News: Lieberman Gets Boobies Shown On C-SPAN. Good Job. Also, Top 10 Games "To Avoid"
Posted by Shocker :: 9:40 PM
Tits on C-SPAN. Primarily 90-year-old audience stunned.
No, you weren't hallucinating if you saw naked boobies on C-SPAN this evening while flipping channels (since it's unlikely you were actually sitting there watching it): uncensored, unpixelated clips from the M-rated "The Guy Game" and "Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude"were shown to a bored looking audience (including Senators Joe Lieberman and Herb Kohl) as part of a National Institure for Media and the Family briefing on its annual MediaWise Video Game Report Card.
Not really huge news, but a bit relevant considering the entire flap over titties that we've been going through this entire year. When 2004 goes into the books, it really will be "The year hooters destroyed society." There is a legitimate question of why this industry is so heavily regulated. I think it's because politicians, who are now pretty much the Vietnam era, see video gaming as primarily a children's hobby, something that people give up around age 18, and thus, concern and flap over violent video games like Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is justified. However, a casual google search reveals some startling facts that run contrary to that assessment. Firstly, the average age of gamer is nearly 30 years old ... Secondly, most games (85% of console games) are purchased by people over the age of 18 (Note that the ESRB's Mature rating only requires the purchaser to be over the age of 17, just as in movies). And perhaps most importantly, 92% of parents say that they monitor the content of the games their under-18-year-olds play. (source) This compares to 81% of movie-goers being over the age of 18 (actually, much much better) (source).
(Full article with NSFW pics: Fleshbot.com)
Are there bad games out there that kids shouldn't be playing? Absolutely. But there are bad movies, sitcoms, dramas, plays and events they probably shouldn't be watching either. That's the job of a parent. Parents don't complain when they take their child to a horrid movie, because they know if they do, the theater management will tell them they clearly knew what the rating was before they went into the movie. I haven't seen a single video game commercial that didn't give the rating of the game. The information is out there, people. Quit running to government to solve the problem of your own piss-poor parenting.
Now, if you are a parent who wants recommendations on which games his or her child should avoid, MediaFamily.org's report may be for you. I'm not arguing that there shouldn't be oversight. What I do object to is the belief that video games are somehow more insidious than movies or television.
I really do think that, in many cases, these sorts of lists are well-intentioned. Most of the games on that list (maybe not so much the Halo and Half-Life 2) are not age-appropriate for kids. Even though the games don't appear to be in any particular order (I think The Guy Game and the new Leisure Suit Larry game are games no one should play for a large variety of reasons...), they get the general idea right. There's just no way that a simple list of 10 can keep kids "safe". Is Psi-Ops any worse than, say, a Bloodrayne 2 or Chronicles of Riddick, or a Killzone? The only way to be safe is for parents to not rely on lists like this and be vigilant.
I will actually have a review of Rumble Roses up sometime later this week (That and MGS 3 and Capcom Fighting Evolution and other stuff). Stay tuned.