Big news down here in Australia with government support now behind the lifting of the R18+ ban. This has been a big thing down here as we are the only country who doesn't have an R18+ classification and as a result many games are either being unreleased or being heavily censored. So, with a shot in the arm to the ban being lifted, I thought I might share my thoughts on the idea of questionable content in games:
My main concern with R18+ games is that they contains buckets of blood and the type of sexual nature that would only appeal to gamers who can’t get it own and probably never will. No, I’m not some twerp who condemns the usage of gore on the screen. I’m actually someone who remembers what triggered this whole, long-lasting debate on violence in video games: It was in game called Mortal Kombat (anyone remember that?).
The thing with Mortal Kombat was that it came at a time when everyone was trying to capitalise on the one on one fighting formula that made Streetfighter 2 a big hit. I understand the notion that incorporating blood and gore was it’s method of standing out from the pack but looking back at the game now, it just seems tame: It hasn’t aged well, like other games from the era, and it’s flaws now seem glaringly obvious now the sensation of tearing people apart has since settled. Thankfully, the sequel, MK2 was an improvement on many levels – and it was indeed satisfying to hear, at the time, people talking abut MK2 as a great game, not just some gore-fest.
Looking at Mortal Kombat now it seems hard to believe that it started this ongoing debate about violence in videogames. Of course, since then games have incorporated violence and blood and have continually pushed the envelope on what players can do to their on-screen opponents.
And this is what I feel is the biggest problem with the violence in videogames debate: Violence has become too commonplace. Ten/Fifteen years ago, seeing a game bearing the M15+ label would’ve been an endorsement: This was a bad/naughty game that would make gamers buy it purely for the element of danger that continually drives thrillseekers onward. Nowadays, you see so many games bearing the M15+ and the MA15+ games that gamers just seem unfazed – even to the point where the games rated G and PG are laughed out of the room.
My point? Violence in videogames has evolved to a point where it’s no longer a constant: It’s now a dependant. Such is the gamer today that if a game doesn’t have lot’s guns and plenty of bad guys to mow down, then it has no hope of getting anywhere. Who cares about new ideas or getting a point across? All one needs to do is provide enough arms and ammunition for several Arnold Schwarzenegger movies and the player won’t think about anything else.
As stated above, I have a knowledge of what makes a good game, forged from many years playing them. I like games that present a degree of immersion, shows signs of intelligence, present a challenge and really establish a connection with the player. So in order to dispel some notion that I some lily-livered panzie who faints at the sight of blood, I do enjoy the game God of War. Sure it is a ridiculously violent game but it is a good way of reliving stress. More importantly however, it has some interesting tricks woven into the gameplay that give it long-lasting appeal and a compelling plot that adds depth to the protagonist Kratos that make him more than just some mindless mass-murderer. But what I find particularly interesting about God of War is that it reinvents Ancient Greek mythology by presenting a degree of brutality never seen before. All the legendary monsters, like the Minotaur, the centaur and the hydra, are in there but they look hideous and capable of breaking a neck like a twig.
Some may argue that violent games are a great way to relive stress. I can agree with that. Some also argue that violent games in no way provide a corrupt influence to socially-maladjusted teenagers and such a belief is ill-informed propaganda. That too has weight. But when it comes to the amount of violence in R18+ games, it is those gamers who are under 18 who will get the most out of it. Sure boasting about blowing foes away in a video game may be fun in High School but doing the same thing when you’re an adult just encourages everyone to keep their distance. That being said, it is strange to allow games bearing a R18+ when the type of things that gets done by its target audience isn’t anything worth bragging about.
Consider the game Grand Theft Auto 3. One of the most controversial games of all time it does succeed however by allowing the player to do whatever they want. It presents scenarios found in action movies, such as high speed car chases, punching people out and blowing things up with a variety of weapons.
There is no denying that escapism walks hand in hand with videogame. And therein lies the strength of GTA3: it allows players to do things that they will never do in real life. And that’s exactly why we play games. We want to escape the troubles of our own life and we want to do something that our mundane lives can’t provide. For this reason alone, the concept behind GTA3 has inspired other games.
But it strikes me that those trying to replicate the ‘do whatever you want’ concept of GTA3 missed the point completely: These clones seem more about blowing things up and creating a ruckus. This strikes me as an indication that game developers are getting lazy. I’m not denying that violence sells but if all there is to it then what are you doing? One of my favourite movies is the Wild Bunch. It is a violent film yes and focuses on violent men as it’s protagonists. But there is reasoning behind it and achieves the somewhat difficult task of introducing a lot of humanity to the murderous protagonists.
It strikes me that this continued presence of violence is really hurting the games industry in general. Consider Jack Thompson: Yes we all hate him and his arguments come across as ill-informed scare-mongering, but he’ll never stop. And even if he does shuffle off, some other nob will come and takes his place. In the case of Manhunt, it’s quite clear that it was intended as a huge smirking, kick in the balls to those who condemn videogames as too violent. It may work in theory but it seems to have backfired tremendously: It has instead given Jack Thompson and his ilk more ammunition. Nowadays gamers encompass people of all types and the idea of a socially inept with contempt for society is more inclined towards a cliché. However, clichés are harmful things and they can be easily utilised by the wrong people.
In the case of the hotly debated Left 4 Dead 2, I find interesting that there is a massive push to get in here uncensored that no one has bothered as to whether or not the game is actually any good. Indeed it is interesting to note that the censored L4D2 released here in Australia
People say that a large number of gamers are all adults when compared to the Golden Age of Gaming (the 16-bit era) but I don't buy that. I mean, if gaming has 'grown-up' as many claim then why is violence still the most powerful driving force? Anyone can make a game which can be addictive and fun without any violence – you only need to look at Tetris. And, in the case of Ico, concepts such as subtly and experimentation, end up being treated with confusion, being overlooked and ultimately disdain.
All of which is hindering gaming evolution.
So what would I like? Well, as mentioned above, violence is predominant in gaming that all designers are getting lazy and new ideas are being sneered upon. That being said, I would like to see game developers think beyond buckets of blood: It will prompt them to be adventurous, experimental and to try new things. It will encourage them to mess with established formulas and do something new with them and save them from being reduced to merely ripping off something else.
It will also force gamers to change their perception of games and look beyond the, somewhat juvenile, perception of buckets of blood. It will encourage thinking, emotion and imagination, elements that can have a place in gaming but are largely confined behind razor wire fencing.
Additionally, it will create a positive image of gamers. Yes we may have halted the cliché of being social freaks but that isn’t enough: The cliché is indeed a cliché and should be stamped out of existence. I would like to hear about gamers who are normal people who balance gaming with decent jobs and an active social life - Lord only knows why Pure Pwnage needs to exist.
In conclusion, I do indeed see the value of having an adult classification so people don't end up making the wrong choice. However, as a gamer, I would like to suggest the following:
We as gamers need to think beyond violence. We need to look to games that can be successful and fun without buckets of blood. We need to embrace any games that do things differently just for having the balls to do so. We need to understand subtly as not an alien concept. We need to take such steps to ensure gaming evolution and continued survival.
And while we're at it, I would also like a Ferrari.
