Zero Punctuation: Video Game Voters Network

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Well that was pointless, I was hoping for a funny game review :/

I know it's all about games and obviously if you love games you come here but was there any real reason to make a whole video basically advertising something that is already being highlighted in "The News Room" ?

Please correct me if I'm wrong but what I have heard would imply that this American "Free speech amendment to the constitution thingy" (Which may be something completely different to this, I know almost nothing about it) would only serve to make it illegal to sell games to people who are younger than the rating allows. This is already law in most parts of the world! If this is actually what is being discussed here then I fully support anyone who wants to bring the USA in line with countries like Britain. (And I'm not part of the "anti fun brigade")

mr_rubino:

There already is no ambiguity. It's called a ratings system, but unfortunately, the porked-up baby-boomers and aging Gen-Xers (Did I reverse those...?) aren't big on the whole "parenting" thing, so they don't do research. (There is, naturally, no such push when it comes to movies, showing a hypocrisy only the most useless people can't see.)

You see, there's one thing we couldn't expect Euros to particularly understand: Americans believe in personal freedom to choose for themselves what they want to expose themselves to. We don't see it as the government's place (MPAA is not a government agency, btw) to coo a lullaby into our ears and tuck us into beddy-bye at night.The problem is the aforementioned people (called "the Me generation" because they lose all ability to focus on anything that is not wholly about them) seem content to hand their kids off to the government without a thought as long as it gives them more time to watch soaps.

This isn't just about video games. But like I said, I can't imagine Euros getting that. You already approve of the government deciding what is good for you, so you really don't understand what the controversy is.

Oh well. Even the most conservative "I'm against big government unless it makes life easier for me" justice on the court (Scalia, for the record) won't support this liberal nanny-state policy out of California. And "Kennedy, J. dissenting" retired. So I think this will be a slam dunk. Free expression is big around here.

Lonan:
I couldn't care less about happens to the to the U.S., and am disappointed that Yahtzee would follow said country on Facebook and waste an entire video talking about the issues his new friend is facing. I waited a week for this video.

Try looking at a calendar or getting a routine. It may help you tell one day of the week from the next some time.

What year did you to exercise your personal freedom if you were Black? What happened to your personal freedom if you were an American citizen of Japanese origin in 1941? Did you get right to free speech if you had left wing sympathies in the 1950s? What protection did the constitution provide the native Americans? Is this the same constitution that values a slave as third of man? Try learning a little history otherwise you just look another dumb loudmouth American proving your own ignorance.

albino boo:

mr_rubino:

There already is no ambiguity. It's called a ratings system, but unfortunately, the porked-up baby-boomers and aging Gen-Xers (Did I reverse those...?) aren't big on the whole "parenting" thing, so they don't do research. (There is, naturally, no such push when it comes to movies, showing a hypocrisy only the most useless people can't see.)

You see, there's one thing we couldn't expect Euros to particularly understand: Americans believe in personal freedom to choose for themselves what they want to expose themselves to. We don't see it as the government's place (MPAA is not a government agency, btw) to coo a lullaby into our ears and tuck us into beddy-bye at night.The problem is the aforementioned people (called "the Me generation" because they lose all ability to focus on anything that is not wholly about them) seem content to hand their kids off to the government without a thought as long as it gives them more time to watch soaps.

This isn't just about video games. But like I said, I can't imagine Euros getting that. You already approve of the government deciding what is good for you, so you really don't understand what the controversy is.

Oh well. Even the most conservative "I'm against big government unless it makes life easier for me" justice on the court (Scalia, for the record) won't support this liberal nanny-state policy out of California. And "Kennedy, J. dissenting" retired. So I think this will be a slam dunk. Free expression is big around here.

Lonan:
I couldn't care less about happens to the to the U.S., and am disappointed that Yahtzee would follow said country on Facebook and waste an entire video talking about the issues his new friend is facing. I waited a week for this video.

Try looking at a calendar or getting a routine. It may help you tell one day of the week from the next some time.

