Zero Punctuation: Video Game Voters Network
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Figured I'd check it out.. what is it I was supposed to see that was going to change my mind? I did notice your most recent Steam game was TF2, which involves gun violence towards human like characters. That's the sort of thing that might end up tossed in the trash can should the case Yahtzee is referring to end up going against gamers.PoisonUnagi said:
Sorry Yahtzee, but I'm going to have to disagree with you. I AM American and of voting age, but the elephant-in-the-room is the economy. I get the distinct impression that the rest of the world has recovered faster than we have to even be mentioning this, but, regardless, our politicians have been hitting token issues like this one for special interest groups for decades; it's time they got off their butts and did something that gets people back to work. Washington is already insulated from the rest of society and easily distracted as well; we need to stand with one voice to put the economy first (without distractions from other issues). Not all of us are in the recession-proof entertainment industry. 
-John
-John
Has anyone really looked into all the issues in the United States?
I don't keep up on it every day, but from everything I know it's all about ratings and selling to minors. This is not unusual world wide. I honestly have not seen any bans on video games being pushed as related to adults. Many countries, including the US, regulate content available to minors. On top of all that, it's about allowing minors to rent them or buy them (it does not prohibit their use). So parents can still buy any game for their kids, and their kids can play them. It simply puts the buying decision solely on the parents, which is also true for movies. So people saying video games are singled out vs. other media, I am not sure what you are getting at, and any ruling made here would certainly pertain to other media (it's been a source of contention for movies also).
Now, I am not a person that thinks violent video games cause violence, and selling to minors can be debated. Yet too many here think there is a bunch of policies being moved forward to ban video games. I don't see it. It all deals with minors, so please stay on the actual debate. No one in the US is attempting to ban games. It's about selling to minors. I am fine with most video games being made available to minors, but I can see the other side. Parents want to be able to make buying decisions on content for their children. This puts it in their hands. It they want to buy it for their kids, they can do that. Yet they get to make the decision, and that would fall into line with many of the legal rights parents have over their children.
The main issue at stake here are First Amendment rights given to children, not video games. The Constitution nor the Bill or Rights deals directly with minors, and many of those rights are denied to minors. Yet most First Amendment rights have been extended to minors within reason. That has been a gray area in US history, and I am sure the reason the Supreme Court is looking at the California case. Everything else is just a bunch of blowhard politicians that can't do a damn thing because any ban on video games for adults would be unconstitutional. So they could talk all they want, but your votes won't matter. The Supreme Court determines Constitutionality. They will now do so concerning minors First Amendment rights, which will be far reaching, not just for video games. Which makes me think they will uphold the Federal Courts decision that it is unconstitutional.
BTW...to the people taking jabs at the US on this. There is not a single video game banned in the US. Take a look at your own country, because I am betting that is not true.
edit: I have now looked at the site for VGVN. I would want no part of that. Very sensationalistic (that video on the front page is awful). I personally don't think there should be laws based on an arbitrary ratings system, but they go way over the top on their website. Thanks, but no thanks.
I don't keep up on it every day, but from everything I know it's all about ratings and selling to minors. This is not unusual world wide. I honestly have not seen any bans on video games being pushed as related to adults. Many countries, including the US, regulate content available to minors. On top of all that, it's about allowing minors to rent them or buy them (it does not prohibit their use). So parents can still buy any game for their kids, and their kids can play them. It simply puts the buying decision solely on the parents, which is also true for movies. So people saying video games are singled out vs. other media, I am not sure what you are getting at, and any ruling made here would certainly pertain to other media (it's been a source of contention for movies also).
Now, I am not a person that thinks violent video games cause violence, and selling to minors can be debated. Yet too many here think there is a bunch of policies being moved forward to ban video games. I don't see it. It all deals with minors, so please stay on the actual debate. No one in the US is attempting to ban games. It's about selling to minors. I am fine with most video games being made available to minors, but I can see the other side. Parents want to be able to make buying decisions on content for their children. This puts it in their hands. It they want to buy it for their kids, they can do that. Yet they get to make the decision, and that would fall into line with many of the legal rights parents have over their children.
The main issue at stake here are First Amendment rights given to children, not video games. The Constitution nor the Bill or Rights deals directly with minors, and many of those rights are denied to minors. Yet most First Amendment rights have been extended to minors within reason. That has been a gray area in US history, and I am sure the reason the Supreme Court is looking at the California case. Everything else is just a bunch of blowhard politicians that can't do a damn thing because any ban on video games for adults would be unconstitutional. So they could talk all they want, but your votes won't matter. The Supreme Court determines Constitutionality. They will now do so concerning minors First Amendment rights, which will be far reaching, not just for video games. Which makes me think they will uphold the Federal Courts decision that it is unconstitutional.
BTW...to the people taking jabs at the US on this. There is not a single video game banned in the US. Take a look at your own country, because I am betting that is not true.
edit: I have now looked at the site for VGVN. I would want no part of that. Very sensationalistic (that video on the front page is awful). I personally don't think there should be laws based on an arbitrary ratings system, but they go way over the top on their website. Thanks, but no thanks.
