Question of the Day, October 5, 2010

[The Escapist Staff]

Question of the Day, October 5, 2010



The news has recently been flooded with videogames featuring controversial gameplay. In the upcoming Medal of Honor game, you could originally play as a fighter in the Taliban before caught some criticism [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103941-EA-Cuts-Taliban-From-Medal-of-Honor] due to its emotional content. What do you think of controversial videogames?

Permalink

 

[The Cheezy One]

There is a line, and it portrays gamers in a bad light if we cant see that

 

[UnravThreads]

I think that there's really only a tiny number of subjects (e.g. paedophilia) that should never, ever be used as the subject of a game.

Books have tackled these subjects for, well, centuries. Film often tackles them. Why can't games? Yeah, it's the youngest medium, but it's no less of an "art" form.

 

[Satin6T]

yeah, cuz this would not be a biased forum for this question

 

[Chrono212]

Well if it doesn't toe the line like other media with a thought for taste, decency and actual merit then it probably deserves to be ridiculed as a bad piece of work but to ban it would leave people without a working example of how not to do it.

 

[NewClassic_v1legacy]

I voted "No, works of art should never be banned." Though, honestly, I feel like nothing should be taboo to be used or discussed unless it already exists as a law elsewhere. To explain, a game mass distributing child pornography or publishing nonfiction lists of places to acquire illegal weapons or narcotics shouldn't be allowed, since there are laws in place against this sort of thing. In regard to thing that could be seen in poor taste, I find a little odd. Unless the publisher/web-host/etc. has issue with it, I fail to see why a game of any content shouldn't be made.

I've yet to hear any German-Americans take offense to the near endless World War II games in which player slaughter hoards of nazis, nor any groups protest zombies in reverence for the dead. If a movie like The Godfather can exist, why is it that a game is specifically worse?

Just because an individual group takes offense means that they can protest, not buy the product, and appeal to have the laws changed. This is within their rights, and perfectly acceptable. Attempting to stifle a developer externally to the law is more arrogant than anything else.

To bring this back to the main point, my answer isn't exclusive to the "art" bit. I believe that free speech is something people should embrace. As consumers, your power to disapprove of a product or lifestyle is to not buy a product. Beyond that, you're infringing on the rights of others. That's always bad, whereas a game you disagree with sometimes is only "sometimes bad."

Just my two cents.

 

[Neonbob]

My knee jerk reaction is no, because I don't like censorship. But after a bit of thought, I'm sure there are people in the world who are capable of making a game beyond what I can imagine, so I want to leave some room for such creations. So I propose a test. Take the most callous person in the world, and expose them to the game. If they don't freak out, it's fine.
So I suppose I fit most into the "only if it's in incredibly poor taste" option.

 

[Jedoro]

If something's truly in bad taste, the community won't buy it and developers won't make it anymore.

Problem solved.

 

[Kiefer13]

Never. Videogames are an artistic medium, just like paintings, books, films or music. Art should never be constrained by what is considered "offensive".

 

[Marter]

I don't think they should ever be banned. No point in my eyes.

 

[Ganthrinor]

Outright banning of a video game is both silly and ineffective.

If it's possible to get pirated versions of legit games on release day (and it is), it's just as easy to get pirated versions of any banned game whenever you want.

I can think of several specific online communities that would do thier damnedest to try and keep any banned game in circulation as long as possible just because it was banned if for no other reason.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

Absolutely not. "Taste" is wholly subjective, and there's a good chance that the decision whether or not to ban a game could fall to the overly-sensitive.

 

[Feylynn]

Note that the phrase "Works of Art" Is the subject of what should not be banned. So no, Video Games should not be banned.

In the same vain, there is a limit to how bad something can be before it does not qualify for it self. Games can be so bad no one would respectfully refer to them as a game.

That comes with the next highest answer included. "If it's in incredibly poor taste."
But that's subjective.

So really, everyone here just answered the same thing. We may disagree what poor taste is, or what a good game is, but people disagree about what good movies, art, and music are.

Games do their best to be good, they do their best to be tasteful, and hopefully without losing those they will keep pushing controversy like any other medium does as it grows.

That'll be fine.

 

[Jesus Phish]

Games (and all art/forms of media) that set out to promote hate and violence towards a race/creed/gender/etc should be banned. Games like Ethnic Cleansing. The game has very clear views and is obviously aimed at a certain type of person, but it promotes nothing positive and I doubt its artistic merits which I'm sure some people would try say it has.

 

[Georgie_Leech]

Wait, are we being trolled by The Escapist itself?



Anyway, I don't think there would ever be a game that should be banned. Videogames cannot hurt anyone in real life. They can display disturbing or controversial material, but no different than what can be found in books or movies (occassionally less so. Dante's Inferno was related to the classic in name only). The difference being that you can "live" it in a more interactive way. I'd argue that the call to ban some videogames means that they are being noticed by the larger world, and thus going through that painful controversial period all creative mediums go through. Aside maybe from painting, as that's been seen to have started mellenia ago. Who knows, maybe those painters were considered crazy as well.

 

[Hamster at Dawn]

I don't think they should ever be banned. If you don't like something then don't buy it. Furthermore, games are not real and people need to stop acting like they are.

 

[Jaebird]

Didn't a certain video already go over this?
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/1961-Free-Speech

 

[MatsVS]

If something's truly in bad taste, the community won't buy it and developers won't make it anymore.

Problem solved.

Exactly.

And if there is a niche market for something the mainstream market rejects, who are we to deny them that? There is no room legislations here.

 

[Prvt.Church]

I don't think that a Holocaust game should ever be made, but should we ban that? No because it wont sell, and thus won't be made.

 

[Sir Prize]

I'm all for the freedom of medians, as long as they are within good taste.