Grand Theft Auto changed to an adults only game!

[lord of the mark]

"The people going after computer games are the same kind that burnt rock and roll records in the late 1950s and early 1960s... I find it hilarious watching the old films (news reels) from inland US towns with the "respectable" inhabitants headed by the priest, the teacher or the doctor (all males, of course) gathering at the city square for a little LP barbeque... "


and why shouldnt they have? Can you deny that rock was part of a cultural change that led to things that were undesirable from their point of view?

"When the VCR came in the late 1970s/early 1980s there was also an outcry... People who bought VCRs either rented i) porn movies or ii) the Texas chain saw massacre..."

How old are you? I was around when the VCR came out, and i dont recall any such outcry, although the VCR WAS heavily used for porn at the beginning.

"Judas Priest, a heavy metal band, was taken to court in the 1980s or 1990s, accused of having recorded secret satanic messages on their LPs... Play their records backwards and Satan's voice will be heard... They were acquitted (?) after having played other LPs (with well-known children's lullabys IIRC?) backwards in court, revealing more "satanic" messages... I guess LPs are not supposed to be played backwards... "

But why shouldnt people have the right to question the values expressed in say, heavy metal music? There are always silly people who believe silly things - there were, I suppose people who believed crazy things about the automobile - that doesnt mean it isnt something with safety and pollution consequences, and effects on communities. That people fear the new doesnt automatically mean the new is benign.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Carolus Rex
I could list a hundred other cases, where intolerant people (not surprisingly under one religious banner or other) have tried to stop, censor, demean or otherwise prevent "non-conformist" people from expressing themselves... The strange (not really) thing is that, in hindsight (with the passing of time), it all seems so ridiculous...

Non - conformist??? Now whos kidding who here?? This isnt hippy dippy free expression we're talking about. Its gilt edged corporate sponsored money makers, from GTA to rap to violent films. Fortunes in Hollywood depend on this stuff - and everywhere I look, letting your kid play GTA, letting your preteens watch R rated movies, following hip hop fashions is what the CONFORMISTS are doing - saying no to that, whether its done by religious folks, or by real hippy dippy types or by (my favorites) people who are BOTH, is the non-conformist option. Dont throw this brave noncomformist BS at me.

[lord of the mark]

'Posted Sunday, Sep. 26, 2004
Pester power. Tweening. Viral marketing. Juliet Schor, a psychiatrist and economist, exposes the multibillion-dollar advertising schemes aimed at America's kids in Born to Buy: The Commercialized Child and the New Consumer Culture. TIME met with Schor:

Why have kids become the target of so much advertising? Kids have a lot more money than they once did, mostly from parents, grandparents and friends. Kids also are much more empowered in parental expenditures, from buying a car to picking a tourist destination to food purchases. Children are inside much more, and they watch more television and other electronic media.

What type of advertising is going on in schools? About 31% of the nation's middle and high schoolers are subjected to a daily news program called Channel One, which is mandatory viewing. If your school has signed on for this, it's a 10-minute broadcast, plus two minutes of overt advertising. The products they advertise tend to be junk food, violent movies — a questionable set of products. There are schools that accept advertising on their buses, on their walls.

How well do marketing messages work on young kids? Market researchers find kids can identify brands from something like 18 months old. Some brand logos are better known than almost anything else: the Golden Arches, Mickey Mouse, the Nike swoosh.

You write about tweening. What is it? Tweening is the marketing of sexually revealing clothing to kids, along with teen music, makeup to girls, more violent toys to younger boys and so forth. A tween is what years ago used to be called a preteen. Some marketers have even stretched the concept of tween down to 6-year-olds.

What impact do kids have on parents' purchases? Researchers estimate that about $600 billion of adult spending is now "influenced" by children. If you look at the kids' channels, you will see adult products being advertised. Hotels, automobiles, technology — kids weigh in on a wide range of parental purchases.

