Games on Trial

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Games on Trial

We evaluate the Supreme Court's position on whether games are protected by the First Amendment.

Read Full Article

How about if a parent doesn't want their kid to play a game they tell them they can't?

AC10:
How about if a parent doesn't want their kid to play a game they tell them they can't?

That would be responsible.

The problem is that this law is writen to "protect" parents that do not review what their children ask for. The parents that walk into Game stop with scribbled christmas lists and ask for games without understanding the ratings system or even looking at the ESRB designations.

As a parent who is an avid fan of the medium, I make it a point to keep my copies of M rated games put away and play them when my child is asleep. When he is around and he wants to play with his dad, I let him play drums on Lego Rock Band or we play some more rated E games. To me, it's common sense. To most of those who were born just 5 years before me, it's a mystery.

We have to accept that it is those people, around age 40 to 60, that are in charge of the country at the moment. Those people, who would never even look at the true experience behind a solid M rated game like Mass Effect or Bioshock, are just more prone to seeing a story about a game like Postal or Rape Lay and make sweeping generalizations because that is what ignorance breeds.

Even if we loose, in 5 to 10 years when a more informed generation comes to power these restrictions can be changed. It's just a matter of having people who actually care in the right place.

Jhereg42:

AC10:
How about if a parent doesn't want their kid to play a game they tell them they can't?

That would be responsible.

The problem is that this law is writen to "protect" parents that do not review what their children ask for. The parents that walk into Game stop with scribbled christmas lists and ask for games without understanding the ratings system or even looking at the ESRB designations.

The CA law only affects kids who walk into gamestop and ask to buy games. If a parent buys violent games for their kids it's still legal.

Were any of the arguments made in light of the already present self-labeling system, the type of thing that allowed movies, music and comics to avoid national censorship? The "M" on a game allows a parent to know what they are buying, as well as what is on their kids' shelves, at a glance, just like the DVDs and (ahem, out dated I know) CDs they have there. If we are talking about enjoining physical retailers in California (and anywhere else these control freak laws pass), that just gives a real advantage to digital and illegal means of getting the same content, which equals LESS REVENUE FOR THAT STATE TO TAX.

Smart move, Gulivornia.

Jhereg42:
make sweeping generalizations because that is what ignorance breeds.

Exactly, and well also that we as gamers sort of don't always show that we are as intelligent and normal and behaved just like anyone else which hinders peoples opinion of us. not saying all of us are hooligans but those who are have a bigger impact than those of us who aren't.

Father Time:

Jhereg42:

AC10:
How about if a parent doesn't want their kid to play a game they tell them they can't?

That would be responsible.

The problem is that this law is writen to "protect" parents that do not review what their children ask for. The parents that walk into Game stop with scribbled christmas lists and ask for games without understanding the ratings system or even looking at the ESRB designations.

The CA law only affects kids who walk into gamestop and ask to buy games. If a parent buys violent games for their kids it's still legal.

No it doesn't. If it passes, given time parents won't be able to walk into GameStop and buy the game for their kids because GameStop won't stock the game. Neither will Walmart, Target, Best Buy, and so on.

It's always postal 2 they go for.

Postal 2 is such a small blip on the gaming radar that it really shouldn't even be in the debate. It's ancient, we all know it's horrible, and its gimmick doesn't last long even in the hands of children. But politicians LOVE it, because they can point to it and say "Look at that horrible games industry, look what they did".

I'll support this law as soon as the same restrictions is applied to all other forms of speech, media, and art. Since that will never happen (nor can it), then i won't ever support this law.

The Supreme Court struck down the Crush Video ban. Those are actual video captures of animals being crushed by high-heel shoes for the purpose of sexual gratification. If the Supreme Court considers this type of media to be protected speech, then i can't ever see how violent video games couldn't be. (love the double negative)

Father Time:
[quote="Jhereg42" post="6.243229.8830867"]

The CA law only affects kids who walk into gamestop and ask to buy games. If a parent buys violent games for their kids it's still legal.

Honestly this is where I think the danger from the law can come in. I mean, how often is a parent not there, and how often will a parent who is all of the sudden horrified by what they bought going to react?

From experience, they will blame the store that sold them the game. A lot of the issue comes in how the faults are reported. He said/she said is going to play into fines and litigation.

mjc0961:

Father Time:

Jhereg42:

AC10:
How about if a parent doesn't want their kid to play a game they tell them they can't?

That would be responsible.

The problem is that this law is writen to "protect" parents that do not review what their children ask for. The parents that walk into Game stop with scribbled christmas lists and ask for games without understanding the ratings system or even looking at the ESRB designations.

The CA law only affects kids who walk into gamestop and ask to buy games. If a parent buys violent games for their kids it's still legal.

No it doesn't. If it passes, given time parents won't be able to walk into GameStop and buy the game for their kids because GameStop won't stock the game. Neither will Walmart, Target, Best Buy, and so on.

That makes no sense.

For starters those companies all ready don't sell M games to minors (or at least gamestop doesn't) as their company policy, even though it's legal to sell them those games.

And besides Wal mart and Target all ready stock things that are illegal to sell to minors. Alcohol and cigarettes.

