Censorship in Illinois

#21 In legal contexts, definitions are based on a community standard - if the average person in Illinois thinks something is sexually explicit, then legally, it is. This serves to insulate indecency laws from exploitation by social conservatives.

And I'm not seeing any mention of the ESRB rating system - so I don't think you can really argue that all mature rated games would necessarily come under regulation.

#22 @Todd: erg...title of thread = "Censorship in Illinois" =D

Quote:
@Mark
That depends entirely on the definition of sexually explicit, what is sexually explicit to one person may not be to another. Also all mature rated games are not necessarily sexually explicit but they would get lumped into the treated like pornography category as well.

Hrm...couldn't you say the same about pornography? That it may be explicit to one person but not to another? What would you say about the recent increase in games that are intentionally oriented around sex?


[edit]Didn't wanna point fingers at any specific game[/edit]

#23 @Mark
The original post states "to ban the sale and rental of all violent and sexually explicit video
games", so it's not just sexually explicit games that are being targeted but games that fall under the generic violent category as well. To me this implies games that would fall under the mature category by the ESRB, but could also be extended to any sort of violence the lawmakers wish, even if it is cartoon violence in the vein of Tom and Jerry.

@Josiah

Quote:Hrm...couldn't you say the same about pornography? That it may be explicit to one person but not to another?

True, but my point, which after rereading it was unclear, was that what defines each category such as violent or sexually explicit needs to be clearly defined.

Quote:What would you say about the recent increase in games that are intentionally oriented around sex?

I personally do not have a problem with it, sexual themes have been present in movies, books, and music for years and while it may not be particularly anyones cup of tea it is, in my opinion, it is just another extension of the meduim.

#24 I am from Illinois and I have no problem with this... I am a Republican, conservative on some things but not a religious zealot, and I do not normally like states and the federal government getting overly involved like many liberals often do but I am in agreement with my Democrat Governor.

I have two kids and I am a father first and a game developer second. I see no reason why a child needs to play GTA San Andreas or Doom 3 for example but I hear often kids are. Parent's are doing a poor job of watching what their children play because most are not into playing games themselves though I myself am an avid gamer so I know. When I hear a parent telling me what game their child is playing now because they buy it, I let them know what the game is like. They don't believe me until they see it for themselves. I have no problems with making sure adult themed games are targeted only to adults, and if that means that the state or federal government needs to get involved then so be it. I have been a gamer since I can remember (mid 30's) and games are always looking to push the envelope and be more violent. The question is do they need to be more violent to be successful? I don't think so. I enjoy sitting down with my son and playing a good computer game. I miss my Amiga lol...

So how do you handle the child that seems to not have responsible parent's is the question? If you are making a violent game, great this is America and you should be able to do it but don't tell me a child needs to play it. Let's be realistic...

By the way, my son's favorite game of all time is "Marble Blast"! He is 8. He asks me all the time when it will be out on his XBOX.

#25 I agree that games should have a rating(which they do but the government doesn't feel its good enough) but to put video games in the same category as cigarettes and alcohol is a bit ridiculous. Its definitly a problem in parenting, why not make it a misdemeanor for a parent to not know what thier kids are doing? instead of making everyone else responsible.

as for definitions form the bill itself.

19 (e) "Violent" video games include realistic depictions of
20 human-on-human violence in which the player kills, seriously
21 injures, or otherwise causes serious physical harm to another
22 human, including but not limited to depictions of death,
23 dismemberment, amputation, decapitation, maiming,
24 disfigurement, mutilation of body parts, or rape.


7 (e) "Sexually explicit" video games include those that the
8 average person, applying contemporary community standards
9 would find, with respect to minors, is designed to appeal or
10 pander to the prurient interest and depicts or represents in a
11 manner patently offensive with respect to minors, an actual or
12 simulated sexual act or sexual contact, an actual or simulated
13 normal or perverted sexual act or a lewd exhibition of the
14 genitals or post-pubescent female breast.

#26 Himm that definition of Sexually Explicit would make all of the recent Sims games illegal for minors to purchase or rent.

#27 @Todd ah now i understand what you're saying =D nvm my post then

@Mario O.o wow they outine it pretty straightforward...but i still think it's the wrong approach...like almost everyone else said, it's mainly there because of a parenting problem.

#28 @ Nate:

I agree that many things including video games and movies affect a child's behavior. That is why games and movies have ratings on them as it is. It is up to parents to know what theirs kids are doing and curb usage of games that may be inappropriate. Too many people use TV and Video Games as babysitters for young children these days. I know several parents like that.