What is trans-toying? It's an industry term for taking everyday utilitarian objects and turning them into toys. It's turning a shampoo container into a toy by putting a character on top or on a toothbrush. It's turning a Band-Aid into a tattoo, a food into a toy.

What impact does all of this have on kids? I found that with most of the kids I interviewed and surveyed, the more consumer culture they were involved in, the more they had conflicts and fights with their parents. Those kids who are heavily involved in consumer culture are depressed; they're anxious; they don't feel well.

Why are they anxious and depressed? They're more likely to have poor self-esteem, which is not a surprise because a lot of the messages consumer culture sends them are that you're nobody if you don't have the right tennis shoes or you're not drinking the right soft drink. Life isn't fun unless you're eating candy. Your parents are nerds. Your teachers are nerds. School is a bore.

Do you favor laws against these practices? I do. The Federal Government has really abdicated its responsibilities in terms of regulating the kids' marketplace. There's something referred to as the Parents' Bill of Rights, some of which is being introduced in Congress, to get some control over the kind of Wild West atmosphere that has developed in children's marketing in the last 15 years.

What should parents do? Don't be afraid to take a pretty restrictive stand toward your children's relation to consumer culture. You don't have to let them watch television. You don't have to let them have products just because they say everyone else does. You have to have the courage to go against the culture. From the Oct. 04, 2004 issue of TIME magazine '

[Carolus Rex]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

To what age group are you referring?

Well... I don't know about the US legislation in this area; that's why I asked above when it's legitimite to have sex in the US... Dis answered, perhaps you can verify his claims?

In Sweden it's 15 years, which admittedly feels a little early (child of Thor, now it's my turn to sound old! )... My point was that if it's legal to have sex under 18 in the US, then it feels awkward to rate a computer game containing sexual material +18 (or above the age that having sex becomes legal)...

Originally posted by lord of the mark

As for content, i think there is certainly more danger. When i grew up the beatles and the Stones were the dangers (as far as pop culture was concerned) they look pretty damned innocent today. In any case, the argument, "ah dont worry, people always say how bad it is" seems glib to me.

Ah, that's another good example! The Beatles! Yeah... They were well-dressed in the early years (they had proper suits! ), were witty and had a lot of charm... Can anyone today understand the commotion? "Get a hair-cut and a job, lads!" "Singin' about love and holding hands, they are! Shameful, 'tis!"

Same thing with Elvis when American TV closed up on him... Whenever the girls scream you know he does a little huzzlin' with his hips... Good thing they didn't show that! "What will it do to all our young ones; which dangerous thoughts will come to their innocent minds?"

Originally posted by lord of the mark

You mean that hardly any kids will end up commmitting murder?
Great. The number of teen suicides is disturbingly high. Look at the total number of people with depression, anxiety, etc. I want childhood to be more than the avoidance of total disaster. I want it to be a time of joy, and discovery, and a basis for a healthy life.

No, of course that's not only what I want (a propos avoiding total disaster). My point was on the contrary that most people grow and mature. I believe being a teenager is hard no matter what society looks like; it doesn't have so much to do with what's allowed or not as it is a difficult process of personal growth.

Carolus

[Carolus Rex]

Wow! I wrote a reply to your first response to my post and when I post it, I find 3 more...

Looks as if it's going to be a busy night! Hello Google, here I come!

Carolus

[Carolus Rex]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

and why shouldnt they have? Can you deny that rock was part of a cultural change that led to things that were undesirable from their point of view?

You seriously don't think that burning or destroying records is overreacting? Whatever happened to sensible, intelligent dialogue?

The step from burning records to burning books is not very big, is it? Books can also be part of a cultural change, challenging mainstream ideas and old ways of living... You want to defend burning books as well? There is a dark path here that I can follow, but I won't...

Originally posted by lord of the mark

How old are you? I was around when the VCR came out, and i dont recall any such outcry, although the VCR WAS heavily used for porn at the beginning.

