Comments on: Why don't game developers get it?
Trash the alibis, says CNET News.com's Charles Cooper. It's time for the industry to take a long look in the mirror.
Most Popular
Latest tech news headlines
- Leaked Nexus One documents: $530 unlocked, $180 with T-Mobile
December 29, 2009 8:30 PM PST
- Teen Muziic founder chastised by Vevo
December 29, 2009 3:53 PM PST
- More attacks expected on Facebook, Twitter in 2010
December 29, 2009 2:50 PM PST
- See all headlines
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
- Markets
Related quotes
playing video games from age 8 to my current 20.
that things have just gone downhill in general.
their are bright gems out there that hold up morals as a good thing. but games like GTA:vice city just Burn my toast. and any and all games that promote death and guts and women that wear bits of cloud here and there and maybe some shiny underwear as they battle the zombies of hades.
its just silly how far these games go.
well that's my two bits from a man that has recently given up on video games as a source of entertainment. i a trying to excercise all those atrophied muscles and mental abilities with soccer and volley ball now. wish me luck.
Keep it up Cooper.
You don't hear people complaining about violent movies that much? Why is that? Why focus all this attention on just Video Games? Is it because it's still a new form of interactive entertainment that people can pinpoint the flaws of humanity on? When parents let their children buy a video game the PARENTS should actually pay attention to the rating of the game and see if it's suitable for their little kid. Because God knows that the parents wouldn't let their 8 year old son purchase a movie like Hostel, Saw II, Running Scared, Doom or purchase an Album that contains music about Gangsters, killing people, drugs, sex, etc. There's NO DIFFERENCE!
playing video games from age 8 to my current 20.
that things have just gone downhill in general.
their are bright gems out there that hold up morals as a good thing. but games like GTA:vice city just Burn my toast. and any and all games that promote death and guts and women that wear bits of cloud here and there and maybe some shiny underwear as they battle the zombies of hades.
its just silly how far these games go.
well that's my two bits from a man that has recently given up on video games as a source of entertainment. i a trying to excercise all those atrophied muscles and mental abilities with soccer and volley ball now. wish me luck.
Keep it up Cooper.
You don't hear people complaining about violent movies that much? Why is that? Why focus all this attention on just Video Games? Is it because it's still a new form of interactive entertainment that people can pinpoint the flaws of humanity on? When parents let their children buy a video game the PARENTS should actually pay attention to the rating of the game and see if it's suitable for their little kid. Because God knows that the parents wouldn't let their 8 year old son purchase a movie like Hostel, Saw II, Running Scared, Doom or purchase an Album that contains music about Gangsters, killing people, drugs, sex, etc. There's NO DIFFERENCE!
I don't game, could care less if they were all removed from the shelves and don't think hours in front of a PC game is healthy... but I don't think legislative morality is healthy either. We need to stop thinking that the development and education of a child is anyone's responsibility but the parents. No excuses. I won't let my child play these games and don't have any interst myself, but I will vote against any politician pushing legislation that attempts to make these "moral" decisions for me. This is America and the choice should be mine.
But it is way past time that we sponsor legislation mandating stiff fines and lengthy jail sentences for any person employed by the media industry found guilty of expressing their personal beliefs if contrary to the current legal guidelines. This growing threat is a severe deterent to the development of a democratic understanding in my child's education.
I don't game, could care less if they were all removed from the shelves and don't think hours in front of a PC game is healthy... but I don't think legislative morality is healthy either. We need to stop thinking that the development and education of a child is anyone's responsibility but the parents. No excuses. I won't let my child play these games and don't have any interst myself, but I will vote against any politician pushing legislation that attempts to make these "moral" decisions for me. This is America and the choice should be mine.
But it is way past time that we sponsor legislation mandating stiff fines and lengthy jail sentences for any person employed by the media industry found guilty of expressing their personal beliefs if contrary to the current legal guidelines. This growing threat is a severe deterent to the development of a democratic understanding in my child's education.
Of course, the video game crowd will be against it, minors are the biggest buyers.
Of course, the video game crowd will be against it, minors are the biggest buyers.
mark d.
Good games are still made, bad games will also still be made and outnumber the good ones by a large margin, they always have and always will, just as there are many more crappy movies out there then there are LOTR's.
Sequels make money, just ask the movie studios, the TV networks and the book publishers, the gaming industry is not exempt from that.
