Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

With Take Two's recent censorship of Vice City, what is your opinion on this? Should certain things be not allowed in games? Or should the companys produce games as they wish?

Edit: Fixed a typo and a stupid mistake in the poll.

in my personal view,censorship kills creativity.

If I wanted something uncreative, I wouldn't have to pay money for it -- any idiot can make something bland and politically friendly -- but would it be worth playing?

edit: Errors fixed. Thanks, Brolly!

Anyway, it doesn't matter to me what companies put in their games, so long as they offer sufficient warning. For example, if a new volleyball game came out and the developers decided to add topless players, as long as there is a warning that that game contains partial nudity and should only be played by people 18 years or older, fine. But, if they leave that warning out, then I see a problem.

I don't have a problem with the censorship; I have a problem with the dumbasses of Florida.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/12/0010245

One question: what the hell can Rockstar do with the games that have already been sold? It's not like PS2 games are patchable or easily modifiable.

Florida sucks. First the election, now this.

There's a HUGE difference between self-imposed limits and government-imposed limits.

It seems in this specific case the developer is trying to resolve a PR nightmare caused by taking a sentence from the game out of context. Which is the developer's right, of course.

Compare with New Zealand's outright ban on Manhunt ( http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl...86&tid=212 )

Let the companies make the games as they see fit. Bring the ESRB more in line with MPAA/CARA. Let the parents screen the games their children play.

I actually have to do a debate for school on Tuesday on "Violent and Sexually Explicit Video Games Should Be Restriced From Minors." I am the affirmative and am arguing that stores should contine to require parental permission before a child under the ESRB suggested age minimum for a game can purchase a game. I will argue that this should be law, not just a voluntary action by stores. There was a law being passed in St. Louis County (where I live, as a matter of fact) to enforce the ESRB ratings, but it has been put on hold by a judge. I still need to do research, to fill me in on anything I missed or screwed up. I am not saying that Mature and Adult games should be banned from minors, just that anyone under the age requirement should need parental permission, like movies.

Like others here, I think game companies should do as they see fit without government intervention of the content of games. Just that more maturely-rated games should require parental permission for kids to purchase.

Originally Posted by dan7532 I actually have to do a debate for school on Tuesday on "Violent and Sexually Explicit Video Games Should Be Restriced From Minors." I am the affirmative and am arguing that stores should contine to require parental permission before a child under the ESRB suggested age minimum for a game can purchase a game. I will argue that this should be law, not just a voluntary action by stores. There was a law being passed in St. Louis County (where I live, as a matter of fact) to enforce the ESRB ratings, but it has been put on hold by a judge. I still need to do research, to fill me in on anything I missed or screwed up. I am not saying that Mature and Adult games should be banned from minors, just that anyone under the age requirement should need parental permission, like movies. Like others here, I think game companies should do as they see fit without government intervention of the content of games. Just that more maturely-rated games should require parental permission for kids to purchase.

Exactly. From my experiences, the problems come when parents buy their kids Mature-rated games without having any idea of what the game's content is like. It doesn't matter how badly your nine year old son wants Manhunt - just check it out online to see if it's appropriate, and refuse to buy the game if it's not. Unfortunately, most people aren't smart enough to do this, and are more content to buy now, bitch later.

"Our children shouldn't be playing violent games!"
If you stop buying them the games, they won't be able to play them as easily. Problem solved.

Penny Arcade posted a day or 2 ago that ESRB should change its ratings to P, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 so parents couldnt say they didnt understand the system.

Anyways, they should only be censored if something big happens and would cause too much trouble. Something like in a game due out in a month where you play as terrorists and have to assinate the Vice President, and it actually happens, then it needs to be removed.

But I really wish Take Two just said "See you in court", because I honestly dont believe they even have a case. I would bet 95% of the people playing dont even realize that Hatians are people from the country Hati. I didnt until someone brought it up.

Originally Posted by SS4Brolly Penny Arcade posted a day or 2 ago that ESRB should change its ratings to P, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 so parents couldnt say they didnt understand the system. Anyways, they should only be censored if something big happens and would cause too much trouble. Something like in a game due out in a month where you play as terrorists and have to assinate the Vice President, and it actually happens, then it needs to be removed. But I really wish Take Two just said "See you in court", because I honestly dont believe they even have a case. I would bet 95% of the people playing dont even realize that Hatians are people from the country Hati. I didnt until someone brought it up.

Gamespy also had an article the other day about that and how when the rating system was getting started their request to use that system was rejected...

My take on this deal: censoring is bad! You can say whatever you want of course you just can't do it in a video game... right...

That being said, 3 year olds don't need to be playing Manhunt or GTA. Parents NEED TO FRICKIN PAY ATTENTION. It's right there on the bottem of the box and on the back, there are posters everywhere (at least at my Blockbuster, Best Buy, Gamestop, etc.) and if it has a guy with a frickin gun on the cover, it might involve shooting. Most places also already ask parents if they want their kids playing it and tell them whats in it. I think now its in the hands of the parents as game companies and retailers have done enough to make it knowen that a game is "bad".