I'm 35 (born 1970). My fault; I referred to Sweden, where this happened.

Originally posted by lord of the mark

But why shouldnt people have the right to question the values expressed in say, heavy metal music?

Of course it's their right, I believe in the freedom of expression and so do you, right?

Originally posted by lord of the mark

There are always silly people who believe silly things - there were, I suppose people who believed crazy things about the automobile - that doesnt mean it isnt something with safety and pollution consequences, and effects on communities. That people fear the new doesnt automatically mean the new is benign.

That's why I brought up the Judas Priest case. Play a record backwards and of course it will sound like satanic verses. Some would claim that Judas Priest's records sound like that even when played forwards, but that's another matter.

Cultural and societal change is inevitable. Why is change so bad? Do you think there's an ideal state of things, deviations from which are necessarily bad?

Edit: About believing crazy things. IIRC some people in the early 19th century thought that travelling with trains would endanger one's ability to see. And I didn't google this...

Carolus

[DrSpike]

What game were we discussing again?

[Carolus Rex]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Non - conformist??? Now whos kidding who here?? This isnt hippy dippy free expression we're talking about. Its gilt edged corporate sponsored money makers, from GTA to rap to violent films. Fortunes in Hollywood depend on this stuff - and everywhere I look, letting your kid play GTA, letting your preteens watch R rated movies, following hip hop fashions is what the CONFORMISTS are doing - saying no to that, whether its done by religious folks, or by real hippy dippy types or by (my favorites) people who are BOTH, is the non-conformist option. Dont throw this brave noncomformist BS at me.

Please, lord of the mark... Why so aggressive? I just try to give you my point of view and hear yours.

What I meant with the "non-conformist" part you refer to, is that when something non-mainstream appears (like rock and roll in the 1950s or heavy metal in the 1970s, or why not jazz in Hitler Germany?) it is immediately viewed as something dangerous, threatening the current way of life and something that needs to be controlled or, better yet, eliminated...

Why is that?

Carolus

[Carolus Rex]

Originally posted by DrSpike

What game were we discussing again?

The-love-thy-fellow-Apolytoner one!

lotm, I have yet to read your final post, but I will play some Civ 2 MP now. I know you'll excuse me for answering it later...

BTW, I haven't said anything contrary to society being overly commercialised. I've seen some sad/scary documentaries about companies targeting kids in, yes, the US. Apparently they recruit "spies" that gather all their friends and show off the company's products to get a feel for what's in and what's out...

More later!

Carolus

[Imran Siddiqui]

You know, I think it's high time someone shut down the ESRB and the ******* holier-than-thou gasp they have given to this mod.

**** them! GTA-SA for EVERYONE! If the parents don't like it, they don't have to buy it and they don't have to keep it in their houses. Yeah, blame society for their utter lack of failure as parents.

I'll say it here, those parents who want GTA-SA banned because they think their kids will get the game and suddenly start killing cops are BAD PARENTS! Society would be better if they were eliminated .

There is this grandmother who bought the game for her 14 year old kid!! Then they changed the rating from M (which means over 17, you dip**** ****!) to AO (18 and over). Now she's suing!! What an utter moron!

[child of Thor]

I'm just concerned that in the states in particular there seems to be much more appitite to pursue the legal path in these issues concerning games.
I don't want to see any draconian laws passed that would affect a games development. One way to avoid this is for the games industry to maybe take its own steps to appease the growing concerns.
Maybe with this option we will see less sex/nudity(but to be honest this is so rare anyway) and from my point of view less graphic violence in games. So avoiding the demonisation of what is to most of us our favourite pastime?