Wish I could help Gentlemen, but we may need such a movement (a serious one) within the EU domain..
Till then we just may spread the word.
Till then we just may spread the word.
We need it in every domain. But yeah, EU, Canada and Australia are probably the best places to go first.Wolf Hagen said:
And a side note to all the haters of my first post, the ESA is a company. And of COURSE Yahtzee just randomly decided to make this video under their name.
Thanks for the effort, and I figured that's what you may have been referring to though I was kind of hoping you had something else up your sleeve that I was missing as what you're pointing out has already been dealt with.PoisonUnagi said:Ugh, looks like I have to do this for you. Hang on a moment.StriderShinryu said:
I'm sure NZ is a beautiful place but I'm really not sure how many games get made there though, especially without intent to sell them in the US. As others have already said numerous times, if the case Yahtzee is talking about goes through then there will be a legal age restriction in the US, which I'm taking it you get. What you don't seem to be considering is what sort of company that puts videogames in with. Stores, especially big American ones with the type of economic placement like WalMart, will almost certainly not carry something that is legally age restricted (like, say, pornography). If stores don't carry legally age restricted games then they will not be made and, on top of that, this case would set a precedent that would allow the type of material considered restrictive to be decided upon by people who don't actually play or care about games. It would start with easy targets like Postal or Manhunt type ultra violence, but just look at how riled up non-gamers got over the "sex-scene" in Mass Effect or just the option to attack police officers in GTA and so on.
If you're still left wondering why yourself, a happy resident of NZ, should care just consider the size of your native market compared to the US. The US is the biggest market in the world for games, and it includes many of the biggest game development companies. As I stated above, if US companies can't sell their own mature games in their own country they're not going to make special versions with all the mature stuff that can be sold elsewhere, they're just going to water everything down until it can be sold. If game companies in Japan or the UK can't sell their mature games to the dominant market that is the US then they will either restrict foreign development altogether or will be forced to edit their content to match US standards. Also consider that once a ruling like this goes forward in the US, governments outside of the US will have even more ammunition to crack down further on mature games in their own backyard.
It not about banning games, its about has exactly the same law that is purposed in California. At the point of sale for a 18 rated game you have to provided proof age, if you look under 25.jono793 said:
OK the rest of the western world ALREADY HAS THIS LAW and yet somehow games are still been sold in those countries. Might that mean that over 18s are buying the games, shock and horror.Danman1 said:
StriderShinryu said:
The same law is already extant in most of the democratic world, the EU alone has 500 million people living in it. The presumption that America is bigger market that the EU, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Korea combined is just plain wrong. In the UK Asda, which is owned by walmart, sells 18 rated games. Also Amazon, steam, direct to drive and gamestop all continue to sell 18 games. Most western countries already have boards that give legally enforced age requirements to films, yet somehow manage to maintain artistic freedom, in fact French and German film is considerably more political than Hollywood. Bottom line here guys, if virtually the entire western world has this law without any threat to sales or to freedom of speech, why is America so different?
I get what you're saying, but you've still only knocked me up to indifferent/can't really do anything at the moment anyway.StriderShinryu said:Thanks for the effort, and I figured that's what you may have been referring to though I was kind of hoping you had something else up your sleeve that I was missing as what you're pointing out has already been dealt with.PoisonUnagi said:Ugh, looks like I have to do this for you. Hang on a moment.StriderShinryu said:
I'm sure NZ is a beautiful place but I'm really not sure how many games get made there though, especially without intent to sell them in the US. As others have already said numerous times, if the case Yahtzee is talking about goes through then there will be a legal age restriction in the US, which I'm taking it you get. What you don't seem to be considering is what sort of company that puts videogames in with. Stores, especially big American ones with the type of economic placement like WalMart, will almost certainly not carry something that is legally age restricted (like, say, pornography). If stores don't carry legally age restricted games then they will not be made and, on top of that, this case would set a precedent that would allow the type of material considered restrictive to be decided upon by people who don't actually play or care about games. It would start with easy targets like Postal or Manhunt type ultra violence, but just look at how riled up non-gamers got over the "sex-scene" in Mass Effect or just the option to attack police officers in GTA and so on.
If you're still left wondering why yourself, a happy resident of NZ, should care just consider the size of your native market compared to the US. The US is the biggest market in the world for games, and it includes many of the biggest game development companies. As I stated above, if US companies can't sell their own mature games in their own country they're not going to make special versions with all the mature stuff that can be sold elsewhere, they're just going to water everything down until it can be sold. If game companies in Japan or the UK can't sell their mature games to the dominant market that is the US then they will either restrict foreign development altogether or will be forced to edit their content to match US standards. Also consider that once a ruling like this goes forward in the US, governments outside of the US will have even more ammunition to crack down further on mature games in their own backyard.
(NZ's a shitty country...)
