So, why do we need trigger warnings in video games...
- Thread starter BarryMcCociner
- Start date
I feel like there's a lot of extra content to this conversation you had. Going from 'that's not an adequate system' to The Force Awakens seems like a pretty massive jump in topics.BarryMcCociner said:
By all means, give us the long story. All of it. Every word.
I think the term "trigger warning" is a trigger for some people 
I'd agree, more trigger warnings aren't required - what's actually needed is an entirely new and separate rating system just for classifying sad things happening to animals.
...before I try to pick up another game like Season 2 of TellTale's Walking Dead.
I'd agree, more trigger warnings aren't required - what's actually needed is an entirely new and separate rating system just for classifying sad things happening to animals.
...before I try to pick up another game like Season 2 of TellTale's Walking Dead.
Yeah, um...Sozora said:
I know sarcasm is hard to convey via text, but there was nothing serious about my post.
As most of the replies seem to have covered, it seems like the ESRB terms could possibly be a bit vague or general, but then again, its meant to be a label on the packaging, not take up half the cover art with specific descriptors on level with cigarette packaging (if you're in one of the places that system exists).
Although arguably, if you're in need of those warnings, you may want to avoid the M-rated game in general, its like playing russian roulette til you actually hit something.
The main one that sort of slips through in Teen games might be violence to animals, which I've heard people say as a trigger, and does come up fairly frequently in games that aren't obvious about it on cover.
Although arguably, if you're in need of those warnings, you may want to avoid the M-rated game in general, its like playing russian roulette til you actually hit something.
The main one that sort of slips through in Teen games might be violence to animals, which I've heard people say as a trigger, and does come up fairly frequently in games that aren't obvious about it on cover.
... That's not a trigger warning, IMO. That's designed for what few parents that give a crap what their kids play to decide if the game they're buying is appropriate.
It's not really any different than the ratings movies get, or even TV shows that often tell people before it starts what might appear, or TV show ratings.
This has been around for ages!
I'd say, yeah, we could do to keep it. The ESRB was something of a huge compromise made back when Jack Thompson was doing his thing, and videogames seemed to be getting more and more graphic ala Mortal Kombat.
Not all games wear their content on their game cover sleeves. Yeah, anyone over maybe the age of 10 knows Mortal Kombat is filled with bloody, gorey violence, but does the cover convey that? Not really, IMO. It's not like Netherrealms only makes Mortal Kombat, they did Injustice which was nowhere near as bloody, and violent, so it's not like companies can get sorted by the content of their games.
I mean Capcom makes Street Fighter, and Monster Hunter. 2 wildly different games from one another.
Honestly, I don't see much point in removing the rating systems, aside from it blocking some movies from coming to theaters, like the one Rob Zombie is working on, and preventing ... wait, we did have a Leisure Suit Larry game come out... many of them. And porn games. I mean, an unrated, mass produced porn game that has a vague cover sleeve on the shelves of stores everywhere would cause considerable chaos.
I dunno, I don't see the ESRB as a bad thing. Not really a good thing either, but it's not something I want to see gone. Nor Pegi, or what other systems are out there for indicating God of War might have exposed boobs, or Red Dead Redemption having a vague vajayjay shot, or what have you.
It's not really any different than the ratings movies get, or even TV shows that often tell people before it starts what might appear, or TV show ratings.
This has been around for ages!
I'd say, yeah, we could do to keep it. The ESRB was something of a huge compromise made back when Jack Thompson was doing his thing, and videogames seemed to be getting more and more graphic ala Mortal Kombat.
Not all games wear their content on their game cover sleeves. Yeah, anyone over maybe the age of 10 knows Mortal Kombat is filled with bloody, gorey violence, but does the cover convey that? Not really, IMO. It's not like Netherrealms only makes Mortal Kombat, they did Injustice which was nowhere near as bloody, and violent, so it's not like companies can get sorted by the content of their games.
I mean Capcom makes Street Fighter, and Monster Hunter. 2 wildly different games from one another.
Honestly, I don't see much point in removing the rating systems, aside from it blocking some movies from coming to theaters, like the one Rob Zombie is working on, and preventing ... wait, we did have a Leisure Suit Larry game come out... many of them. And porn games. I mean, an unrated, mass produced porn game that has a vague cover sleeve on the shelves of stores everywhere would cause considerable chaos.
I dunno, I don't see the ESRB as a bad thing. Not really a good thing either, but it's not something I want to see gone. Nor Pegi, or what other systems are out there for indicating God of War might have exposed boobs, or Red Dead Redemption having a vague vajayjay shot, or what have you.
I've worked at places like Gamestop and you have NO idea how STUPID consumers are.
Idiot Sperm/Egg Donor:
'Why the FUCK did I have to come in here and buy MK/GTA/etc for my 5/10 year old...why did you DENY them their RIGHT to BUY this GAME you STUPID (inset a racial/sexual slur for good measure) shit!!! '
Me:
-Because it has gore/nudity/language-that-would-make-Eminem-blush/etc.