What year did you to exercise your personal freedom if you were Black? What happened to your personal freedom if you were an American citizen of Japanese origin in 1941? Did you get right to free speech if you had left wing sympathies in the 1950s? What protection did the constitution provide the native Americans? Is this the same constitution that values a slave as third of man? Try learning a little history otherwise you just look another dumb loudmouth American proving your own ignorance.

Ah yes. The tried-and-true "We should not care about the legality of distributing mature video games because the United States is actually Nazi Germany, you sheeple" argument.

I'm not American, but it even bugs me. I'll help out however I can.

I'm more worried about the attacks on the used games industry rather than feeble attempts at restricting the 1st amendment. They tried it a long time ago with porn and now "fundamentalist" are trying to attack videogames, something else they don't/can't understand.

I agree with almost everything Yahtzee says, except I take issue with his conflation of "cutting edge games" and "interactive storytelling." This imposition of narrative on games is a byproduct of "game shame." Games want to be movies or real life so much more than they want to be GAMES that what you end up with is a really bad excuse for already-bad film writing OR a simulator with no victory conditions. Since WHEN is a criteria for a good game or a "cutting edge" game "storytelling?" Does TETRIS have a narrative? It's arguably the VERY best video game to date if your criteria are actually things like gameplay, elegant and original design, not only challenge and depth, but EMERGENT challenge and depth. (all from 7 little pieces.)

We've dug this ENORMOUS hole that obligates EVERY new game to slap a narrative onto it, forcing us to go through 15 minutes of tutorials, 20 minutes of cutscenes before we actually PLAY. But of course, "lack of story" can be a point against a game on a gameplay review...

What if you read a film review, and the reviewer's complaint was that the film didn't have a controller on the seat so the audience was forced to do QTE events to make the film progress? Would this make film as an art form BETTER or worse?

Even Yahtzee can fall victim to the fact that games are still a relatively immature art form, and that once we get a clue and realize it's about making the best GAME possible, rather than fulfill the arbitrary obligation to couple it with a (mostly poorly written) narrative, the genre can artistically progress in more "cutting edge" ways.

Does it work if you're Canadian... Bah, I'll just check at the site.

Why are you using the word 'gamer', Ben?

Invalid Postal code? They want support and they are not willing to receive it accross the border from their closest nieghbour or any other nation for that matter? Smooth move.

so close yet so far I'm Canadian

Did you feel weird doing a speech for Americans when you're British and live in Australia?

You sounded more impatient than passionate. :D

There are 257 comments so forgive me if someone already made this joke.
It's like Zero Punctuation meets Extra Credits. You can call it Extra Punctuation.....oh wait.

That episode needed to end with the word "TITS" for no reason whatsoever after the credits..

"TITS"

Just 2 minutes of awsometalk? ..its just not enough..not enough..

Zagzag:
Please correct me if I'm wrong but what I have heard would imply that this American "Free speech amendment to the constitution thingy" (Which may be something completely different to this, I know almost nothing about it) would only serve to make it illegal to sell games to people who are younger than the rating allows. This is already law in most parts of the world! If this is actually what is being discussed here then I fully support anyone who wants to bring the USA in line with countries like Britain. (And I'm not part of the "anti fun brigade")

The law itself would only make it illegal to sell games to people younger than the rating would allow.

BUT

The US does not currently have any laws for restricting the sales of movies/music/etc. to minors. If only video games had this law it would essentially set them apart from other forms of media. According to US law, they would be on the same level as pornography (IE lacking any possible artistic or educational value).

Hopefully you can see the problem with this.

mr_rubino:
Oh well. Even the most conservative "I'm against big government unless it makes life easier for me" justice on the court (Scalia, for the record) won't support this liberal nanny-state policy out of California.

Are you always this insulting to people who agree with you? Do you find it effective in convincing the ones who don't?

Zagzag:
Please correct me if I'm wrong but what I have heard would imply that this American "Free speech amendment to the constitution thingy" (Which may be something completely different to this, I know almost nothing about it) would only serve to make it illegal to sell games to people who are younger than the rating allows. This is already law in most parts of the world! If this is actually what is being discussed here then I fully support anyone who wants to bring the USA in line with countries like Britain. (And I'm not part of the "anti fun brigade")

First, boholikeu's response above me was a good one.

