260: Reviewing Blood, Sex and Magic

[Vorocano]

I personally have no problem with fictional depictions of magic. I'm a pretty conservative Christian, but I love to read fantasy novels. For me the biggest thing is that fiction is fiction. My love of fantasy literature has never once led me to being interested in pursuing "real" magic.

My issue is that there are people who seriously believe real magic exists at all.

And for those of you who think that sites like ccgr.org are "censoring" video games, maybe you should actually read some of the reviews. The reviewer isn't saying that "These games should be banned," or even "Christians shouldn't play this game," but rather sets out the various potential appropriateness or morality issues in a game. It's a review for the sake of information from a specifically Christian perspective. But that would be too nuanced for those people who simply think, "Christians don't like magic so any review criticizing its use must be an attempt at moral censorship."

See my above statement.

Do you seriously not realize how stupid the site sounds? 'The game depicts magic. Magic is harmful. Therefore the game can potentially be harmful.'

IT. IS. NOT. REAL.

Do understand that even if you do not believe in magic, these people do.

To these Christians, magic is real, something warned against in the Bible, as magic powers are generally gained from the Devil, and are inherently evil in nature.

It probably looks silly to you, but some Christians genuinely believe in this and therefore see the world in a very dfferent way to you. It is as if they live in the Diablo universe for real, and for them, magic is wrong. Evil and wrong.

Whether you agree with that or not, it should be taken into account, and certainly puts the Christian video games reviews into perspective.

The "IT. IS. NOT. REAL." comment was part of my first point. It's why I personally don't have an issue with fictional magic, as it's describing a universe in which magic is, for lack of a better word, "natural" and possible outside of the existence of things like demons. But things in the real world are different.

Those of us Christians who believe in the literal existence of Satan and demons believe in the existence of magic, but it's a very different magic than the "common" magic usually depicted in video games and fantasy literature. I believe that magic (and by that I mean unnatural abilities derived from communion with evil beings) exists, but is very rare. I'm not one of those "demon under every doily" people, who stub their toe and say, "The debbil did this to me." Again, I have no problem with fictional depictions of magic, and I don't believe that being exposed to such fiction will automatically make people want to become sorcerers or anything, but my original point was that, from a Christian perspective, it's nice to have someone who is reviewing games that is reviewing them from that angle. And there are those Christians who take the biblical command to have nothing to do with witchcraft or sorcery very seriously, and so would not want it involved in their entertainment.

As far as the difference between miracles and magic is concerned, in terms of the end result there's no difference. It's the reason for the miracle that makes the difference. Genuine miracles exist for one of two reasons: to glorify God, and to prove to people that the person performing the miracle has been sent and authorized by God. Magic or witchcraft on the other hand, is done for personal reasons, and comes from a different source.

I hope that this isn't coming across as being preachy. My intent is not to try and convert anyone or anything, but merely to help you understand why magic is such a big deal to so many Christians, and to give an idea of some of the theology behind it.

 

[Lucifron]

While the presence or absence of magic may not be a deal breaker for most gamers, sites like CCGR can prove an invaluable resource for concerned Christians who wish to shield their children from the occult forces, and could presumably also be useful to practicing wizards who could reverse the score and find themselves some extreme magical games. For the rest of us, it's a great opportunity to take a look at games from a different perspective.

Allow me to laugh out loud. Please tell me you didn't write that with a straight face?

 

[Valkyrie101]

or the biotic powers of Mass Effect.

Isn't the biotic powers explained "scientifically" in the game? Also, there's no worshipping to any higher power involved.

Yes, biotics are science, so if they'e okay with Resident Evil zombies then they should be okay with them. Or maybe they didn't study it carefully enough.

Or maybe they're retards.

 

[Draxonicar]

I was surprised to see them actually give a GOOD review of Manhunt ~_^

It got a B- in the graphics department, A+ in Audio, B in gameplay and Audio, and an F in Offensive comment, not from the violence though, but from the comments that the Director makes.

 

[TraderJimmy]

Um, sorry, maybe I'm a little slow here. But I thought that fairytale magic, with its connections to old celtic and pagan traditions and assumption that these traditions are REAL, would be more threatening to Christianity than 'entertainment' magic, i.e. high fantasy magic, which never claims to have been set in our real world. After all, who's to say Gandalf doesn't get his powers from God itself?

 

[Joabbuac]

haha this article made me laugh, i love the way the English describe the violence in games....it really sounds right out of a gory novel

 

[dee_dubs]

Did anyone else get a chuckle when they read "space furniture" in the Mass Effect 2 description?

Yeah, though not quite as much of a chuckle as "future-blouse". It's like the writer of the quoted document needed to remind everyone "This is sci-fi!" every few seconds. Spaceman removes alien girlfriend's antigravity shirt on orbital couch!

I'm curious about the difference between a bed and a "bed-slab". Aren't most beds rather slab-like? I'm thinking that the censor was being intentionally silly. There's just no way they were serious.

Personally I'm intrigued as to what these "Ground Based Space Battles" are.

 

[vxicepickxv]

Australia aside (go us!), mostly these classifications (government and otherwise) are for informing the consumer and not restricting access for adults. A more informed consumer can only be a good thing (unless you're a MNC.) I'm glad then that some of these reports are written to actually be read by and appeal to people considering a purchase.

I'm glad you brought up the point of these types of reviews not being set up to ban a game, but instead to allow for more informed decisions. If I look at an ESRB tag and review for reasons, they're very short statements that don't really help me understand exactly what's going on in a game.

Blood, Language, Partial Nudity, Sexual Themes, Violence

Okay, how often do they occur? What are the depictions of it like? This is the reason why other sites do what they do. The ESRB may give basic notices about it, but other sites count how often it occurs, what actually happens in the game, and the severity.

