First Ammedment Protection and Video Games

[BraveEarth]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/1961-Free-Speech

Kind of wanted to just post this and get opinions

[Wolfy]

Saddle up, people..it's time to march on Washington. o-o

And seriously, California...saying that Minors (I. E. anyone under 18) do not have the mental capacity to make decisions for themselves?...Seriously? You're calling everyone below a certain age basically mentally handicapped?

If Gaming isn't an Art form, then neither is some random guy just throwing paint onto a canvas and giving some bullshit explanation of what he felt at the time, neither are the best movies (Avatar, The Dark Knight, and other, more classic movies, like the old Indiana Jones films or Casablanca).

Also, if Video games are made not protected by the First Amendment, then god damn it, some asshole in the south wanting to burn a holy book shouldn't have his ass covered by it either, nor should a certain church who's initials are WBC.

Buuuut..that's just my opinion. >_>

[Wolfy]

O_o...Odd...I figured this would be a more hot button topic with gamers....I guess I'm the only one. o-o

[Brandon]

I can only talk about it so much before theres nothing left to say Wolfy

[Wolfy]

Well..I just figured someone else would have something else to say..maybe a counter-opinion to my own? *shrugs*

[Nyarly]

You're calling everyone below a certain age basically mentally handicapped?

I wouldn't say that this is implausible. Children rarely have good... mental abilites and I often wondered how they grow up to become reasonable, intelligent adults. But then I took a clear look at adults and everything maked sense.

[Serephino]

I thought it already was illegal to sell M rated games to minors, or is it a seller discretion thing? I'm okay with it not being legal to sell M rated games to minors, but gaming companies should be able to produce whatever they want.  There are a lot of adult gamers out there.  I don't think kids are the majority anymore.

It should be up to parents to decide whether or not their kids should be exposed to that kind of stuff.  There are games my boyfriend plays that I don't think are appropriate for say a ten year old.  Of course that's my opinion, and we all know that there are parents out there that don't seem to care. 

[Oniya]

Most sales-folk that I know will make the effort, whether or not it's a legal matter.  It doesn't stop the kid from finding a semi-comatose adult from buying it for them.

As for the minors and decision-making, the brain actually doesn't fully mature until the early 20's.  This is why we have such things as the juvenile court system.  It's also why all those ads for mail-order toys on TV say 'Must be 18 to order', even if they're showing something only a 7-year-old would be interested in.  If you want to get a credit card or apply for a loan, and you're under 18, they have to have a co-signer.

It's not that we're mentally handicapped until we're 18.  It's that you don't take a second-grader and hand them 'War and Peace'.

[Jude]

Gamestop has a policy where they will not sell games to people who aren't of the appropriate age rating (i.e. they won't sell teen games to people who aren't teen+ and mature games require 18+).  It's universally enforced in all of their stores throughout the nation, so this change wouldn't affect them directly.  Most specialty retailers have the same provisions, and I know Walmart and Kmart do as well.

And even that is unnecessary:  there are parental controls on all of the major consoles which parents can easily use to lock out kids from playing games of any rating (as well as limit the amount of time the child is allowed to play).  This law is not needed under the pretenses of empowering parents, because they already have all of the control that they need.

[Brandon]

Guess I might as well restate my case

Personally I could care less if people want to make it a crime to sell M rated games to minors. I dont really see a problem there as long as someone buying an inapproprpiate game for a minor isnt covered in the same law. That way, if I had a kid and he wanted a game like god of war I could still make the decision of whether or not I would let him play it

My problem isnt with the distribution of video games to minors. Its claiming that video games do not fall under free speech that I have a problem with and to a lesser extent the idea that they are not art. Video games are in every way art. Thats not to say every game falls into artistic just as not every piece of "modern artwork" ever made falls into that category either. In a medium where I can experience settings more richly detailed then middle earth like Rapture (Bioshock) or post apocolyptic earth (Fallout) and play as myself or at least as myself as I would be in a video games setting I find them an excellent means of escapism. By themselves they inspire technological growth but as individual games they can inspire political examination, itellectual curiousity, and even personal human introspection (no other medium has ever made me look at myself and think about the morality of my actions so thoroughly. Acctually I might even say no other medium has ever made me do that). How can a medium that does all this possibly not fall into free speech?

[Oniya]

Its claiming that video games do not fall under free speech that I have a problem with and to a lesser extent the idea that they are not art. Video games are in every way art.

Fully agree with that.  Not much more to say that people didn't already cover in the Roger Ebert thread a while back.

