News: Renewed Furor Over Video Game Violence
Posted by Shocker :: 10:30 AM
Not the latest of news, but I wanted to back off the story for a bit until people sort of moved on from it.
A video game simulation of President John F. Kennedy's 1963 assassination released this week sparked outrage yesterday from a leading entertainment decency watchdog.
In "JFK: Reloaded," the player views Kennedy's fateful Dallas motorcade from the book depository tower in which Oswald sat and is charged with the mission of assassinating the president. The game debuted Monday to coincide with the 41st anniversary of Kennedy's assassination. Traffic is offering a $100,000 prize to the first player to "most accurately re-create the three shots fired by Lee Harvey Oswald," according to a news release issued Monday.
Does this cross the line? For myself, I think it's, again, a big disconnect from the attitudes that older politicans have about games versus the reality that is there. Last week, I gave some facts about video game players that stated that a good majority of players are adults (18+) and are capable of making these decisions without politicians' help. But the statements in the article are a bit more insidious than that. Lieberman outright threatens developers and publishers with possible legal action for "contemplating violent action against an elected official." Please.
Video games are a form of media, and like all media, sometimes acts are simulated that the participator would never do, but wants to experience. When we watch a movie like Rambo, are we actively involved in the killing of commandos in the jungle? Or more relevantly, when we buy books, watch TV shows, attend movies, and read magazines about the assassination of JFK, or any figure, are we any more or less culpable for the promotion of that event?
Moreover, where is the outrage over games like Dynasty Warriors, in which you simulate the assassinations of leaders of Chinese dynasties. Oh, wait. That aroma you're catching is the smell of hypocricy. Because it's tragic to you, now it's a problem. If politicians want to make hay, let them. But don't start telling me that I'm culpable for promoting the assassination of a president if I'm interested in a game, when more pure profit has already been made over exploitation of his assassination through books, magazines, movies and television than this game could ever make.
This, by the way, brings up our second ever
QUESTION OF THE WEEK
How do you guys feel about this? Do you agree with the way I stated it, or do you think that I'm full of it? What about the broader implications of games like this? Will its acceptance, tacit as it may be open the gates for mainstream games about assassinating current political figures?
Respond in comments!