About the whole AO issue: if you want to make a really bad game, make it. If it gets AO and no one sells it, it's YOUR fault for making a game that bad. Moral of the story? There are limits and you shouldn't pass them. Not that the AO "punishment" is ever really used but its still there as a threat, maybe a semi-meaningless one, but still a threat none the less.

parents are stupid!

At least the uninvolved ones are.

remember back when shadow hearts, kingdom hearts, and dual hearts were released at approximately the same time?

Well I had the misfortune to be present in the bestbuy gaming section waiting for a clerk to get a game from the back for me while another clerk was helping this mother who asked for the Disney game she had read about called shadow hearts

The clerk got off the rock for her and explained it was the game she really wanted.

No go.

She knew what she really wanted, as she wasn't going to let some buy $5. 5 0 dollar an hour clerk try to sell her the wrong game.

She came for shadow hearts ,and by golly,she was going to get shadow hearts-- she told everyone within hearing distance!

now most clerks being the younger type with a low threshold for aggravation would have just handed her shadow hearts and let her find out the hard way, but this was an older moralistic type, and he just wouldn't let her have what she wanted -- which was a good kick in the teeth at this point in my opinion,, but I digress ;-)

I finally ended up walking out without my game the scene she created was so bad, so I'm not sure how it ended.

I can tell you however that the little kds I saw with herwere probably scarred for life by that scene she created far worse than any videogame could ever do to them ;-)

Originally Posted by gamefreak About the whole AO issue: if you want to make a really bad game, make it. If it gets AO and no one sells it, it's YOUR fault for making a game that bad.

I'd like to see a developer with the balls to make an AO game. Wow, Wal-Mart will refuse to sell it. Big deal. Im sure it will sell just as well as other games. Atleast when BS rises about it being too ____, they can say "This game has been rated for adults only, and can only be sold to adults. Its your problem." With the M rating, nearly anyone can buy it. A retailer might question an 8 year old about buying GTA, but definatly not Onimusha, Max Payne, or Devil May Cry. I dont think I've ever been denied a game. Most people will just say "Fine, Ill go the EB/Gamestop at the other end of the mall and buy it there" and the retailer is out $50. With AO this wont be happening.

Well, I don't know what the limit should be, but certain games should be able to be censored. But, The games should also be put out into their original form also. I guess the only reason you should censor something is if a game is rated higher than the mature rating(im tired and cant think of what it is right away). But I am against government regulating what the game is and isn't allowed to express. I think it is horrible that video games aren't protected by the freedom of speech.

Ya like for some PC games (most notably the SOF games) come with an option to install a gory or a semi-edited option. Alot of other games come with an option for this too (MGS2 I think...?).

i am against censorship in all its forms. but its funny how much video game violence upsets people. recently ive been low on cash and have been tradeing them in, for new ones. however, not grand theift auto 3, why? im not crazy about the game although i did play it to completion. its because its a piece of history, this game has pissed more ppl off than any other b4 it. i know another will come along in time, but i havent herd a game being disscussed so much by none gamers since dooms (involvement) in columbine.

Your question is completely meaningless.

Until a game is released, it's a work in progress; a multitude of ideas is considered and thrown out on a daily basis.

Surely you're not suggesting the development company shouldn't have a say regarding the content - they're generating it.

Surely you're not suggesting the publisher shouldn't have a say regarding the content - it's their money, their image, their risk.

I think you meant to ask something like "should any government body have the power to force game companies to censor their content?"

At least that point is debatable.

Originally Posted by SS4Brolly Wow, Wal-Mart will refuse to sell it. Big deal. Im sure it will sell just as well as other games.

Do you have any idea how much sales Wal-Mart generates? How a contract with it can make or break a company?

Just because you don't buy your games at wal-mart, doesn't mean it's not one of the country's biggest (if not the biggest, period) game-selling channels.

Originally Posted by eldad9 Do you have any idea how much sales Wal-Mart generates? How a contract with it can make or break a company? Just because you don't buy your games at wal-mart, doesn't mean it's not one of the country's biggest (if not the biggest, period) game-selling channels.

No, I had no idea at all.

But on the othere hand, if Wal-Mart refuses to sell it, it will make national news of "how bad it is" and whatnot. People will buy it, like GTA3, to see what the big deal is.

First of all game companies can do whatever they want - if they made the game they have the right to alter it how they wish. I don't think the poll was worded too well.

I am not for game censorship, but I also think that we need to be careful not to accept gratuitous sex, violence and other evils as the norm - there should be more to a game than just those things.

People may want to single out GTA as an example of this, but GTA is hardly gratuitous as the whole point of the game is to roleplay a criminal. It would be stupid to be a criminal who couldn't kill or steal, etc.

I believe that companies shouldnt have to censor their games but the parents that buy the games for their kids decided if it is appropriate enough or not.