[Wolfy]

Most sales-folk that I know will make the effort, whether or not it's a legal matter.  It doesn't stop the kid from finding a semi-comatose adult from buying it for them.

As for the minors and decision-making, the brain actually doesn't fully mature until the early 20's.  This is why we have such things as the juvenile court system.  It's also why all those ads for mail-order toys on TV say 'Must be 18 to order', even if they're showing something only a 7-year-old would be interested in.  If you want to get a credit card or apply for a loan, and you're under 18, they have to have a co-signer.

It's not that we're mentally handicapped until we're 18.  It's that you don't take a second-grader and hand them 'War and Peace'.

What's the requirement for "Fully Mature" though? That's a gray area.

[Will]

Fully agree with that.  Not much more to say that people didn't already cover in the Roger Ebert thread a while back.

Crossposted for great justice semi-relevance.



I agree with Brandon (man, that is happening all too often lately!)!  I completely agree that video games are art, but enforcing more controls on accessibility to minors doesn't bother me in the slightest.  Parents should be making the decisions anyway.

[Oniya]

What's the requirement for "Fully Mature" though? That's a gray area.

Biologically speaking, it's when all of the growth phases have completed.  In specific, it's when the prefrontal cortex matures.  If you're interested in a more scholarly answer, this is a good starting point.

[Wolfy]

Yes Oniya..but even a scholar would tell you that everyone matures at their own rates. One person can be more "Mature" than another person of the same age...Biological and Environmental factors play equal parts in it.

[Oniya]

This is true, which is why there is always a range involved, but the fact remains that structures in the brain don't reach a mature level of functioning until they've developed a certain amount of connections.  Add to that the fact that we have so many barely-participating parents - like the guy in the video store with Mafia II - and there's no feedback to help those connections form.

The particularly relevant part of the link I provided (with my emphasis):

The nucleus accumbens, which directs motivated behavior, is responsible for how much
effort the organism will expend in order to seek rewards. In teenagers, an immature nucleus
accumbens is believed to result in preferences for activities that require low effort yet produce
high excitement. Real-world observations bear this out: most teenagers tend to favor activities
such as playing video- games, skate boarding and, unfortunately, substance use.

The amygdala is the structure responsible for integrating emotional reactions to
pleasurable and aversive experiences. It is believed that a developing amygdala contributes to
two behavioral effects: the tendency for adolescents to react explosively to situations rather than
with more controlled responses, and the propensity for youth to mis-read neutral or inquisitive
facial expressions of others as a sign of anger.

And one of the last areas to mature is the prefrontal cortex, located just behind the
forehead. Some times referred to as “the seat of sober second thought,” it is the area of the brain
responsible for the complex processing of information, ranging from making judgments, to
controlling impulses, foreseeing consequences, and setting goals and plans. An immature
prefrontal cortex is thought to be the neurobiological explanation for why teenagers show poor
judgment and too often act before they think.

[Spice]

I have no problem with parents who don't let their their children play violent video games. It's okay when video game makers put ratings on their game. And I don't object when stores like Gamestop use ratings to limit what age they will sell a particular game to a minor.

The parents know their kids. The game makers designed and know the game. The store owners can sell whatever they want to whoever they want within certain boundaries. These aren't free speech issues. It's just private actors doing what makes sense to them right or wrong.

But I don't like it when government expands its view of "bad speech," which is what this California law does. This is why we have the First Amendment. It's a mistake in my view when laws try to craft out exceptions to its protections. The Supreme Court should find this to be an unconstitutional law.

It won't.

[Jude]

•    40% of gamers are women, and the average age of a gamer is 34
•    76% of parents believe parental controls in all gaming systems are useful
•    More parents monitor their children’s video game playing than any other form of entertainment
•    93% of the time parents are present when games are purchased or rented
•    In 2009, nearly half of all video games sold were rated E for Everyone

http://www.esrb.org/about/video-game-industry-statistics.jsp

And a lot more here.  They basically conclusively show, in my opinion, that there's no need for the California law whatsoever.

[Wolfy]

•    40% of gamers are women, and the average age of a gamer is 34
•    76% of parents believe parental controls in all gaming systems are useful
•    More parents monitor their children’s video game playing than any other form of entertainment
•    93% of the time parents are present when games are purchased or rented
•    In 2009, nearly half of all video games sold were rated E for Everyone

http://www.esrb.org/about/video-game-industry-statistics.jsp

And a lot more here.  They basically conclusively show, in my opinion, that there's no need for the California law whatsoever.

And yet.......