The really stupid thing here is this...the GTA series are among the most original and best games for grown up gamers in existence.
It would be a sad day if we lost games like GTA because of moralistic posing by people that have made hundreds of millions with on screen violence.
mark d.
Good games are still made, bad games will also still be made and outnumber the good ones by a large margin, they always have and always will, just as there are many more crappy movies out there then there are LOTR's.
Sequels make money, just ask the movie studios, the TV networks and the book publishers, the gaming industry is not exempt from that.
The really stupid thing here is this...the GTA series are among the most original and best games for grown up gamers in existence.
It would be a sad day if we lost games like GTA because of moralistic posing by people that have made hundreds of millions with on screen violence.
I recall seeing market research done by Sony that placed its largest demographic at males between ages 25 and 35.
More on topic;
The gaming industry 'suffers' from the same ailment any creative industry suffers, there are only so many good ideas and so many truly good & creative writers/directors/designers in the world.
For every Kill Bill or GTA (yes, I think those are comparable) there are 10 tripe games which try to substitute story and content with tripe, such is the way of the creative industries.
I also do not see why the gaming industry is treated differently from other creative industries in this regard, movie and TV audiences are inundated with tripe every day and considering they are working with real people instead of cartoon style drawings I'd be much more concerned there over the effect they have.
For the person earlier who asked if I'd let a child play a game that involved crashing a jet into a skyscraper I'll answer that with yes.
Why? If my child cannot comprehend the difference between video game behavior and acceptable human interaction then I dont intend to blame the video game, I blame the parents who are so lacking in parenting skills that they neglected to teach their children the difference.
This applies to points raised by Mr. Cooper as well, I think, ultimately no legislation is going to be one iota effective nor is repression of content going to reach any goals unless you first start parenting children, not just plonking them for a tv or computer screen with a video game.
As for Schwarzenegger signing this bill into law I can only say "only in America" and shake my head.
I recall seeing market research done by Sony that placed its largest demographic at males between ages 25 and 35.
More on topic;
The gaming industry 'suffers' from the same ailment any creative industry suffers, there are only so many good ideas and so many truly good & creative writers/directors/designers in the world.
For every Kill Bill or GTA (yes, I think those are comparable) there are 10 tripe games which try to substitute story and content with tripe, such is the way of the creative industries.
I also do not see why the gaming industry is treated differently from other creative industries in this regard, movie and TV audiences are inundated with tripe every day and considering they are working with real people instead of cartoon style drawings I'd be much more concerned there over the effect they have.
For the person earlier who asked if I'd let a child play a game that involved crashing a jet into a skyscraper I'll answer that with yes.
Why? If my child cannot comprehend the difference between video game behavior and acceptable human interaction then I dont intend to blame the video game, I blame the parents who are so lacking in parenting skills that they neglected to teach their children the difference.
This applies to points raised by Mr. Cooper as well, I think, ultimately no legislation is going to be one iota effective nor is repression of content going to reach any goals unless you first start parenting children, not just plonking them for a tv or computer screen with a video game.
As for Schwarzenegger signing this bill into law I can only say "only in America" and shake my head.
20 years ago an R rating on a film meant that children didn't get into the theater. That isn't the case today. Not only that but, what qualified for an R rating back then barely gets a PG/PG13 rating today. Go pick up a copy of an older film from the late 70's that has an R rating and watch it. Compare it to a PG movie today. You'll see what I mean. Even what is shown on TV has gotten more lax. "Robocop" would never have been shown on TV, even in edited form, 20 years ago due to the violence in it. Now they show it.
Standards have slipped downward over what is considered OK for minors over the past two decades, and parents are not helping matters there either. For example, on opening night for the movie "Blade," I witnessed parents bringing in 8 year old children. The children were crying and scared out of their minds, but the parents just kept on watching the film and trying to hush the child up.
Is this really where everyone wants things to go? Irresponsible parents and voluntary ratings that are useless? I would never think to allow a 12 year old under my care to watch something like "Starship Troopers" where people are being ripped apart by large insects, but I saw parents taking children to the theater for that one too. Can a child who grows up on such things really be considered well-adjusted? Desensitizing a child to violence is not a good thing. Violence is supposed to be horrible, not entertaining.