For me, and I bet for the Supreme Court, this is about the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The Supreme Courts main goal is to protect the US Constitution and Amendments. Many people in the US see any attack on the First Amendment as an attack on all freedoms provided under the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the other amendments. Those issues do not exist in Europe. Many people in the US, me included, see any attack on those rights as an attack on every right provided by those documents. So from that end I hope the Supreme Court upholds the ruling (as noted before, the Federal Court ruled the California law unconstitutional). I believe any retailer has a right to sell video games to whom they want (ratings right now are just a suggestion, not government ruling). Yet almost every retailer follows the rating system, so this whole thing is not a big deal other than the question of minors rights concerning the First Amendment since now the government is actually getting involved. Movies are the same way, although I believe some places do have laws concerning sale of R rated movie to minors (probably just never been brought to trial).albino boo said:
Yet for everyone else here, especially those in other countries, I really don't understand the issue. Maybe the problem is they don't understand the issue at hand in the US (hence why I tried to clarify it earlier). What is happening in the US has already been done in most countries. As I stated earlier, this is not a ban on any video game. It's about sales to minors.
The US already has a rating system, and I believe 99% of retailers follow those rules concerning sales to minors (including Walmart). So what you are talking about is already in effect. The problem that the industry has is the fear the government will take over their rating system, which right now is not government run. That is why they are fighting it. The rest I have discussed is about First Amendment rights.StriderShinryu said:Thanks for the effort, and I figured that's what you may have been referring to though I was kind of hoping you had something else up your sleeve that I was missing as what you're pointing out has already been dealt with.PoisonUnagi said:Ugh, looks like I have to do this for you. Hang on a moment.StriderShinryu said:
I'm sure NZ is a beautiful place but I'm really not sure how many games get made there though, especially without intent to sell them in the US. As others have already said numerous times, if the case Yahtzee is talking about goes through then there will be a legal age restriction in the US, which I'm taking it you get. What you don't seem to be considering is what sort of company that puts videogames in with. Stores, especially big American ones with the type of economic placement like WalMart, will almost certainly not carry something that is legally age restricted (like, say, pornography). If stores don't carry legally age restricted games then they will not be made and, on top of that, this case would set a precedent that would allow the type of material considered restrictive to be decided upon by people who don't actually play or care about games. It would start with easy targets like Postal or Manhunt type ultra violence, but just look at how riled up non-gamers got over the "sex-scene" in Mass Effect or just the option to attack police officers in GTA and so on.
If you're still left wondering why yourself, a happy resident of NZ, should care just consider the size of your native market compared to the US. The US is the biggest market in the world for games, and it includes many of the biggest game development companies. As I stated above, if US companies can't sell their own mature games in their own country they're not going to make special versions with all the mature stuff that can be sold elsewhere, they're just going to water everything down until it can be sold. If game companies in Japan or the UK can't sell their mature games to the dominant market that is the US then they will either restrict foreign development altogether or will be forced to edit their content to match US standards. Also consider that once a ruling like this goes forward in the US, governments outside of the US will have even more ammunition to crack down further on mature games in their own backyard.
Right now M rated games are sold almost everywhere, and not sold to minors. The video game industry simply wants to control the rating system and they mask it under First Amendment rights issue. Now, for me, many people in the US, and the Supreme Court that is the issue. Yet the group being promoted here is about controlling the system, not video game or First Amendment rights (although they will certainly mask it that way to get more support).
A) Why don't you care? Is it because you're not from the US? Neither am I, but this can and will still affect you if you buy or play any games made by US companies.PoisonUnagi said:
B) You accused Yahtzee of selling out, explain to me in what way he's done so.
I don't care because there's literally nothing I can do about it for another 4-6 years. Besides, I can deal with some more shitty games coming out, there's still plenty of games in the meantime that I can play. I've got three games sitting on my desktop that I haven't even played yet, it's not like I don't have enough to keep me occupied.Gizen said:
As for B, the ESA have clearly paid Yahtzee to get this video shown. Think about that, why the hell would Yahtzee just randomly decide to make a video about this, let alone put THIS IS A SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE ESA right at the start of it. How obvious can it be?
Hey, this would have been great if absolutely anyone on the Escapist lived in the United States and was also of voting age.
Not that it's going to stop anyone from yammering on about themselves in the comments section.
Not that it's going to stop anyone from yammering on about themselves in the comments section.
I see the Focus on the U.S. side clearly, but the problem is that even some Goverments within Europe (my Homecountry Germany beeing the most serious thread of censorship yet. Equal to Australia) the Politicians here see Games as a potential target and vote catcher whenever something goes nut with guns. Just one Exeption yet so far.
It's not just about the Market, but the freedom of the speach / giving the Elected Ladies and Gentlemen the insight that Games as they are are not equal to expensive Fisher Price Toys but more spread over every age and therefore should be self regulated instead of censored.
It's not just about the Market, but the freedom of the speach / giving the Elected Ladies and Gentlemen the insight that Games as they are are not equal to expensive Fisher Price Toys but more spread over every age and therefore should be self regulated instead of censored.