Idiot Sperm/Egg Donor:
'Well that's bullshit, I don't see that on THE COVER...YOU'RE LYING TO ME YOU LYING LIAR OF A LIE!'
Me:
-Uh, (turns game to back where ESRB rating explanation is), it's right there.
Idiot Sperm/Egg Donor:
'STOP MAKING ME LOOK STUPID YOU DOO DOO HEAD! IMA GIT YOU FIRED!'
Me:
-*silence* *intense internal laughter*
If it's not on the cover, you have NO idea how often it is ignored and I've had to EXPLAIN it...
Over, and over, and over, and...over...again.
So, TL;DR?
Q: WHY ARE TRIGGER WARNINGS NEED?!?
A: Because people are STUPID, lazy, and think they're ENTITLED to their ignorance.
Idiot Sperm/Egg Donor:
'Why the FUCK did I have to come in here and buy MK/GTA/etc for my 5/10 year old...why did you DENY them their RIGHT to BUY this GAME you STUPID (inset a racial/sexual slur for good measure) shit!!! '
Me:
-Because it has gore/nudity/language-that-would-make-Eminem-blush/etc.
Idiot Sperm/Egg Donor:
'Well that's bullshit, I don't see that on THE COVER...YOU'RE LYING TO ME YOU LYING LIAR OF A LIE!'
Me:
-Uh, (turns game to back where ESRB rating explanation is), it's right there.
Idiot Sperm/Egg Donor:
'STOP MAKING ME LOOK STUPID YOU DOO DOO HEAD! IMA GIT YOU FIRED!'
Me:
-*silence* *intense internal laughter*
If it's not on the cover, you have NO idea how often it is ignored and I've had to EXPLAIN it...
Over, and over, and over, and...over...again.
So, TL;DR?
Q: WHY ARE TRIGGER WARNINGS NEED?!?
A: Because people are STUPID, lazy, and think they're ENTITLED to their ignorance.
To be fair, I tend to forget that the ESRB exists anymore myself. When I was younger, it was a big deal. Now that I'm old enough to buy any game I want and don't care about the content, I tend to forget that such ratings exist.
Trigger warnings in videogames are needed or you will start doing team damage when you keep pressing that trigger everywhere.
Jokes aside, ERSB is more than enough to find out about the game if you are the kind of person that cannot handle seeing things you dont like. It has a negative effect though in that it limits access by age.
Jokes aside, ERSB is more than enough to find out about the game if you are the kind of person that cannot handle seeing things you dont like. It has a negative effect though in that it limits access by age.
more, please! this is hilarious.Sozora said:
and now i want to play GTA 4 again. i loved how the cars controlled in that game.Vigormortis said:Yeah, um...
the actual reason is that gamestops policy does not allow M rated titles sold to minors. note that this is NOT required by law in US, but game stores still follow it as laws because its easier.Tanis said:
There's a difference between a trigger warning and a content descriptor.
Trigger warnings are targeted specifically at people who have post traumatic stress disorder. Post-traumatic stress is a serious mental illness often experienced by military veterans and survivors of sexual assault or torture. One of the symptoms of PTSD is being "triggered" (i.e. having violent and distressing flashbacks, hallucinations, emotional swings or episodes) when reminded of a traumatic experience. "Trigger warnings" are an informal system of warnings which considerate people like to use when discussing or sharing information on potentially traumatic things, most often sexual assault, in places where they may be viewed by PTSD sufferers.
Content descriptors are designed to help parents of children assess the age-suitability of particular products.
Equating the two gives way too much credence to one of the stupidest misconceptions people have about trigger warnings, which is that they are designed to shield people from potentially distressing content (in the same was a young child has to be shielded from adult content). This is a pretty shitty thing to think and is deeply infantalizing to people with a very serious mental health problem which they in no way deserve. The purpose of a trigger warning is actually to prevent people with PTSD from being surprised by the content or running into it accidentally, since that's the thing that's likely to cause a reaction. This stupid false dichotomy between "trigger warnings" and exposure therapy needs to die, because effective exposure therapy relies on "trigger warnings" to be successful. Simply throwing shit at someone and causing them to have an episode is not helpful to them, in fact it's actively harmful because it further cements the association between the object of trauma and the ongoing experience of being triggered.
Inb4 "but the tumblrinas did it first!" Don't care. They at least have good intentions for the most part. Mocking the mentally ill is just a shit thing to do.
Trigger warnings are targeted specifically at people who have post traumatic stress disorder. Post-traumatic stress is a serious mental illness often experienced by military veterans and survivors of sexual assault or torture. One of the symptoms of PTSD is being "triggered" (i.e. having violent and distressing flashbacks, hallucinations, emotional swings or episodes) when reminded of a traumatic experience. "Trigger warnings" are an informal system of warnings which considerate people like to use when discussing or sharing information on potentially traumatic things, most often sexual assault, in places where they may be viewed by PTSD sufferers.