I'm an adult, I'll buy games I like, but if I had kids, they wouldn't be playing my copy of Modern Warfare 2.

 

[Grahav]

"There is no opportunity to further damage bodies post-mortem, and none of the corpses stay in the environment for more than a few seconds. "

... so it fails in giving boners.

 

[DarkPanda XIII]

'nough said...

[img src="http://neoncstar.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/facepalm2ic7copyrl2-jpg.jpeg" /]

 

[ImpostorZim]

Oh man, ESRB reports are so much fun to read. What I don't understand is why they would go into so much detail. It's almost as if they're promoting the violence because to be honest I hadn't even thought about trying Bayonetta until I read that report just now.

Now what really did grab my attention like you said, are the Centered Christian Gamer Reviews. While I'm not a religious person and I'm not really one against magic, I have to say, I love the way they break apart a game and REEEAALLY review it. One example I found was how one person reviewed GTA San Andreas. It was deducted points for blood, violence, sex, etc. and rewarded points for promoting family values! And I was like, "The guy's right! I would've never thought of that!" So it really is quite interesting to say the least.

 

[Necromancer1991]

I'd love to see CCGR's take on all thing related to Shin Megami Tensei (dealing with demons to earn magical powers[Magic: 1,000,000/10]). All this just strikes me as funny in an ironic way.

 

[Haunted Serenity]

I believe in all 3 things in real life does that make me a bad person and need to be censored?

 

[Flying Dagger]

EDIT: And in a wonderfully irony I post here as a Christian with a badge symbolising my perfect knowledge of the Harry Potter universe!

My church had a trip to go see harry potter, was actually the last church trip I went on before I outgrew them.

On topic though, it's a shame that without using electronics, the amish can't put reviews like this out there, judging videogames by how much they stick to the amish nature

 

[Lovesfool]

This is bureaucracy at it's best.

It seems that the whole procedure is designed in such a way to remove any shred of thought from the process (which would also mean personal opinion).

This would also explain some of the comments from the reveiwers / censors, especially the details on what is or isn't depicted.

It's like reviewing by numbers or check-boxes. You have a list in front of you and you just tick yes and no. For example, I imagine there is a violence section, that has check boxes in the logic of:

Depiction of blood? Yes. No.
Realistic depiction of blood? Yes. No.
Infliction of bloody injuries? Yes. No.
Infliction of post mortem injuries? Yes. No.

On the other hand, this kind of makes sense, in a wierd, corporate way. Imagine you are a publisher and you are aiming for a PEGI / ESRB / BBFC title with a teenager rating. You need to know beforehand exactly what you are allowed or not allowed to show.

By removing any personal opinion from the process, you safeguard that everyone is treated the same.

By removing any thought of the process, you also safeguard that everyone is treated in the same STUPID way.

 

[arealperson]

Okay, I noticed what seems to be a factual error or at least misleading statement by the author, along with some misconceptions by posters (several of which were already covered by other helpful posters) as I took time to read up on one of the sources (CCGR).

First, the author mentions an occult rating that is out of ten. The way this rating is presented on the site is as part of a standard ratings system, "Appropriateness", which is out of 50 and makes up half of the games overall score, the other half being standard quality conventions. The 50 points assigned for "Appropriateness" are essentially demerits, meaning you have them automatically, but can be deducted based on 'inappropriate' criteria, which have a preset deduction affiliated. In the context of the occult ratings for God of War, it would be said to have high occult content as over half of its points were lost (3.5 points remaining). This is in contrast to the author's assertion that a 'max' magic rating would've been 10/10 (rather it would be 0/10). The site does not allow for point totals above or below the 10 point range for those wondering, as there are preset deduction limits (though there are bonuses would allow a deduction to be neutralized). There is some confusion with the game's overall "Appropriateness" rating caused by the review itself (a 29/50 for what mathematically would've been 17/50) but overall the ratings are pretty clear in this respect (though the author did correctly refer to the fairy magic deduction being low).

Next, for those criticizing the content of the reviews on that site, one has to realize they are essentially peer submissions, with guidelines to follow the general review point standards (which at least the review for Mass Effect 2 seems to fall outside of for some reason). The Mass Effect 'magic' rating in question was essentially a translation of the adept powers, which I'm sure can be generally agreed on as at least 'otherworldly powers' .

To be fair, I plan to submit the errors and suggestions to that site (it may take some signing up, which I'd do gladly ) and I'll pm the author here to draw his attention to this small matter.

 

[Gyrefalcon]

So I wonder what their reaction would be if all magic in a game was labeled miracles?

 

[Alar]

"Clothed alien/human characters may prop a partner on top of a space console, clear away the clutter from a bed-slab, unzip a future-blouse, or just talk it out. Though an alien/human may gyrate her hips while on top (fleeting - one-to-two seconds), actual sex is never depicted - the camera cuts away to space furniture and ceilings."

That paragraph made my day. That's an awesome description, and exactly what happens. Too many people think, "Oh no, sex in vidya gaims! Mah kids be gettin' corruptified!" No, not at all. The only place (I believe) you'll find truly graphic sexual content in a video game is a video game DESIGNED AROUND the sex.

 

[lleihsad]

Yes, biotics are science, so if they'e okay with Resident Evil zombies then they should be okay with them. Or maybe they didn't study it carefully enough.

Or maybe they're retards.

The CCGR page just passingly describes Biotics as "a sort of psychic power" without really dwelling on it. As the essay writer mentions, they are admirably level-headed about their analysis of themes that are of concern to their demographic.

On a different note, and as I'm sure the author knows, a sufficiently British person can say anything in a clinical tone.