You're right that other countries do it. But a court ruling should never be influenced by standards in other countries. (They often are, mind you, because sometimes Justices don't read the job description and just find a reason to do what they want. But that's not the standard in how it should work.)

Laws are made by the legislature, but their power isn't infinite. Any branch of the government can only act in the manner allowed by the Constitution, which was passed by supermajority and ratified by the States. The Constitution was hard to pass and is difficult (but not impossible) to amend, so its job is to constrain any new laws that come. The Court's job is to say if the new law is something the government is allowed to do or not. That's what's going to happen here: a group of representatives passed a law and the court needs to decide if the law is permitted.

This is very specifically different from how Britain works. There, a centuries-old legal tradition has created a strong network of precedents which hold force. Since the United States was specifically founded by Constitution, that means the document holds chief power, not the court. In this case, two clauses are being tested against each other. One says that Congress has the power "To regulate Commerce" among the several States. The other says "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech".

So when a video game is sold, it's trade but is it also speech? That's what's going to be tested.

I've signed up, but it's mostly masturbation.

Hear me out.

I live in Vermont, a very blue state with a lot of liberal hippie ideas. The only guy in our state who really supports anything like this nonsense is Pat Leahy, and he'll never get voted out as long as A) He has a (D) next to his name and B) his oppnents are all morons and monsters. This is the guy who co-penned the Patriot Act and defended it until people actually read it. He's proposed a lot of legislation that deals with internet censorship (Usually under the guise of THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!) and piracy (Because he takes money from the film industry).

Generally, the leftist crazies of this state support free speech, so my vote won't matter. I've made peace with this. Vermont will always carry the blue guy or the red guy with such moderate intents that he is slagged off by the rest of the red states, because moderates are evil baby eating satan-spawn.

We're one of the last progressive states in this country (hats off to Oregon, you guys rock!). We're the gay marriage, "free" health care, socialist Representative state and I love that. But we have the influence of a dog trying to stop a speeding car with its face--when the driver's drunk and blindfolded.

So I'll do my part, because that's what I do, but for all my influence, I might as well be Canadian (Not that there's anything wrong with that. I love Canadia!).

What we really need are people in the Bible Belt, Texas, the Midwest, and California: The site of much of the controversy right now. And I hope we get them. Advertise this elsewhere and try and snag gamers. Art is important, and there should be no free speech exception simply because we don't like the speech.

See I'm doing a games design course, and we've recently learnt about censor within the media and the games industry, and I agree with every bloody gamer. The only problem I bloody have is I'm British therefore I can not sign up to this because I need to be living in a state where I can vote. living in Britain, this is ever so slightly impossible!

Video games are corrupting our children!

No your failed parenting and continual shifting of the blame for why your kids have turned out assholes is what is corrupting your children.

So I guesss this means nothing to Brits?

WRONG.

Our goverment is just as stupid. Only we need someone to set up a thing for us like that.
Go on someone...do it.

Zagzag:
Please correct me if I'm wrong but what I have heard would imply that this American "Free speech amendment to the constitution thingy" would only serve to make it illegal to sell games to people who are younger than the rating allows.

Here's the tricky part. In order to make a law that the games can't be sold based on their content, the games are no longer protected by our free speech amendment. According to our Constitution, for something that is protected speech there can be no laws made to restrict its sale. Therefore, in order for the law to stand it has to also be decided that video games are not protected as free speech. That has ramifications.

If games are no longer considered free speech, there will be absolutely nothing preventing other laws that do far worse than require ID to buy mature games. It would take one Columbine to get a bunch of shooters banned from sale. Or one 9/11 to get flight simulators banned. The free speech right exists to protect the people from the tyranny of the majority, and as a part of the "gaming minority" it's something we need to be really concerned about. Otherwise our hobby gets crushed and relegated to being a children's toy.

This is the thing though - the law itself is meaningless "protect the children" pandering. Game retailers already refuse to sell M-rated games to minors without an adult present at a far higher rate than R-rated movies or Explicit-rated CDs. The problem isn't with what the specific law is trying to do, because we already have that. The problem is what the law will cause in order to exist.