I did not mean to imply that people do not get ideas from video games. Like in the quote above from Josiah about the kids who went out on the playground and emulated Mortal Kombat. I want to see one of you tell me that you didn't do something similar as a kid. You see Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (A Cartoon) and go out and fight your buddies with sticks. You see the Lone Ranger and go out and play Cowboys and Native Americans (going for PC here...)

The point I am making is that all kids play video games. All kids watch movies. All kids get bullied and made fun of at some point. We don't all go out and murder our classmates or become felons. Kids play and they play rough. They always have. The doctors want us to believe that kids play fighting makes them violent. I say it makes them normal. The anomaly is the kid that brings a shotgun to school. And this is the exception and not the rule. What we should be searching for is what makes those kids take it to the next level. I don't think that "trigger" is the video games.

To conclude, like all of you I agree 4 year olds should not be playing mortal kombat. The fact is that at this time games have ESRB ratings. They are not enforced very well. What is the point of adding more legislation that will not be enforced except as a scare tactic?

#29 I am both for and against this happening. My reasoning, video games do effect kids, but everything effects kids! Saying just violent Video Games cause you to be a Jack the Ripper or sexually explicit Video Games cause you to be a rapist (insert bad thing related to sexually explicit Video Games here), is wrong.

I do believe that this will most likely lead to censorship and overpowered government (As when people have power, they are going to use it to gain more power).

I believe this quote from an old book sums up the way we will most likely be living in the near future:

Quote:'You are improving. Intellectually there is very little wrong with you. It is only emotionally that you have failed to make progress. Tell me, Winston -- and remember, no lies: you know that I am always able to detect a lie -- tell me, what are your true feelings towards violent and/or sexually explicit Video Games?'

'I love them.'

'You love them. Good. Then the time has come for you to take the last step. You must hate violent and/or sexually explicit Video Games. It is not enough to stay away from them: you must hate them.'

He released Winston with a little push towards the guards.

'Room 101,' he said.

(from 1984. Minor editing to emphasize point).

NOTE: This is my personal opinion and you have the right to have your own opinion. If you believe I am wrong, and you are right, please, enlighten me.

Robert

#30 I am all against such moves and not because I think minors should have unlimited contact with violence and sex but- first of all- because I think it's parents job to determine whenever their child can or can not watch certain thing, not goverments. If kids will not be taught proper behaviour at homes, even most restrictive laws will not change anything and parents should not expect that goverment will do their job. Personaly last thing I'd like to see is goverment sticking it's nose into my private affairs and telling me how should I grow my kids, what should I think or say.

Second- How you will determine by law whenever something is sexy/ violent or not ? I am not talking about extremes which are widely known and recognized as such but average games and in almost all of them various degrees violence appear. C&C is violent, Tomb Raider might be seen as game about killing and big tits (I've seen descriptions like that), even Pacman contains violence (poor yellow pacman get's eaten or eats ghosts). Remove ALL games with elements of violence ? Well- then next logical step is to prohibit greek mythology, westerns... simply speaking about 90 % of our culture, Bible included (there is a lot of killing in it). Still sounds like a good idea ?

#31 I live in Illinois and will be writing to my congressman. the problem with this bill is that it is ambigious in its description of 'explicitly violent' when the govener introduced the bill gamasutra pointed out in thier announcement of the story that it does not specify what is too violent. So as Radaslow says, how do you specify the level of violence. Madden could be included on that list even though it carries a teen rating. Which by the way is okay for minors over the age of 13 according to the ERSB. We as an industry have already done a better job of policing ourselves than any other creative group. look at the movies. I've been to so many PG-13 rated movies where thier content often makes me go this is okay for 13 year olds? I don't understand why my govenor feels that he must make the parenting decisions. Luckily history is on our side here similar bills have been struck down in California due to thier vaugeness. The ambigious nature of this bill concerns me most because it opens the door for the state to determine anything is too violent. so all you illinoisians out there write to your senator. We can at least try to stop them from telling us what to do.

#32 The other problem I see with this bill is that I think the retailers will just stop carrying those games rather than risk getting fined and sent to jail.

#33 @Robert: O.o i love 1984 - great book...reminds me of HL2 for some reason...

@Mario: quite the contrary....I mean, look at the movie industry. The things keep sliding more and more into the PG-13 area, which can probably be considered the "safe zone". The closer it seems that it should be rated R, the more teens flock to it. So in essence, this bill might actually provoke the the creation of more and more violent/sexual material that borderline the T and the M rating.