The problem is i dont see this being likely to happen - the big players know what makes money and will continue to use the methods that gets the bucks(sex+violence sell, especially to the impresionable.).
So it may well be down to the lobyists and non-gamers to address the issue with the law/legal approach. It sucks though

I chose not to buy any GTA game past the first one(the 2D top down one). I didn't enjoy the message of the game in the context of the current problems we experience in society, so chose not to support it with my money. I don't have kids, but if i did and they showed the kind of behaviour traits i see in young people all around London every day; i probably wouldn't let them play the later version either. I don't think games like GTA-SA are helpful in their development as young adults.

For me games were an instramental part in my development. I played a lot of strat games, they helped me develope excellent problem solving skills.

So games can be an excellent hobby for the young IMHO. It just depends on the message of the game.

Games had a much stronger impact on me than either books or film - the interactive nature of the game makes it a more powerful vehicle. I think we should be very aware of this when making games that we know young people will be playing.

You youngsters can scoof now - but when you get a bit older you'll be saying the same sad things about your generation of youth

[Carolus Rex]

lotm,

In response to your last post let me quote myself (from my first response to you):

Originally posted by Carolus Rex

A society built on consumption, where individuals are judged from what they own and earn (and not from who they are) is an empty society indeed. Unfortunatley, that's what we live in and I don't like it any more than you do...

In other words, I don't understand what you want to tell me with your post. There's nothing new in it to me, and there's nothing important in it that I disagree with. I haven't defended the mass-consumption society...

We are free to choose how we live in that society, however. We can choose not to participate in activities or behaviour that we do not like. And I'm pretty sure that the two of us are intelligent enough to do just that, each according to our own beliefs.

Not too long ago, that was not possible. Stray outside the mainstream (religious, music, clothes, hairstyle, or other) and you'd be an outcast. That's a conformist society in my book and I don't see how that can be preferred?

Carolus

[lord of the mark]

to carolus rex - of course i dont want to see irrational acts, I want reasonable dialogue. And I see, wrt to games, a lot of attempts at reasonable dialogue - folks arent playing GTA and other games backwards or whatever, theyre looking at actual content. Theyre not having bonfires and cursing it, theyre discussing what an appropriate rating should be. I see in your posts, and in much discussion, by dragging in irrational reactions from the 50's, say, an attempt to confuse the issue, and to demonize those who want to have a serious discussion.

You think in the 19050s there was a conformist society, that made life hard for people who wanted to be different? Sure. This isnt the 1950's, not even here in the US. As far as i can see (and i may be biased, as i live in a large northeastern city, not in the bible belt) it far harder today to live according to traditional values, and to resist the mass of violence and sex laden culture. I really think youre confusing who is the counterculture, and who is the oppressive mainstream. I see hollywood types, who purvey the worst sh*t for purely commercial purposes, regularly (and hypocritically) draping themselves in the aura of past countercultures. I dont like that very much.

Change is inevitable - yes, but 1. Not all change is good OR inevitable - some changes can and should be opposed. What means are appropriate to oppose them is of course something worthy of discussion. 2. Some changes that ARE good need to happen slowly, so that the society and culture can absorb them. To much change too fast can lead to backlash.


IS - of course Rockstar has the right to not have their games rated if they choose. And retailers have the similar right to not carry them if theyre not rated (I think many of the largest bricks and mortar retailers wont carry unrated games) If you think Rockstar and Take Two are going to make that decision out of first amendment idealism, rather than business decisions, i suspect your misjudging them. I cant see what good would be accomplished by ending the rating system - its already hard enough for parents, who have to follow different ratings systems for movies, games, and TV, each rating system being rather arbitrary (as some here have already pointed out wrt games) - do you really expect parents to know the content of each and every game?


COT - did you see, GTA:SA has been banned in Australia. Thats right. The govt denied it a rating, which makes it ILLEGAL to sell it. No such law in the States. Its not illegal to sell ANY games here, AFAIK. All this debate is about what is now a voluntary rating system, which matters economically because the largest retailers use it (well at least they wont carry AO games) NOT about govt policy - at least not yet. And yet everyone focuses on how prudish the UNITED STATES is, how the USA has problems with freedom of speech. Australia can ban the friggin game and nobody bats an eye.