20 years ago an R rating on a film meant that children didn't get into the theater. That isn't the case today. Not only that but, what qualified for an R rating back then barely gets a PG/PG13 rating today. Go pick up a copy of an older film from the late 70's that has an R rating and watch it. Compare it to a PG movie today. You'll see what I mean. Even what is shown on TV has gotten more lax. "Robocop" would never have been shown on TV, even in edited form, 20 years ago due to the violence in it. Now they show it.
Standards have slipped downward over what is considered OK for minors over the past two decades, and parents are not helping matters there either. For example, on opening night for the movie "Blade," I witnessed parents bringing in 8 year old children. The children were crying and scared out of their minds, but the parents just kept on watching the film and trying to hush the child up.
Is this really where everyone wants things to go? Irresponsible parents and voluntary ratings that are useless? I would never think to allow a 12 year old under my care to watch something like "Starship Troopers" where people are being ripped apart by large insects, but I saw parents taking children to the theater for that one too. Can a child who grows up on such things really be considered well-adjusted? Desensitizing a child to violence is not a good thing. Violence is supposed to be horrible, not entertaining.
This tension between winner and loser is often portrayed as a "battle", such as in chess.
Even in the game of football, there is a "battle" of sorts happening between the two sides, which is a metaphor for war.
Almost every game ever conceived in history, even tic-tac-toe, has at it's roots the concept of defeating your oponent.
So violence is at the root of most games. Get over it. IT'S JUST A GAME!!!
in a game of tic tac toe, and a graphic depiction of gore
exploding across the (simulated) camera lens as you beat a
hooker to death with a crowbar.
Humans are physical critters, wired to respond to danger with a
whole bunch of stress hormones. Those are far more likely to
be released when scenes of violence are put in front of us. That
is, in fact, _why_ I enjoy playing an FPS on occasion - the rush is
fun. Like a roller coaster. I don't ride roller coasters every day,
and I do not want every video game I look at to become Doom or
GTA:SA. It would really bite if the choices became Tetris or
Blood Soaked Romp Seven.
Not only is it unrealistic and desensitizing, it also misses whole
nuances of menace and threat. I want the menace of Alien (the
movie) in a video game, and that is not likely if the designers
think that only buckets of gore and slime can produce menace.
I honestly think that that the current top games have gotten out
of hand. The industry needs to reset itself, figure out what level
of gore they want, and what image they want to have, or they
will have a pretty good chance of becoming irrelevant.
Scott
This tension between winner and loser is often portrayed as a "battle", such as in chess.
Even in the game of football, there is a "battle" of sorts happening between the two sides, which is a metaphor for war.
Almost every game ever conceived in history, even tic-tac-toe, has at it's roots the concept of defeating your oponent.
So violence is at the root of most games. Get over it. IT'S JUST A GAME!!!
in a game of tic tac toe, and a graphic depiction of gore
exploding across the (simulated) camera lens as you beat a
hooker to death with a crowbar.
Humans are physical critters, wired to respond to danger with a
whole bunch of stress hormones. Those are far more likely to
be released when scenes of violence are put in front of us. That
is, in fact, _why_ I enjoy playing an FPS on occasion - the rush is
fun. Like a roller coaster. I don't ride roller coasters every day,
and I do not want every video game I look at to become Doom or
GTA:SA. It would really bite if the choices became Tetris or
Blood Soaked Romp Seven.
Not only is it unrealistic and desensitizing, it also misses whole
nuances of menace and threat. I want the menace of Alien (the
movie) in a video game, and that is not likely if the designers
think that only buckets of gore and slime can produce menace.
I honestly think that that the current top games have gotten out
of hand. The industry needs to reset itself, figure out what level
of gore they want, and what image they want to have, or they
will have a pretty good chance of becoming irrelevant.
Scott
Video games are no better or worst than other media, but they get a undo amount of criticism. Even Mr. Cooper here which seems to be a smart cookie could not help but find something to fault them for even though I suspect if he thought about it he would find that his complaints apply as readily or more so to other media.
Lets leave parenting to the parents shall we. I mean it's just that 'the govt. should protect us' attitude that has led to the decline of personal responsibility in this country.
Video games are no better or worst than other media, but they get a undo amount of criticism. Even Mr. Cooper here which seems to be a smart cookie could not help but find something to fault them for even though I suspect if he thought about it he would find that his complaints apply as readily or more so to other media.
Lets leave parenting to the parents shall we. I mean it's just that 'the govt. should protect us' attitude that has led to the decline of personal responsibility in this country.
proportion. Like anything, it is possible to take video game
violence too far. Video game designers have lost the ability to
create art in favor of creating carnage.
