Disney Vows to Monitor Violent Game Content

[Andy Chalk]

Disney Vows to Monitor Violent Game Content

Disney CEO Bob Iger said the company is "taking stock" to ensure that its videogames don't cross the line.

Disney probably isn't the first thing that pops into mind when the topic of violent videogames comes up, and Bob Iger would like to keep it that way. With entities including the U.S. government once again calling for further investigation into the role that videogames play in gun violence, the Disney chief executive said the company will "take stock in everything we've got that can be considered near the line or over the line."

"Fortunately at Disney there's very little [violent content], but I still want to make sure we're asking ourselves the right questions in terms of that standard, and also [ensure] we're willing to be a part of a dialogue in today's world that I think is pretty necessary in terms of what our role is and what our role should be," Iger said last week.

I'm pretty sure that the most violent videogame Disney has ever published is the decade-old Disney Infinity [http://www.amazon.com/Tron-2-0-PC/dp/B0009OXELE/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1359390725&sr=8-3&keywords=Tron+2.0] franchise, not to mention the ongoing hand-wringing and finger-pointing over the Sandy Hook mass murder, it's not terribly surprising that Iger would want to start preemptively burnishing the company's family-friendly image.

Source: Deadline [http://www.deadline.com/2013/01/disney-video-game-violence-measures-bob-iger/]



Permalink

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

Disney isn't the figurehead to represent gaming, the industry monitors crap already with reviews and age ratings.

This is just patronizing and perpetuates the stereotype that games are toys.

 

[Kiyeri]

I mean, it makes sense that Disney wouldn't want to be associated with violence nowadays. They're considered pretty family/kid oriented, so it's unlikely they'd release something like "Mickey's Murderous Rampage through DisneyWorld" anyway though.

Edit: Also, just read the article itself. This sounds actually kind of creepy.

"Iger also took time to promote his new MyMagic+MagicBands digital venture, a Disney theme park initiative set to launch this spring at Disney World that enables park visitors to upload personal information into digitally enhanced wristbands designed to enhance their experience. The so-called ?MagicBands? store information in a ?cloud? that will allow patrons to reserve time on rides and in restaurants, upload birthday information, and track guest interaction and purchasing behavior ? trading privacy for convenience. Iger says the future of MagicBands can include even more meticulously collected interactive data that one day will allow guests to go cash- and credit card-free and ?order food in advance, sit at table? we?ll know because of GPS positioning where you?re sitting and we?ll know what you ordered?.

 

[StashAugustine]

Does this include Star Wars? Cause if so, Republic Commando 2 is definitively dead.

 

[Ldude893]

If this covers games produced by Marvel and Lucasarts, consider my jimmies set alight with kerosine.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

*sigh* This is ridiculous! As Jim Sterling said, video game violence isn't real violence, it's pretend violence and most people can tell the difference. That being said, I still wouldn't want my 5-10 year old, if I had one, playing Call of Duty; but that's the thing, that would be my call as a parent to make. I don't need the Government or the game developers/publishers doing my parenting for me!!

 

[Falseprophet]

So, Avengers movie good, Avengers video game bad?

Thanks for clearing that up, Bob.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Does this include Star Wars? Cause if so, Republic Commando 2 is definitively dead.

Took the words out of my mouth. I guess we'll never find Sev *sniff*

 

[Azuaron]

Breaking News: Disney, the company that pushed Princess Mononoke out the door under the Mirimax label because this (PG-13) movie was too violent, say they're not going to be associating the Disney name with violence.

Instead, they'll (undoubtedly) be associating the Marvel and Lucasarts names with violence.

So... business as usual?

 

[redknightalex]

So, Avengers movie good, Avengers video game bad?

Thanks for clearing that up, Bob.

Cartoon or sci-fi violence doesn't count, for some odd reason. I think it's stupid that they continue to create cartoons/movies/games/media that are all sorts of violent but refuses to show any red blood. They'd probably be fine if it showed green blood coming out of a sword strike, like the whole Chronicles of Narnia movies (not sure if it was green though).

Come to think of it, the first two Narnia books/movies are about a war. Not sure how much more violent you can get than war and political upheaval.

 

[medv4380]

Nothing more than lip service.

Disney does plenty of R rated and Violent Movies. They used to use Touchstone as their poster child for any R Rated films. Made it so their name could be scrubbed from the credits.

They haven't been as afraid to put their name on things like that in the last 5 years. The Fright Night remake has the Disney logo plastered on it. However they still do it in a convoluted way.

See Here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fright_Night_(2011_film)#Production]
Fright Night was distributed by DreamWorks through Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures under the Touchstone Pictures label.

As long as their name can be scrubbed clean to keep their "family friendly" image clean they'll do it. It just means Disney recognizable items must appear to be "family friendly" at all times. So Square wont be allowed to make an M rated Kingdom Hearts Game with Disney Princesses.

 

[The White Hunter]

I take it throwing people off high places into fire doesn't count as violent then? Interesting...