Verlander:
Out of interest (I fully support the sentiment), if video games start getting banned etc in America, does that not mean the industry will just move elsewhere, such as Europe, and produce them there? And like, Americans could only get them on illegal import?

The US is the largest game market on the planet, and any laws that change the types and content of games that can be sold here will dramatically change the games the rest of the world will see. Even European companies target the content of their games towards what can sell in the US. Game companies can't afford to ignore this market for major releases - unlike other restrictive countries, like Germany - instead, they'll change the games they make to be able to sell everywhere.

rembrandtqeinstein:
Not to crap in anyone's danish but the bankroll behind the VGVN is the ESA which is the lobbying arm of the game publishers.

The ESA is a lobbying organization, but that doesn't mean they're wrong about everything. It's to the advantage of gamers, developers, and publishers that games remain protected under the 1st Amendment.

RowdyRodimus:
Damn, you hit it out of the park with this. Here's a paragraph that basically tells kids it's ok to use others work in school without permission, but nowhere else.

That didn't make sense, so I looked it up. You're taking the quote out of context. What that text is saying is that using other peoples content as a part of your schoolwork can be counted as plagiarism, and that there can be serious academic consequences for it. Then it goes on to say that outside of schoolwork, fair use allows much more open uses of other people's content. But just because something is fair use doesn't mean it's not plagiarism - it can be both. You got the message backwards. It's actually a decent explanation of fair use rights.

Of course, the whole thing is set up as an anti-piracy advocate site, which is kind of understandable from their point of view. That doesn't change the relevancy of wanting games to be protected as free speech though.

EvilYoshi:
It's futile Yahtzee, our demographic is the least likely to get off our asses to go vote on something. The old gits, on the other hand, are the most likely to vote (they have nothing better to do anyways).

That's why it's even more important.

For any non-American gamers I would like to offer my greatest thanks for any and all support giving to this cause.

But My God between this upcoming supreme court case, The ACTA and the strange impending Vote I recently read about to Criminalize Soda-pop I'm beginning to debate a life in Canada

What exactly is the threat anyway? I'm having trouble finding out what this legislation/stuff would do.

Wait a second, Yahtzee's hat BLEEDS?

Chronamut:
What exactly is the threat anyway? I'm having trouble finding out what this legislation/stuff would do.

The bottom line is that video games will no longer be protected under the first amendment (Freedom of Speech), so a politician will literally be able to just point at a game and it will be taken of shelves in a moment's notice if this law passes.

This law is a big fucking deal.

Chronamut:
What exactly is the threat anyway? I'm having trouble finding out what this legislation/stuff would do.

Old joke:

A man goes up to a woman and asks "Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?" She says "for a million? Absolutely." Then he says "How about for $5 bucks?" She scoffs "What kind of woman do you think I am?" to which he retorts "We've already established that. Now we're just haggling over the price.

The problem specifically before the court is not what this particular law says so much as whether it has the right to say anything. Either the legislature has the right to restrict game sales or it doesn't. If a restriction is allowed, precedent will be established. Setting more actual laws later is just haggling.

Zachary Amaranth:
Generally, the leftist crazies of this state support free speech, so my vote won't matter. I've made peace with this. Vermont will always carry the blue guy or the red guy with such moderate intents that he is slagged off by the rest of the red states, because moderates are evil baby eating satan-spawn.

We're one of the last progressive states in this country (hats off to Oregon, you guys rock!). We're the gay marriage, "free" health care, socialist Representative state and I love that.

New Joke:

Q: How do you turn a hippie against free speech?
A: Tell him someone's profiting from it.

It's good to see people care about this. Take it from an Irish, you give an inch with people like this they only go for more. Em... I meant that purely in the area of censorship it wasn't until I re-read it I realised it sounded kinda IRA-ish.