[child of Thor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
edit...
COT - did you see, GTA:SA has been banned in Australia. Thats right. The govt denied it a rating, which makes it ILLEGAL to sell it. No such law in the States. Its not illegal to sell ANY games here, AFAIK. All this debate is about what is now a voluntary rating system, which matters economically because the largest retailers use it (well at least they wont carry AO games) NOT about govt policy - at least not yet. And yet everyone focuses on how prudish the UNITED STATES is, how the USA has problems with freedom of speech. Australia can ban the friggin game and nobody bats an eye.

wow - no i didnt know that. Now that is not a good result for game developers. But i can see it as a knee-jerk reaction, and we might end up with more such actions sadly, before everyone gets sensible about things again.

Atleast in the games industry armegedon of the future - I can still provide links to crusty old(and legal) games that wont upset anyone.....a small crumb of comfort?

[Carolus Rex]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

to carolus rex - of course i dont want to see irrational acts, I want reasonable dialogue. And I see, wrt to games, a lot of attempts at reasonable dialogue - folks arent playing GTA and other games backwards or whatever, theyre looking at actual content.

True.

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Theyre not having bonfires and cursing it, theyre discussing what an appropriate rating should be. I see in your posts, and in much discussion, by dragging in irrational reactions from the 50's, say, an attempt to confuse the issue, and to demonize those who want to have a serious discussion.

Well... My intention was not to demonise those who are genuinely concerned... I just wanted to give some perspective when I mentioned those historical cases...

Today we can readily (or?) agree that the reactions in the 1950s were "irrational", but had you said that back then to the people involved... It's difficult to distance oneself from one's own era... Who can tell what "the burning records" - overreaction is in our times?

Originally posted by lord of the mark

You think in the 19050s there was a conformist society, that made life hard for people who wanted to be different? Sure. This isnt the 1950's, not even here in the US. As far as i can see (and i may be biased, as i live in a large northeastern city, not in the bible belt) it far harder today to live according to traditional values, and to resist the mass of violence and sex laden culture. I really think youre confusing who is the counterculture, and who is the oppressive mainstream. I see hollywood types, who purvey the worst sh*t for purely commercial purposes, regularly (and hypocritically) draping themselves in the aura of past countercultures. I dont like that very much.

I think you have a point here, but my point is still valid. It's not a question of whether a mainstream religious group "oppresses" a non-religious "outcast" group or the other way around... The common denominator is intolerance towards people outside of the "mainstream group" (whatever that is)... In other words, it's equally bad...

I think I can relate to what you say about "hard to live according to traditional values". In Sweden, religion is more or less dead, but (caveats):

i) not everyone would agree; we have our own bible belt

ii) we have a lot of immigrants with strong religious faith and

iii) this isn't to say that people are not searching for spiritual guidance; they are, but it's an individual quest (religious communities are relatively weak, but see i) above)

So, in my experience (which need not be a correct description of swedish society) it's more odd to say you're a christian than saying you're an agnostic. Or rather, people don't really care what you believe in.

Hence, it's not an issue if our prime minister believes in a God or not (the current one does), whereas the US still awaits its first agnostic president... If you're an american and don't claim to be a believer in God, then the highest office in your country is out of reach for you.

I don't think you can understand how utterly strange it feels to listen to Bush speak in biblical terms, or seeing american politicians swearing on the bible... God (in any form) is completely absent in the political debate here (unless it's about religion's place in the educational system)... Religion seems to be as strong as ever in the US, but I don't live there so what do I know...

Originally posted by lord of the mark

And yet everyone focuses on how prudish the UNITED STATES is, how the USA has problems with freedom of speech. Australia can ban the friggin game and nobody bats an eye.

I didn't know that. Heck, I don't even know the reaction to all this in my own country... Perhaps because there hasn't been any?! I'll have to check...

Carolus