I played GTA:SA, and eventually stopped, because I found the
headspace one I disapproved of. It is so far out of touch with
any behavior we want to encourage that I finally stopped caring.
I like action movies and first person shooter games, but there is
a limit. We all know that Terminator was just a story. Still, the
earlier movies had more emotional impact precisely because the
body count was low. Doom 3 has less impact than the original
Doom, because it is a shooting gallery, not a tension soaked
romp through the moonbase.
Put another way, a horror movie like Evil Dead can generate
concern with just five people at risk, while the upcoming Doom
movie is likely to have a body count in the hundreds. I am not
sure that is a win.
GTA forced the character to act in a villainous way, without a
shred of personal integrity or honor. For all that Carl is back in
town to avenge his lost family, one of the first things he does is
kill off a couple of guards to steal some songs for his buddy the
incompetent rapper working at burger barn. That is an
acceptable way to play it, but it should not be the only way to
enjoy such an immersive simulation.
Again, Carl does not have to be some kind of paladin, but
wouldn't it be nice if the main character of one of the best
selling games had some other option than public enemy number
one?
By the time I stopped playing, my main character had killed over
two thousand civilians, and over a hundred enemy gang
members. According to the NLM, '7288 gang-related homicides
occurred in Los Angeles County from 1979 through 1994', so
my character in two weeks killed as many people as _every other
gang member in all of LA county_. Heck, CJ killed nearly as
many people as Osama Bin Laden managed.
This cannot be healthy.
Killing 42 people in service to the Hell's Angels made Yves
"Apache" Trudeau one of the most prolific killers in history, yet
that would not even get you to 'hitman' in this game. The
perspective is just plain off here.
I just do not see the sex in these games as a big problem as yet.
Eventually, perhaps, but frankly, the casual murder of people for
a few hundred dollars seems more fraught.
Look, I like violent movies and games as much as the next guy,
but game designers have just gone beyond the pale. Crank it
back, try to make the story a bit more engaging, the targets
more interesting as individuals, and you can have a good game.
- Game developers need a swift kick
- by October 10, 2005 11:35 AM PDT
- I believe current game developers have lost a sense of
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 2 of 3 pages (90 Comments)proportion. Like anything, it is possible to take video game
violence too far. Video game designers have lost the ability to
create art in favor of creating carnage.
I played GTA:SA, and eventually stopped, because I found the
headspace one I disapproved of. It is so far out of touch with
any behavior we want to encourage that I finally stopped caring.
I like action movies and first person shooter games, but there is
a limit. We all know that Terminator was just a story. Still, the
earlier movies had more emotional impact precisely because the
body count was low. Doom 3 has less impact than the original
Doom, because it is a shooting gallery, not a tension soaked
romp through the moonbase.
Put another way, a horror movie like Evil Dead can generate
concern with just five people at risk, while the upcoming Doom
movie is likely to have a body count in the hundreds. I am not
sure that is a win.
GTA forced the character to act in a villainous way, without a
shred of personal integrity or honor. For all that Carl is back in
town to avenge his lost family, one of the first things he does is
kill off a couple of guards to steal some songs for his buddy the
incompetent rapper working at burger barn. That is an
acceptable way to play it, but it should not be the only way to
enjoy such an immersive simulation.
Again, Carl does not have to be some kind of paladin, but
wouldn't it be nice if the main character of one of the best
selling games had some other option than public enemy number
one?
By the time I stopped playing, my main character had killed over
two thousand civilians, and over a hundred enemy gang
members. According to the NLM, '7288 gang-related homicides
occurred in Los Angeles County from 1979 through 1994', so
my character in two weeks killed as many people as _every other
gang member in all of LA county_. Heck, CJ killed nearly as
many people as Osama Bin Laden managed.
This cannot be healthy.
Killing 42 people in service to the Hell's Angels made Yves
"Apache" Trudeau one of the most prolific killers in history, yet
that would not even get you to 'hitman' in this game. The
perspective is just plain off here.
I just do not see the sex in these games as a big problem as yet.
Eventually, perhaps, but frankly, the casual murder of people for
a few hundred dollars seems more fraught.
Look, I like violent movies and games as much as the next guy,
but game designers have just gone beyond the pale. Crank it
back, try to make the story a bit more engaging, the targets
more interesting as individuals, and you can have a good game.