What if, my "bit" involves your mom? Should i s still be doing it?

great PSA and a worthy cause, but unfortunately I've decided I'm not going to vote this year. It's too depressing. American politics are utter garbage at the moment. Both Democrats and Republicans are behaving like morons and I don't want to vote for either of them. Voting for a third party is also completely pointless outside of local (city/county) elections.

albino boo:

mr_rubino:

There already is no ambiguity. It's called a ratings system, but unfortunately, the porked-up baby-boomers and aging Gen-Xers (Did I reverse those...?) aren't big on the whole "parenting" thing, so they don't do research. (There is, naturally, no such push when it comes to movies, showing a hypocrisy only the most useless people can't see.)

You see, there's one thing we couldn't expect Euros to particularly understand: Americans believe in personal freedom to choose for themselves what they want to expose themselves to. We don't see it as the government's place (MPAA is not a government agency, btw) to coo a lullaby into our ears and tuck us into beddy-bye at night.The problem is the aforementioned people (called "the Me generation" because they lose all ability to focus on anything that is not wholly about them) seem content to hand their kids off to the government without a thought as long as it gives them more time to watch soaps.

This isn't just about video games. But like I said, I can't imagine Euros getting that. You already approve of the government deciding what is good for you, so you really don't understand what the controversy is.

Oh well. Even the most conservative "I'm against big government unless it makes life easier for me" justice on the court (Scalia, for the record) won't support this liberal nanny-state policy out of California. And "Kennedy, J. dissenting" retired. So I think this will be a slam dunk. Free expression is big around here.

Lonan:
I couldn't care less about happens to the to the U.S., and am disappointed that Yahtzee would follow said country on Facebook and waste an entire video talking about the issues his new friend is facing. I waited a week for this video.

Try looking at a calendar or getting a routine. It may help you tell one day of the week from the next some time.

What year did you to exercise your personal freedom if you were Black? What happened to your personal freedom if you were an American citizen of Japanese origin in 1941? Did you get right to free speech if you had left wing sympathies in the 1950s? What protection did the constitution provide the native Americans? Is this the same constitution that values a slave as third of man? Try learning a little history otherwise you just look another dumb loudmouth American proving your own ignorance.

I'm white and wasn't alive then. That's the funny thing about rights. Once you get them, they last.
But thanks for saying something relevant and important! You've shown me how educated you are on this topic by throwing out sentence fragments you picked up in 12th grade civics.
Your disapproval of free expression has been noted.

PoisonUnagi:

mr_rubino:

PoisonUnagi:

mr_rubino:
forgotten country

See, now you're just trolling.

Better a successful one than a failed one. Back in the real world, New Zealand still serves no purpose except perhaps providing some species of insect nobody particularly wants coming to their shores.
No wonder you're so bitter; your big brother is causing all manner of commotion in this debate and all you can do it sit there doing nothing. =(

You're not successful once you openly admit to trolling. Reported.

I guess it's better than saying something that adds to the conversation in any way. Better to sit there among your sheep and dirt, cursing the fact your country will never have a place of importance on the world stage.

Amarsir:

mr_rubino:
Oh well. Even the most conservative "I'm against big government unless it makes life easier for me" justice on the court (Scalia, for the record) won't support this liberal nanny-state policy out of California.

Are you always this insulting to people who agree with you? Do you find it effective in convincing the ones who don't?

When I'm right, I'm right. And in the absence of arguments showing I am wrong, I'm also right.
So far, you don't seem to have said anything that could in any way prove me wrong. Work on that. It's called "rebuttal" in the common parlance.

Ok, I admit I didn't read all 277 posts, (TL;DR). For all the Australians here though, get cracking. It's not just an American problem, our rights are more in jeopardy than theirs. HOWEVER, the South Australian AG who was blocking the R18 for games has stepped down. It's time to start lobbying (peacfully and through the correct channels) the new guy.

Also, read up on Clean Feed. With the introduction of the National Broadband Network, they're trying to slip in a Chinaesqe filter on our internet. No porn, no hacking sites, no torrents, in fact nothing the anti-fun brigade thinks might be even a little interesting.

So if you think, I'm an Aussie, what can I do? The answer is: Plenty!

First Daniel Floyd and now Yahtzee! Who else do you need to tell you to go do this thing!

I kid, I know plenty of people have already done they're part and are now just trying to tell everyone else to do their's.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here