Content descriptors are designed to help parents of children assess the age-suitability of particular products.
Equating the two gives way too much credence to one of the stupidest misconceptions people have about trigger warnings, which is that they are designed to shield people from potentially distressing content (in the same was a young child has to be shielded from adult content). This is a pretty shitty thing to think and is deeply infantalizing to people with a very serious mental health problem which they in no way deserve. The purpose of a trigger warning is actually to prevent people with PTSD from being surprised by the content or running into it accidentally, since that's the thing that's likely to cause a reaction. This stupid false dichotomy between "trigger warnings" and exposure therapy needs to die, because effective exposure therapy relies on "trigger warnings" to be successful. Simply throwing shit at someone and causing them to have an episode is not helpful to them, in fact it's actively harmful because it further cements the association between the object of trauma and the ongoing experience of being triggered.
Inb4 "but the tumblrinas did it first!" Don't care. They at least have good intentions for the most part. Mocking the mentally ill is just a shit thing to do.
It's not about potentially offensive content, it's about content that's likely to cause adverse effects in sufferers or PTSD. And you don't need them, you can go without them, as is clearly shown by the current status. You'll notice that "Alcohol Use" sits on there, as does nudity. They're adult content warnings, designed as part of a rating system based on age. As opposed to, say, wanting to discuss sexual assault, without hurting victims of the same.
Of course, if you want to discuss a difficult topic, without inadvertantly hurting the people that you want to talk about and explore, then you might want to include some warning.
Of course, if you want to discuss a difficult topic, without inadvertantly hurting the people that you want to talk about and explore, then you might want to include some warning.
And if you want to see how silly this argument sounds, spoil The Force Awakens and see the backlash. We will fervently protect people from having a movie spoiled, then turn around and balk that someone might want to be made aware of trauma-related issues.Loonyyy said:
Yeah. It does resemble that situation quite a lot actually. Lots of critics and people who want to talk about things like plots of new films will put a spoiler warning up so that they can talk about it without ruining it for the people they want to talk to, and it's the same case there.Something Amyss said:
The most common times I see trigger warnings or similar content warnings is when someone wants to talk about topics like sexual assault, and often in graphic detail, which is naturally upsetting to some of those directly affected by it, and there's a significant number of them who deal with trauma and post traumatic stress. If you're an activist talking about sexual assault, it's just good sense not to unwittingly hurt they people you want to fight for. And occasionally really stupid ones on tumblr, and yeah, some of those are kinda dumb, sure. It's not like someone putting a silly warning on a pointless post is going to cause me any trouble. Doesn't effect me, so I don't even need to read it.
But fuck that and fuck everyone else. No spoiler warnings. Wasn't it horrible in the new film when the Rey girl dyed her hair and proceeded to crush the villain using the force to wield the Millenium Falcon as a bludgeon, shouting about how the opponents of social justice must die? Like, I'm a fairly radical and progressive sort, but that's just being a Social Justice Warrior.
The ESRB is nice, but sometimes it's too vague or incomplete. Far cry 4 MGSv hit-man Absolution share the sexual content ratings, but handle it in totally different ways. (MGSv is also missing a partial nudity tag?) Also not every game has one. The games that need them the most (sex games) often don't. (Though then if they did have them, they would likely be too vague to be useful.)
*Odd thing I just noticed looking up ratings. RoM is rated M according to steam, but the ESRB hasn't rated it according to their page.
*Odd thing I just noticed looking up ratings. RoM is rated M according to steam, but the ESRB hasn't rated it according to their page.
Well PEGI is already a thing, so what are you proposing?
Two separate "trigger warning" systems, when one could suffice?
Two separate "trigger warning" systems, when one could suffice?
I'm glad that there are rating systems such as PEGI and ESRB, as they can be very informative. However, they do not cover everything. If a developer thinks an extra warning is needed, well, it's their game and they're free to put it there.
Some trigger warnings can be kind of strange, though. For instance, 199x warns the player that characters discuss forced orgasms as a treatment for female hysteria. I thought the warning was more unsettling than things the characters said. But maybe that's just me. If the warning was helpful to others, who am I to complain?
Some trigger warnings can be kind of strange, though. For instance, 199x warns the player that characters discuss forced orgasms as a treatment for female hysteria. I thought the warning was more unsettling than things the characters said. But maybe that's just me. If the warning was helpful to others, who am I to complain?
I agree. Not only is the ESRB system good enough already, trigger warnings are practically memes now. Whenever I see a trigger warning, my first thought isn't "there's going be some hard to watch stuff in this", it's "bro, this is totally gonna trigger you, dude." The latter thought isn't even my own voice in my head, it's the intrusion of some 12 year old.Johnny Novgorod said:
