Support NeoGAF

[tehrik-e-insaaf]

This is dumb legislation for many reasons outlined above. I don't care about parents and children and whether they are competent/incompetent. This holds games to a different standard than R rated DVD (uncut versions which include full sex scenes), books (there is a such as pornographic written word), etc.

Not only that, but for this to really be successful you would have to be dead sure the people who are purchasing the games themselves would have to be the ones most likely to be negatively influenced. I don't think that is true.

The only people likely to buy the game themselves are 16+ (meaning one year before they can legally buy the game b/c they can drive to the store). Otherwise it is parents. If parents are randomly purchasing these games for their kids, then we haven't solved anything.

At the end of the day here is what I bet the bill will end up saying (if it even gets passed given this is a Republican pro-business congress) -- stores should check ID's for games that are AO (and that should be in-line with pornography and other things). Given no publisher dares to make a mainstream game AO anyways, the net effect will be zero. The only thing it might do is the gaming companies might get a bit more cautious (and spend more money educating parents) given that Congress is not shy about legislating the industry.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

No one is truly "free". Freedom is a political construct, but there are biological, social, and psychological needs and facts that dictate the need for others and the following of objective rules even when it is not in our immediate self interest.

Sounds like putting the interests of the state before your own interests for the benefit of the state. We are not talking about murder or theft here; we are talking about issues related to the restriction of freedom of expression and the liberty to raise your child as you see fit. Freedom is not a political construct, but it is being used, along with democracy, by some in this country to excuse their political actions to deprive people of their rights to protect, in their words, freedom and democracy for all. However, when you start taking away the rights of the dissenting opinion or the minority to benefit the majority or the empowered leaders views, then you have drifted away from democracy and towards fascism. If the bill becomes law, and the courts hold it up to be constitutional, then I will have to abide by it. Until then, I will fight it because it is one step closer to putting the state before its people, which is indeed facism.

 

[CarlosX360]

WTF is Nintendo X so worried about? They aren't taking away your Mario Party, kiddo. STFU.

Why would I be worried about ME not getting the games? I'm 23, I go in, and buy any mature game I want....

That's not the point...The point is, that the game industry WILL eventually change in one way or another...The difference between the industries that is discussed in this thread, and the gaming industry, is that they let them off....but they get on the game industry's ass like nazi's.

The complaints abot the ratings such as "emotionally damaging one's perception of violence" or "kids are impacted by the violence in games" all those reasons seem so stupid to me...more than what proof has shown: Kids who kill, play GTA type/violent games.

Why? Because I never was impacted by games as a kid, as a teen, I never thought of killing people with a gun just because I played GTA, or Doom, or Quake, or fucking hell.....Mortal Kombat. There is a lot of people like this. So I'm thinking, that this case is more of a isolation of people, as say....the broken 360's.

Let me clarify my stance a little Nintendo X. I am absolutely for this bill? Nope. I believe the ESRB does a fine job of rating games. They are for the most part spot on with their rating system, and is a well enough indicator of the content of a game. The problem with them is that they simply aren't enforcing their rating system whatsoever. Kids are still able to walk into a videogame store and purchase an M rated game like it was nothing. The videogame industry has not stepped in to formulate a solution to this problem. As I said before, they are still enjoying this vast growth in the industry, and anything that would be detrmintal to that growth they want no part in, so if nothing is being done, then what? This is why the government is stepping in and if the videogame industry doesn't feel like stepping up to the plate and protecting itself then so be it.

I have never disagreed that this would be bad for the industry. It will. We will see some negative effects if this bill is passed (doubtful), but your problem is you are not weighing in the moral value of the children in question at all. Your only concern seems to be the health of the industry, rather than the health of the youth of America, and that is why your argument falls flat against others. There are plenty of reasons to be dead set against this bill, but the ones you are providing make no sense when weighed in with larger factors.

Well, I understand that I may have come off as someone who doesn't give a shit about today's youth....I don't think it's their problem with trying to get their hands on the games...Heck, I don't blame them. I blame the parents, because they fingerpoint the wrong people with the WRONG reasons. They seem to pick up on the pieces that the columbine shootings, and other well known shootings left off, and do their own complaints - you see, they're picking the wrong reasons to push for censorship, for bans, which has come to the congress in the past, and people were against that, and now that the law is waking people up, there's mixed feelings, mixed reactions, such as this tread has shown.

 

[DDayton]

Why DO kids need to play M-rated games?

QUIET, YOU GAME HATER! YOU ARE PROBABLY AN N-BOT! DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH! GNASH GNASH GNASH.

Why is this myth still being perpetuated? It is NOT TRUE.

There is NO FEDERAL LAW currently extant in the US that fines retailers for selling R rated movies or Explicit Lyrics CDs to minors, or theaters for admitting unaccompanied minors to R films or minors period to NC-17 films. These restrictions are maintained by BUSINESS to AVOID GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION. Belief that this sort of censorship is equivalent to the self-regulation done by other entertainment industries is WRONG.

... and while that is true, there is a reason for it. Unlike the game industry, the movie industry has (generally) managed to police themselves fairly well. They set up their own regulations to avoid government intervention, and in doing so saved themselves from it. The game industry tried to do the same thing (see the ESRB), but retailers have generally done a fairly lousy job of enforcing it... especially game-only stores. The "Game industry" could have avoided this entire mess, you know.

Well, for one, the developers would have to dumb down the level of violence in their games, and try to cater the game to a crowd that WILL be buying the games. Of course, there will be a lot of people buying GTA type of games, but there will not be enough sales for the same game that was made famous because of this law...

Now I'm quite curious -- how does one "dumb down the level of violence"?

 

[kaching]

... and while that is true, there is a reason for it. Unlike the game industry, the movie industry has (generally) managed to police themselves fairly well. They set up their own regulations to avoid government intervention, and in doing so saved themselves from it. The game industry tried to do the same thing (see the ESRB), but retailers have generally done a fairly lousy job of enforcing it... especially game-only stores. The "Game industry" could have avoided this entire mess, you know.

Does anyone *know* how long it took the movie industry to go from no rating system to the well-understood, well policed self-regulation they have now? The videogame industry is younger and has been making clear efforts to continually try to improve the collective awareness and understanding of the system and to better police themselves in the process. So what grace period was the movie industry granted to get it right, as compared to the way the videogame industry is being treated?

 

[monchi-kun]

... and while that is true, there is a reason for it. Unlike the game industry, the movie industry has (generally) managed to police themselves fairly well. They set up their own regulations to avoid government intervention, and in doing so saved themselves from it. The game industry tried to do the same thing (see the ESRB), but retailers have generally done a fairly lousy job of enforcing it... especially game-only stores. The "Game industry" could have avoided this entire mess, you know.

I'd like to see government statistics on how well are ratings are enforced amongst different forms of media. I find it hard to believe that music/movie retailers are so much more "saintly" compared to the videogame industry. Heck, movie ratings aren't even displayed on the FRONT of DVD boxes...and yet videogames= teh devil?

Hot Coffee was blown waaaay out of proportion, it became the ammunition that some politicians used to further their cause. But how pervasive are the "Hot Coffees" in the videogame industry?

 

[chaostrophy]

The "Game industry" could have avoided this entire mess, you know.

True, the game industry is not as effective at policing itself as other entertainment industries. The flawed logic I was trying to point out is people thinking that mature content available to adults would in no way be affected by this law, and pointing to the continued production and availability of mature movies, music, etc. as proof. No one can really know what will happen if the law passes, it will depend on a lot of factors...maybe it will be business as usual for adult gamers and maybe hell will break loose.

And I honestly think that this entire mess is much ado about nothing...that it's in the best interest of the game industry and children both for society in general to stop being so condescending and overprotective toward children, and stop looking at the culture they're interested in as a social problem that needs to be fixed rather than just part of their life experience.

 

[AlphaSnake]

I'll make sure to be the guy in the store who buys it FOR the kid. Fuck that shit. This ain't no ciggs or weed. Goddamn this country is moronic.

 

[CarlosX360]

Now I'm quite curious -- how does one "dumb down the level of violence"?

PLEASE tell me you've played the SNES verison of the original Mortal Kombat.

PLEASE tell me you've played the SNES version of Dracula X.

 

[terrene]

The complaints abot the ratings such as "emotionally damaging one's perception of violence" or "kids are impacted by the violence in games" all those reasons seem so stupid to me...more than what proof has shown: Kids who kill, play GTA type/violent games.

Why? Because I never was impacted by games as a kid, as a teen, I never thought of killing people with a gun just because I played GTA, or Doom, or Quake, or fucking hell.....Mortal Kombat. There is a lot of people like this. So I'm thinking, that this case is more of a isolation of people, as say....the broken 360's.

So, great, under this system, if your parents have recognized your maturity and how capable you are of playing GTA without being affected, then they'll buy the game for you. So you, Mr. Mature Kiddie, get your GTA.

The point is that their authority is not overstepped by some clerk at EB who is willing to sell such a game to a minor with cash in hand.

 

[sgt]

If you're over 18, there's no reason to worry about this. All it will do is give them less ammo for saying game companies are corrupting children. It's no different than children not being able to buy R rated movies. To anyone saying it's 100% up to the parents... I disagree. Yes, it is the main responsibility of the parents to regulate what their children do. I'd think most children 12+ are in stores, with money by themselves at times. That is like saying someone of any age should be able to walk up and buy a bottle of jack and a copy of Flesh Hunter on DVD because the parents should be watching 24/7.

 

[Scrow]

The ESRB, as it is now, already allows them to do that. =P

if history is anything to go by, it doesn't.

 

[tedhbrown]

I was amazed at how so many people in this thread don't seem to care much, when in the past on this and other forums, when someone has tried to legislate game ratings, there is an unanimous outcry. I couldn't quite figure out why everyone's opinion had suddenly changed, and then it hit me.

If the OP had replaced the word's "Clinton" and "Lieberman", with "Bush" and "Cheney", oh my god this thread would already be 15 pages long.

 

[terrene]

I was amazed at how so many people in this thread don't seem to care much, when in the past on this and other forums, when someone has tried to legislate game ratings, there is an unanimous outcry. I couldn't quite figure out why everyone's opinion had suddenly changed, and then it hit me.

If the OP had replaced the word's "Clinton" and "Lieberman", with "Bush" and "Cheney", oh my god this thread would already be 15 pages long.

You're a moron.

 

[luxsol]

if history is anything to go by, it doesn't.

I don't think a mainstream game like God of War and that mini-game would have been possible without it. There are already game companies pointing at their ratings as an excuse when parents start coming at them as well.
Anyway, it's not the ESRB that pervents them nor laws... it's retail that stops them from going all the way. AO games don't sell as much as M games do because the bigger chains won't carry them. The same thing will happen with M rated if this law passes (which it WON'T ).

 

[Scrow]

AO games don't sell as much as M games do because the bigger chains won't carry them. The same thing will happen with M rated if this law passes

i think you're wrong. here's what i had to say about that in another thread.

The huge amount of revenue generated by M rated games like GTA would far outweigh the odd fine here and there incurred by negligent employees. You can bet your bottom dollar retailers will continue to stock M rated games, risk or no risk, as long as the revenue they generate exceeds the losses incurred by fines (which I can tell you right now, they will). And the number of fines will reduce more and more as the retail industry adapts and managers crack down on their employees to carry out their duties properly.

if the games sell, retailers wont stop stocking them.

 

[luxsol]

The huge amount of revenue generated by M rated games like GTA would far outweigh the odd fine here and there incurred by negligent employees. You can bet your bottom dollar retailers will continue to stock M rated games, risk or no risk, as long as the revenue they generate exceeds the losses incurred by fines (which I can tell you right now, they will). And the number of fines will reduce more and more as the retail industry adapts and managers crack down on their employees to carry out their duties properly.

This would only raise the penalty fee.

And like i mentioned, retail stores like Walmart won't carry AO games because of the harm parents believe they can do. With M-rated games being treated like pornography the larger "family friendly" retailer stores will not carry them. Gamestops (or was it EB?) held GTA:SA behind the counters after the scandal hit. You have a shrinking retail presence that automatically means lower sales for the publisher. This will only scare off publishers/developers from making games that will get M-ratings and we will see fewer chances being made.

So everyone who ignores this bill because they're adults are also ignoring the ramifications it will have on the gaming industry.

But it's all moot anyway.

 

[pestul]

I was amazed at how so many people in this thread don't seem to care much, when in the past on this and other forums, when someone has tried to legislate game ratings, there is an unanimous outcry. I couldn't quite figure out why everyone's opinion had suddenly changed, and then it hit me.

If the OP had replaced the word's "Clinton" and "Lieberman", with "Bush" and "Cheney", oh my god this thread would already be 15 pages long.

Nah.. I think we were getting pissed about the possibility of game content getting banned all together. This doesn't do anything to our games.

I certainly wouldn't kick up a fuss if this came out of the Bush administration.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

My goodness she is hideous.

Democrats unite! :lol

They sure do love big government don't they.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

My goodness she is hideous.

Democrats unite! :lol

They sure do love big government don't they.

FYI: The current Bush administration is currently the biggest and most expensive government EVER.

 

[The Guivre]

My problems with this whole debacle are as follows.

1. It's not good for the industry

2. It doesn't stop games from getting into kids' hands
-There'll always be the friend down the street with GTA
-There'll always be the guy outside the EB who'll buy the game for them
-There'll always be the parent who doesn't care until they see just how mature a game is

3. If this bill is anything like other attempts to restrict the industry it won't hold up.

4. In the end, all it does is put Mrs. Clinton in everyone's thoughts as it starts to be time to decide who's going to be president. Great for Democrats who love Clinton, bad for Republicans like me.

My mother and I watched the unveiling of this bill on the news and I of course asked her how she dealt with raising me around so many vile video game influences from my NES and Genny, and to a lesser extent the Playstation. And she replied "I just made sure you understood right from wrong. And made it a point to have an occaisional talk with you"

Parenting, from parents... Amazing! :lol

 

[MetatronM]

Such a non-issue.
Anyone who finds offense with the government regulating sales to minors of adult material (like GTA) must be a fucking alarmist douche. This stuff isn't meant to be sold to minors at all. Actually enforcing age restrictions isn't going to mean games are censored, or worse off. It'll mean they'll get played by their intended audiences or parents will buy the games for them. No big changeup.

You are obviously missing all the OTHER government watchdog bullshit. It isn't JUST "now stores can't sell to minors."

Read the rest of the proposed law, and then come back with your two cents.

 

[Particle Physicist]

i really dont see whats wrong with this.

 

[kaching]

i really dont see whats wrong with this.

Presumably because you haven't even bothered to look at what people have said *is* wrong with it...

 

[Spencerr]

Good. Kids shouldn't be playing these games anyway. Besides, most places already enforce the ESRB ratings.

 

[Spencerr]

You guys are retarded. It's the parent's job only? Right, so we should make alcohol and tobacco available to children. I mean, it's the parent's responsibility to make sure they don't smoke and drink, amirite?

Edit: And to whoever said people are saying this because the legislation is coming from Democrats, please. I don't care who sets this law up, it makes sense. Give me a solid reason to oppose this.

"Someone can just buy it for them lolz! " Yeah they could, and that's why the parents should also monitor what their kids are doing.

 

[CarlosX360]

And like i mentioned, retail stores like Walmart won't carry AO games because of the harm parents believe they can do. With M-rated games being treated like pornography the larger "family friendly" retailer stores will not carry them. Gamestops (or was it EB?) held GTA:SA behind the counters after the scandal hit. You have a shrinking retail presence that automatically means lower sales for the publisher. This will only scare off publishers/developers from making games that will get M-ratings and we will see fewer chances being made.

Thank you for making my point even more clearer than I have in the past...I agree whoheartenly....This is exactly why I think the gaming industry will change because of the law. It will lower the chances of Mature games being made than today...I think its worse than what people give this law credit for. I mean, Liberman obviously hates the violent games, and its been like this since Mortal Kombat came to home consoles. Its been like this since Primal Rage was released on game consoles...Its been like this for ten mother fucking years.

But as long as we have influencial publishers, and developers such as Capcom, Epic, Konami, Sony (God of War), and of course Rockstar themselves. But that's the problem, with the mergers going on right now, this means less and less mature games will be made, there will be a small percentage of these mature games than previous generations.

Think about it for a second...What's going on in the gaming world? EA is buying everything, Midway is buying some properties, Square just merged with Enix, Sammy just merged with SEGA, some companies are closing, some smaller developers are getting acquired...What does this law mean for us? LESS MATURE GAMES.....Why? Because companies can't take risks with the fact that the development costs are rising..higher and higher as generations pass.

No, I'm not changing my reasons, or my point..there are many points as to why this is really going to hurt our industry.

 

[DDayton]

PLEASE tell me you've played the SNES verison of the original Mortal Kombat.

PLEASE tell me you've played the SNES version of Dracula X.

... if I said I really didn't care for Mortal Kombat and thought the whole "sweat for blood" thing was funny, I suppose you'd start writhing on the ground...

What in the world does "dumbing down violence" mean? My best guess is that you are attempting to say that enforcing a strict ratings system will mean less violence in games... and, to be perfectly frank, I really don't care if the level of violence in games is lowered. Regulation would simply mean that companies couldn't sell "SLASH-EM UP X" to little kiddies... if you are trying to imply that companies would stop making your favorite games because they would be scared of an M rating, you seem to be saying that they are already selling violent games to youngsters -- which is sort of the problem. If the ratings are supposed to mean anything, youngsters shouldn't be playing M rated games right now, anyway; developers and publishers shouldn't change their business as enforcing the "no kids" policy shouldn't (in theory) decrease the market for their titles. The ONLY way this would be bad for folks who enjoy "Mature" games is if the entire industry depended on underage kids buying M rated games.

 

[luxsol]

What in the world does "dumbing down violence" mean? My best guess is that you are attempting to say that enforcing a strict ratings system will mean less violence in games... and, to be perfectly frank, I really don't care if the level of violence in games is lowered.

You people really need to read the other posts in this thread....

Regulation would simply mean that companies couldn't sell "SLASH-EM UP X" to little kiddies... if you are trying to imply that companies would stop making your favorite games because they would be scared of an M rating, you seem to be saying that they are already selling violent games to youngsters -- which is sort of the problem. If the ratings are supposed to mean anything, youngsters shouldn't be playing M rated games right now, anyway; developers and publishers shouldn't change their business as enforcing the "no kids" policy shouldn't (in theory) decrease the market for their titles. The ONLY way this would be bad for folks who enjoy "Mature" games is if the entire industry depended on underage kids buying M rated games.

There is another way too...

And like i mentioned, retail stores like Walmart won't carry AO games because of the harm parents believe they can do. With M-rated games being treated like pornography the larger "family friendly" retailer stores will not carry them. Gamestops (or was it EB?) held GTA:SA behind the counters after the scandal hit. You have a shrinking retail presence that automatically means lower sales for the publisher. This will only scare off publishers/developers from making games that will get M-ratings and we will see fewer chances being made.

The majority of games are sold in stores like this.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

FYI: The current Bush administration is currently the biggest and most expensive government EVER.

Was already well aware of all that

The dems attitude though is that they know whats best for us. We don't know what's best for us, so they will legislate in order to "save us from ourselves". Just look at what they are doing now. There are going to be shitty parents and not so shitty parents. The government can't fix whats wrong with people.

The problem is, passing legislation against this will do pretty much nothing in the end unfortunately. Little kids shouldn't be playing these games, but the government in ineffective in stopping it. It's parents who need to be involved in their children's lives that can do anything about this shit.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

Was already well aware of all that

The dems attitude though is that they know whats best for us. We don't know what's best for us, so they will legislate in order to "save us from ourselves". Just look at what they are doing now. There are going to be shitty parents and not so shitty parents. The government can't fix whats wrong with people.

The problem is, passing legislation against this will do pretty much nothing in the end unfortunately. Little kids shouldn't be playing these games, but the government in ineffective in stopping it. It's parents who need to be involved in their children's lives that can do anything about this shit.

This is what I have been saying in this thread.

Unfortunately, both side of the aisle right now is filled with whores who think they know what is best for people.

 

[CarlosX360]

... if I said I really didn't care for Mortal Kombat and thought the whole "sweat for blood" thing was funny, I suppose you'd start writhing on the ground...

What in the world does "dumbing down violence" mean? My best guess is that you are attempting to say that enforcing a strict ratings system will mean less violence in games... and, to be perfectly frank, I really don't care if the level of violence in games is lowered. Regulation would simply mean that companies couldn't sell "SLASH-EM UP X" to little kiddies... if you are trying to imply that companies would stop making your favorite games because they would be scared of an M rating, you seem to be saying that they are already selling violent games to youngsters -- which is sort of the problem. If the ratings are supposed to mean anything, youngsters shouldn't be playing M rated games right now, anyway; developers and publishers shouldn't change their business as enforcing the "no kids" policy shouldn't (in theory) decrease the market for their titles. The ONLY way this would be bad for folks who enjoy "Mature" games is if the entire industry depended on underage kids buying M rated games.

If you don't know what "dumbing down violence" is.....Then I suggest you to PLAY the SNES version of Mortal Kombat.

If you don't CARE if the game violence is lowered to the extent that Mortal Kombat was cut of explict content...and replaced with an appropriate content, why the fuck are you in this thread? You seem to act like you have no knowledge of how censorship, and how downgraded a game would be. You seem to come off as this hypocrit that doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

I mean, you're not backing up your arguement with that "I don't care" sentiment...Everyone in this thread must have known what "dumbed down" content means...

Think about what you're saying:

You started by saying "I don't care for mortal kombat and the sweat for blood thing is funny" and then you say "I don't understand what dumbing down violence means" damn hypocrit.

I'm sorry, I don't care about your message, you seem to so stupid not to understand it.

If you played the SNES version, and made sense, then I would care about your dumbass comments.

And I'm not sweating for blood, you fool. Games with violence sell more than your type of games, so don't come to me and tell me I sweat for blood. The thing I don't want to see is a game like Mortal Kombat get dumbed down just because some law prevents developers/publishers from putting it on shelves (I know this is not the case, but it was the case in the first place). Mortal Kombat II and above had blood in all future SNES/N64/GC titles. Nintendo learned their lesson from censoring the SNES version of MK.

 

[callous]

Why DO kids need to play M-rated games?

Exactly. Oh no! The government wants to prevent kids from playing overly violent games and games with explicit sexual content. What is the world coming to?!

 

[DenogginizerOS]

There is NO DIRECT LINK of childhood exposure to violent video games, movies, books, music, or TV news to developmental problems in any peer-reviewed scientific journals. However, there is plenty of evidence linking abandoned, mistreated, ignored, abused children to terrible parents. This legislation is waste of tax-dollars, a waste of time, and yet another poor attempt by the government to try an put a band-aid on bigger problems. If this bill is passed, teenagers left alone at malls with money will be asking strangers to buy games for them. The solution: Stop leaving your children alone and get active in their lives. We do NOT need a law for this.

 

[CarlosX360]

The solution: Stop leaving your children alone and get active in their lives. We do NOT need a law for this.

That's what we've all been saying in this thread. This law does SHIT, it will only inspire kids to get someone to buy the game for them. Just like with cigarettes. Back in H.S. I saw a friend of mine asking some stranger for help on getting the cigs for him. And he got what he wanted.

 

[DDayton]

If you don't CARE if the game violence is lowered to the extent that Mortal Kombat was cut of explict content...and replaced with an appropriate content, why the (BLEEP) are you in this thread? You seem to act like you have no knowledge of how censorship, and how downgraded a game would be. You seem to come off as this hypocrit that doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

I do believe you mean "alternate content" or "inappropriate content" -- if something is replaced with appropriate content, you'd consider it a good thing.

I'm a hypocrite? How? What exactly have I said that I don't follow through on? I'd love to find out, so I can properly change my ways.

You started by saying "I don't care for mortal kombat and the sweat for blood thing is funny" and then you say "I don't understand what dumbing down violence means" damn hypocrit.

I think you misunderstood me, kind sir. It's true I don't care about the silly MK sweat thing... and, on a different note, I don't understand what you mean by "dumbing down violence." You appear to be saying that the games will be simplified or "dumbed down" if violence is edited or replaced, and that seems like it would be hardly the case. Removing violence, or creating a game that is less violent, can't be "dumbed down" -- you can only "dumb" something down by simplifying the game or gameplay. Perhaps you meant the games would be bowdlerized? I suppose my issue is that you are implying that limiting the portrayed violence would necessarily simplify the gameplay... and I'm saying that that doesn't make any sense, even if you try to use the MK sweat analogy. The gameplay of MK didn't change; perhaps the experience did, but it wasn't "dumbed down".

I'm sorry, I don't care about your message, you seem to so stupid not to understand it. If you played the SNES version, and made sense, then I would care about your BLEEPYFACE comments.

And I'm not sweating for blood, you fool. Games with violence sell more than your type of games, so don't come to me and tell me I sweat for blood. The thing I don't want to see is a game like Mortal Kombat get dumbed down just because some law prevents developers/publishers from putting it on shelves (I know this is not the case, but it was the case in the first place). Mortal Kombat II and above had blood in all future SNES/N64/GC titles. Nintendo learned their lesson from censoring the SNES version of MK.

I'm not sure you are thinking critically here. While Nintendo changed their policies due to the limited sales of the "edited" version of MK, I still can't see how the game was "dumbed down." While it might certainly be possible for a game to be "dumbed down" by editing out violence, you'd have to provide an example of it first before I can take your paranoia seriously. Granted, I can think of a scenario where that might happen, but I find it rather unlikely that it ever would.

As an aside, what exactly is "(my) type of game"? For that matter, why in the world would you "sweat for blood" -- are you suffering from some strange vampiric disorder?

(Sighs, then goes back to his SNES and Mortal Kombat.)

 

[carbonbased]

Regardless of whether or not you support the bill, you have to admit that it's pretty hypocritical. There are no laws forcing retailers to card for R-rated DVDs or Parental Advisory CDs (never in my life have I needed to show ID for either, I'm 20), yet there's such a huge push for the government to regulate games in a matter that is, IMO, completely unnecessary. Kids can easily buy movies from Best Buy with full-on *real* nudity/sex and extremely realistic violence without a problem, but somehow video games are an imminent threat to our youth that must be policed.

This pretty much just proves that video games are a misunderstood and wrongfully-demonized medium.

 

[CarlosX360]

I do believe you mean "alternate content" or "inappropriate content" -- if something is replaced with appropriate content, you'd consider it a good thing.

You foolish man. You spent time on "bleeping" out my cuss words...Wow, you're such a fucking pussy.

Dumb Down Content means simply this:

Look at SNES vs Genesis versions of Mortal Kombat:

SNES: No blood, alternate fatalities, some content taken out.

Genesis: This version remained intact, all the blood, all of the fatalities, the only downside is the graphics, which was a sacrifice for gameplay/framerate. And some memorable glitches.

Then Nintendo cleaned up their act, and covered their asses with a 17+ rating with MKII.

The SNES version got all the content, and is hailed as the best looking Mortal Kombat II at the time.

The genesis version was more popular because of Nintendo's mistake with the original MK, and the fact that the controller configuration for Genesis (at the time, Street Fighter II CE was already released, and the Six button controller was the most comfortable controller at the time).

I'm a hypocrite? How? What exactly have I said that I don't follow through on? I'd love to find out, so I can properly change my ways.

Below, I answered your dumbass question:

You started by saying "I don't care for mortal kombat and the sweat for blood thing is funny" and then you say "I don't understand what dumbing down violence means" damn hypocrit.

You don't understand what I meant by "dumbed down content" simply because you didn't play SNES Mortal Kombat, which was controversial to gamers back in the day, and still is frowned uponed today. The gamplay DOES remain intact, but the overall game is dumbed down, and that turns off people...Like myself. If you looked at the quote I used above (the one with the link in the quote...You'd understand how much content they took out because of Nintendo's scalded attitude towards violence. They were crybabies like yourself, who frown upon swearing, and blood...And you ACTUALLY like games without blood, and all the good stuff. The good stuff that makes games enjoyable. I remember people like "awesome" or "cool" after a new fatality was performed in arcades. Maybe if you experienced things in the violence in gaming phase....Then I would've admired your opposition to this situation. It takes a lot of balls to say some of the things you said in this thread to millions of people viewing the forums.

I think you misunderstood me, kind sir. It's true I don't care about the silly MK sweat thing... and, on a different note, I don't understand what you mean by "dumbing down violence." You appear to be saying that the games will be simplified or "dumbed down" if violence is edited or replaced, and that seems like it would be hardly the case. Removing violence, or creating a game that is less violent, can't be "dumbed down" -- you can only "dumb" something down by simplifying the game or gameplay. Perhaps you meant the games would be bowdlerized? I suppose my issue is that you are implying that limiting the portrayed violence would necessarily simplify the gameplay... and I'm saying that that doesn't make any sense, even if you try to use the MK sweat analogy. The gameplay of MK didn't change; perhaps the experience did, but it wasn't "dumbed down".

What? What are you? Stupid? Mortal Kombat SNES was a dumbed down version of any version on the market at the time. I guarentee you someone else will vouch for this. I guarentee you someone else will vouch that the Genesis version sold more than the SNES version because of the very reason. As a matter of fact, when I heard about the SNES version being slapped around with a trout on violence by Nintendo....That was the day that I disregarded the version. I was going to buy the game, but I saw the difference between the SNES version, and the Genesis version, my cousin made the best decsision renting the Genesis version of Mortal Kombat, later, I bought it myself. Everyone I knew were disgusted by the SNES version because it was "dumbed" down by most gamers' terms. I said this before, and I'll say it again. AVP was "dumbed" down by being cut of violent scenes. You seem to be the only one who doesn't understand the gamers' term regarding "dumb" it means the substance of the game is GONE.

In other words, the game doesn't feel like Mortal Kombat, therefore, there is no reason to play it, there is no reason to buy it....It just doesn't feel like a Mortal Kombat game. It just doesn't.

At the time, "Perfect Arcade Conversion" or "Perfect Arcade Translation" were the biggest terms in the history of gaming advertising....And any gamer that reads those words, will rush to a game retailer and buy it soley because of the term. It was a loose advertising term at the time...So if a game like mortal Kombat is "dumbed" down.....then they won't buy it.

I'm not sure you are thinking critically here. While Nintendo changed their policies due to the limited sales of the "edited" version of MK, I still can't see how the game was "dumbed down." While it might certainly be possible for a game to be "dumbed down" by editing out violence, you'd have to provide an example of it first before I can take your paranoia seriously. Granted, I can think of a scenario where that might happen, but I find it rather unlikely that it ever would.

(Sighs, then goes back to his SNES and Mortal Kombat.)

Why are you trying to create this invisible wall in front of me saying things like "I'm not sure what you mean" or "I'm not sure you're thinking critically" you're acting like you know better than me when you have not played a "dumbed down" version of a game.

You obviously don't understand the basic principles of how violence in gaming works...And why it sells, why it is the most wanted thing in games...Why this and this. You seem to think that violence in games doesn't matter, because its YOUR opinion...Stop thinking selfishly, because this is reality, everyone wants violence in games.

And if you can't understand that, I say, end this conversation between you and I, because you come off as an idiot to me.

As an aside, what exactly is "(my) type of game"? For that matter, why in the world would you "sweat for blood" -- are you suffering from some strange vampiric disorder?

I don't have any fucking disorder, you must have a disorder of crying over violence, and cussing...the fact that you censored my cussing..or swearing..proves just that. Who in the flying fuck would edit content like that? Hmm? Parents. Of course. YOU must be the one going paranoid in this thread, because you edited in your posts "Bleep" "Bleep" "Bleep" Seriously dude. Stop being a pussy.

Your type of game is Mickey Mouse 3D. :lol :lol :lol

Games like Mickey Mouse, or Mario, and endless of cutesy games that N64 had chock full of...Is the reason why Nintendo has that "kiddy" image.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

Illinois Tosses Video Game Law Out

The judge agreed, saying, "If controlling access to allegedly 'dangerous' speech is important in promoting the positive psychological development of children, in our society that role is properly accorded to parents and families, not the State."