 

[Therumancer]

Disney isn't the figurehead to represent gaming, the industry monitors crap already with reviews and age ratings.

This is just patronizing and perpetuates the stereotype that games are toys.

Actually it's frightening but they might be.

Disney controls a lot of studios, I believe Miramax, Dimension, and New Line Cinema, all fall under their umbrella. Disney is also one of those companies like Sony that is large and powerful on paper, but has a LOT of hidden global interests accross a large variety of interests. For example I remember reading something about them controlling construction, aerospace, and heavy machinery manufacturing companies. Some of those jokes about Disney taking over the world with private armies and such (using heavily armed mascots) aren't far fetched, because apparently they are one of the few international companies that could do a "Cyberpunk" type move and actually raise, arm, and equip their own army "in house".

Disney as an entity ultimatly speaks for studios that have produced things like "The Crow", "Hellraiser", and the "Nightmare On Elm Street" franchise apparently. Meaning that it's ultimatly had it's fingers in the liscenced video games derived from those properties, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are involved in a lot more products in video gaming directly or indirectly.

Not to mention that Disney DOES have the Marvel liscence right now, and is apparently looking towards getting DC too (a few people have speculated about what it might be like to have them all under one owner). Super Heroes hardly being non-violent, and a few of the most popular ones like Wolverine and The Punisher being ultra-violent. Not to mention entire imprints like "MAX", "Vertigo", "Wildstorm" (sadly defunct), and others existing under those labels specifically due to mature content.

With Disney loudly making a point out of "The Avengers" being "Disney's Avengers" what does that bode for super hero video games?

Not to mention the fact that games like "Kingdom Hearts" might have cartoony violence, but they still have violence in them.


At any rate the point here being that if Disney gets involved and really does play ball, it's a big deal. You can scream hypocricy, but the bottom line is if they decide to end violent video gaming with their products and liscences, it could have a surprisingly large impact. Especially if they decide to go beyond that at some point and get back to Uncle Walt's ethics where a lot of the stuff their sub-studios do would never have been permitted.

Apologies if I have some of the specific studios involved wrong, it's been a while since I've dissected Disney, it is however kind of surprising when you consider what's technically part of the Disney family nowadays.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

Disney isn't the figurehead to represent gaming, the industry monitors crap already with reviews and age ratings.

This is just patronizing and perpetuates the stereotype that games are toys.

Actually it's frightening but they might be.

Disney controls a lot of studios, I believe Miramax, Dimension, and New Line Cinema, all fall under their umbrella. Disney is also one of those companies like Sony that is large and powerful on paper, but has a LOT of hidden global interests accross a large variety of interests. For example I remember reading something about them controlling construction, aerospace, and heavy machinery manufacturing companies. Some of those jokes about Disney taking over the world with private armies and such (using heavily armed mascots) aren't far fetched, because apparently they are one of the few international companies that could do a "Cyberpunk" type move and actually raise, arm, and equip their own army "in house".

Disney as an entity ultimatly speaks for studios that have produced things like "The Crow", "Hellraiser", and the "Nightmare On Elm Street" franchise apparently. Meaning that it's ultimatly had it's fingers in the liscenced video games derived from those properties, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are involved in a lot more products in video gaming directly or indirectly.

Not to mention that Disney DOES have the Marvel liscence right now, and is apparently looking towards getting DC too (a few people have speculated about what it might be like to have them all under one owner). Super Heroes hardly being non-violent, and a few of the most popular ones like Wolverine and The Punisher being ultra-violent. Not to mention entire imprints like "MAX", "Vertigo", "Wildstorm" (sadly defunct), and others existing under those labels specifically due to mature content.

With Disney loudly making a point out of "The Avengers" being "Disney's Avengers" what does that bode for super hero video games?

Not to mention the fact that games like "Kingdom Hearts" might have cartoony violence, but they still have violence in them.


At any rate the point here being that if Disney gets involved and really does play ball, it's a big deal. You can scream hypocricy, but the bottom line is if they decide to end violent video gaming with their products and liscences, it could have a surprisingly large impact. Especially if they decide to go beyond that at some point and get back to Uncle Walt's ethics where a lot of the stuff their sub-studios do would never have been permitted.

Apologies if I have some of the specific studios involved wrong, it's been a while since I've dissected Disney, it is however kind of surprising when you consider what's technically part of the Disney family nowadays.

I may have been a little bit too quick to disregard Disney, I apologize, but nonetheless it doesn't change the fact that the statement is utterly butterly pointless.

CAPTHA: firefighter squirrel XD

 

[Johnson McGee]

so does that mean they'll just hide the violence in the background like all the sexual references in their movies?

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Disney: "Hey! Hey! Listen, we're gonna do something about violence in games! Hey, look at us! We're serious, here! We've got Mickey Mouse and Goofy and the stylized fights of superheroes where nobody stays dead or injured anyway and lightsabers that cauterize wounds and Midichlorians and-

Oh."

Me: "Yeah, Disney. Like you're one to talk. Your stuff's about as violent as your average Tex Avery cartoon."