that games can more accurately portray reality, the potential effects can easily be more adverse than those of films, especially as conrtolloing a violent character (for example) gives that little bit more depth and 'connection' between the player and the character. Games deserve age certificates as much, if not more than films do.
Though many games are violent, however, there is as of yet relatively little swearing, sexual references or nudity compared to modern films - and these are all things which are also taken into account when retings are issued. If these things become more widespread in games, then I believe that age restrictions will be imposed without a doubt.
Currently, we just have violence. Maybe on it's own that's not enough to deem games suitable for more stringent age control? Does anyone remember the fuss caused by the release of Mortal Kombat? That sparked off a whole debate about whether games deserved age ratings, but all we got was a 'guideline'.
I dont't think that there's enough content in games to warrant any sales restrictions. Yet.
Though many games are violent, however, there is as of yet relatively little swearing, sexual references or nudity compared to modern films - and these are all things which are also taken into account when retings are issued. If these things become more widespread in games, then I believe that age restrictions will be imposed without a doubt.
Currently, we just have violence. Maybe on it's own that's not enough to deem games suitable for more stringent age control? Does anyone remember the fuss caused by the release of Mortal Kombat? That sparked off a whole debate about whether games deserved age ratings, but all we got was a 'guideline'.
I dont't think that there's enough content in games to warrant any sales restrictions. Yet.
Interesting points!
Maybe in years to come we'll get more coverage of games than films on television and in magazines and newspapers.
Though I doubt we'll ever see the day in which a Mario, Wario and Peach love triangle makes the front pages of The Sun.
Or at least I hope not....
Maybe in years to come we'll get more coverage of games than films on television and in magazines and newspapers.
Though I doubt we'll ever see the day in which a Mario, Wario and Peach love triangle makes the front pages of The Sun.
Or at least I hope not....
As the Gaming Industry starts to overtake the Film and Music Industries in terms of Dollars generated, and as their influence on people becomes ever more widespread, the gaming industry is going to have to take some responsibility for its output in the future.
With Film, for example, we have censorship bodies controlling a lot of what we can and cannot see. They are there for a reason, and whether we agree with those reasons or not, age classification of films, as most parents will agree, is a necessary evil.
With video games, this type of classification is currently volutary, there is nothing as yet to prevent a video game being released that contains all manner of evils being sold to a minor, the ELSPA information on the back of a disc or cartridge box is there as a guide to the buyer, not as a restriction on the seller.
But content is not the only thing to worry about, it's the whole business in general. Already games have diversified into separate genres (shooters, RPG's, racers, sports sims and so on), but what percentage of all the genres combined could be classed as educational? I would suggest less than 1% at a guess.
Being such a big industry, and growing larger every day, the games manufacturers are realising that they have a great influence over the youth of today, and that influence is growing. Nowadays, instead of looking up to screen idols of old like John Wayne, Mel Gibson, James Bond and so on, today our idols are characters from games like Cloud Strife, Link, Sonic....(although we may be loathe to admit this in public).
What could the ramifications be of this shift? Both on and off screen, a movie actor or a sports hero recognises early on that they have a great platform from which to make a change for the good. Tiger Woods for example does an awful lot for kids, and so does Princess Anne, the Princess Royal. And when a superstar does wrong (pick Mike Tyson here at random), they are seen to be punished for their sins more often than not.
But with games characters, their platforms are just as large from which to make impressions on people, but they cannot be judged for their sins, so if they can be seen to do any wrong, they cannot be seen to be punished for it.
So with their new powers, the games industry really should start to look hard at how they regulate themselves, and quickly, before the draconian measures of enforced censorship are thrust upon them by a society that has no other choice in the matter.
With Film, for example, we have censorship bodies controlling a lot of what we can and cannot see. They are there for a reason, and whether we agree with those reasons or not, age classification of films, as most parents will agree, is a necessary evil.
With video games, this type of classification is currently volutary, there is nothing as yet to prevent a video game being released that contains all manner of evils being sold to a minor, the ELSPA information on the back of a disc or cartridge box is there as a guide to the buyer, not as a restriction on the seller.
But content is not the only thing to worry about, it's the whole business in general. Already games have diversified into separate genres (shooters, RPG's, racers, sports sims and so on), but what percentage of all the genres combined could be classed as educational? I would suggest less than 1% at a guess.
Being such a big industry, and growing larger every day, the games manufacturers are realising that they have a great influence over the youth of today, and that influence is growing. Nowadays, instead of looking up to screen idols of old like John Wayne, Mel Gibson, James Bond and so on, today our idols are characters from games like Cloud Strife, Link, Sonic....(although we may be loathe to admit this in public).
What could the ramifications be of this shift? Both on and off screen, a movie actor or a sports hero recognises early on that they have a great platform from which to make a change for the good. Tiger Woods for example does an awful lot for kids, and so does Princess Anne, the Princess Royal. And when a superstar does wrong (pick Mike Tyson here at random), they are seen to be punished for their sins more often than not.
But with games characters, their platforms are just as large from which to make impressions on people, but they cannot be judged for their sins, so if they can be seen to do any wrong, they cannot be seen to be punished for it.
So with their new powers, the games industry really should start to look hard at how they regulate themselves, and quickly, before the draconian measures of enforced censorship are thrust upon them by a society that has no other choice in the matter.