#34 @Josiah: I thought it was a great book, so I adapted a small part of it, hehe. I hate Dr. Breen, as he was the worst "Big Brother" ever.

Anyway, I believe in the "forbidden fruit" philosophy. For those of you who don't know it (by that name or just don't know it), it is the idea that because something is forbidden/prohibited/banned, people will be attracted to it. An example of this is the prohibition.

Robert

#35 This is stupid ... I don't know about everyone else but I grew up playing violent games like Mortal Kombat etc... and I turned out ok. Games will have different reactions with different people. After playing Mortal Kombat I wanted to know how to program ... I'm sure it's a very very small minority who actually wanted to go rip someone's head off ... and the rest of use shouldn't be punished for the few who are going to go nuts anyway ... most likely due to complex social issues involving parents, family, and friends and having nothing to do with video games.

#36 @ Jeremy

We may think its dumb but the problem is the parents of these small minorities are the ones voicing thier opinions. As the saying goes the squeaky wheel gets the grease. I've been following this on the news and the governor is really misguided. most elected officials are uneducated about what games are and who plays them. They still regard them as child's play. So unless we as developers stand up and say something on behalf we'll continue to be this country's scape goat.

@ Brian jack the ripper had a game boy i think he used it to play 'hooker hunter' the cops said that encouraged him to kill :)

This is a good topic in the forum but I think we must all actually voice our concerns to the people in office otherwise we'll just continue to be a big target.

#37 Where I live, MN, we already ban the sale of violent games to people under 18. All this means is I get to play the game before my son does, since I have to buy it. I have no issues with the bill.

#38 Here's an article I pulled from a recent magazine:

Quote:
Young Killer Goaded by Games

He had no criminal record. Yet when arrested on suspicion of car theft in 2003, 16-year-old Devon Moore seized an officer's gun and started shooting. IN a matter of minutes, two police-men and a dispatcher lay dead. Implicated in the killings were the brutal Grand Theft Auto video games, which the teen had played incessantly.

Attorney Jack Thompson is representing the victims' families in a lawsuit fileda gainst the creator of the M-rated games, as well as retailers responsible for selling them to a minor. He told 60 Minutes, "Devon Moore, was, in effect, trained to do what he did. He was given a murder simulator. ... The video game industry gave him a cranial menu that popped up in the blink of an eye in that police station, and that menu offered him the split-second decision to kill the officers, shoot them in the head and flee in a police car just as the game itself trained him to do."

Indeed, Moore's actions were disturbingly similar to the cop-killing scenarios presented in the computer games. When apprehended the young man quipped, "Life is a video game. You've got to die sometime." Despite these and other obvious connections, Thompson may have a hard time convincing a court that anyone except Moore is liable for this crime.

Although I don't agree entirely with that article, I do think that it shows the extent of media's affection. I underlined some of the things I thought should be emphasized.

I still agree, however, that even though the media provides the options, it's always the user (harhar?) who makes the choice of what to do. If we limit the options, we limit what hte user can do (going back to the Forbidden Fruit principle Robert said)


[edit]
did the quote think tags wrong >_< stupid me
[/edit]

#39 I've heard similiar arguments regarding pornography- that it will lead to deviations and increasing number of sexual crimes. Sure, you will find cruel deviants reading hardcore porn and commiting crimes but does it proove porn is a cause of their actions ? Statistics show that it actually works exactly oposite- in countries with free acces to that kind of materials number of sexual crimes is much lower then in restrictive ones.

Case of kid from example above does not proove video games are something that promotes crime or makes a kid-serial killer. It prooves that material gadgets will not replace proper relations between parents and kid.

#40 A few things:

1.
There Are those studies which show a biological, medical effect of violent video games.

Michael said "I think the study is probably meaningless",
but without any reasons why.

I linked to some of them up in like the second page of the thread.


2.
I too played my share or possibly more of violent games as a kid.
We played "Guns" several hours a day all thru elementary school it seems,
and now i'm a bleeding heart pacifist,
so obviously it's not a simple cause -> effect relationship.

But just because it's not a simple relationship doesn't mean there's no relationship.

2.5.
Also i can't help but feel that the realism in games like GTA make them a totally different beast than kids running around with pop-guns, or even games like Mortal Combat.


3.
As Marvin said, the game industry should accept at least the fact that the media & public may Think there is a causal relationship, and should start taking the issue seriously, whether or not video games actually do increase violence in society.