Father Time:

mjc0961:

Father Time:

Jhereg42:

AC10:
How about if a parent doesn't want their kid to play a game they tell them they can't?

That would be responsible.

The problem is that this law is writen to "protect" parents that do not review what their children ask for. The parents that walk into Game stop with scribbled christmas lists and ask for games without understanding the ratings system or even looking at the ESRB designations.

The CA law only affects kids who walk into gamestop and ask to buy games. If a parent buys violent games for their kids it's still legal.

No it doesn't. If it passes, given time parents won't be able to walk into GameStop and buy the game for their kids because GameStop won't stock the game. Neither will Walmart, Target, Best Buy, and so on.

That makes no sense.

For starters those companies all ready don't sell M games to minors (or at least gamestop doesn't) as their company policy, even though it's legal to sell them those games.

And besides Wal mart and Target all ready stock things that are illegal to sell to minors. Alcohol and cigarettes.

But, of course, those store policies are driven more by external pressures and corporate image concerns more than anything else. I'd imagine that if they ever lost their minds and decided to sell M-rated games to whomever wanted to buy them and argued that there's no law against them doing so, then a horde of white, middle-class, middle-aged, suburban mothers would descend upon their annual shareholder meetings in a convoy of minivans and quickly make them regret that decision. Otherwise, and as long as to do so showed a profit at the bottom line, they'd be selling M-rated games to kids hand over fist.

I wish John Galt was here...

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your heart's content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

And hat's off to you. You're quite well-written for still being in high school. And feisty, too. I like feisty. It's a fine quality of character.

Wait, there's a game where you beat innocent schoolgirls to death with a shovel, pour gasoline on them and then urinate on them?!? 0_o

....pics or it didn't happen?

Also, I think this could pretty much be summed up as a situation involving parental supervision and responsibility; if you're "too busy" to make sure the game you got little Jimmy (or what he borrowed from a friend/is playing in general) isn't about beating up hookers, you should probably get help with your poor parenting skills or, to be more specific, your lack thereof.

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your hearts content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

No worries, I knew you were joking, that why I used the word "shall" so much. Orwell's not my cup of tea, lord, reading Animal Farm was torture! If someone doesn't like my references they can kiss my ass for all I'm concerned, and for some reason I don't think that the average Escapist is familiar with Ayn Rand's works, and if you liked "1984" I would recomend "Anthem" by Mrs. Rand.

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your hearts content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

No worries, I knew you were joking, that why I used the word "shall" so much. Orwell's not my cup of tea, lord, reading Animal Farm was torture! If someone doesn't like my references they can kiss my ass for all I'm concerned, and for some reason I don't think that the average Escapist is familiar with Ayn Rand's works, and if you liked "1984" I would recomend "Anthem" by Mrs. Rand.

I loved "1984" but I loved "Animal Farm" even more. I'm both lazy and short attention-spanned. If you can't quickly tell your tale, you'll quickly lose me. And Rand isn't exactly short-winded.

AC10:
How about if a parent doesn't want their kid to play a game they tell them they can't?

But that would involve the parent actually taking responsibility for the kid and we can't have that, can we? /sarcasm _

Altorin:
It's always postal 2 they go for.

Postal 2 is such a small blip on the gaming radar that it really shouldn't even be in the debate. It's ancient, we all know it's horrible, and its gimmick doesn't last long even in the hands of children. But politicians LOVE it, because they can point to it and say "Look at that horrible games industry, look what they did".

Does Anyone own that, that thing.

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your hearts content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

No worries, I knew you were joking, that why I used the word "shall" so much. Orwell's not my cup of tea, lord, reading Animal Farm was torture! If someone doesn't like my references they can kiss my ass for all I'm concerned, and for some reason I don't think that the average Escapist is familiar with Ayn Rand's works, and if you liked "1984" I would recomend "Anthem" by Mrs. Rand.

I loved "1984" but I loved "Animal Farm" even more. I'm both lazy and short attention-spanned. If you can't quickly tell your tale, you'll quickly lose me. And Rand isn't exactly short-winded.

Actually Anthem is only about 110 pages long, really good read I recomend it highly.

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your hearts content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

No worries, I knew you were joking, that why I used the word "shall" so much. Orwell's not my cup of tea, lord, reading Animal Farm was torture! If someone doesn't like my references they can kiss my ass for all I'm concerned, and for some reason I don't think that the average Escapist is familiar with Ayn Rand's works, and if you liked "1984" I would recomend "Anthem" by Mrs. Rand.

I think everyone on the internet is familiar with Ayn Rand's works after about a month-two months in a forum. Don't flatter yourself.

OT: something, something, censorship is bad in this case. Some of those Supreme Court Judges sound hella cool.

ERM, why has California suddenly declared war on the video games industry? Sorry, i dont live in America so im not really sure of some of the political issues over there but, over here in Britain we more or less allow anything and everything. The government over here is more concerned with getting us out of the recession than imposing ridiculous laws which, in the long run, wont make a bloody difference anyway ^^

TraderJimmy:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your hearts content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

No worries, I knew you were joking, that why I used the word "shall" so much. Orwell's not my cup of tea, lord, reading Animal Farm was torture! If someone doesn't like my references they can kiss my ass for all I'm concerned, and for some reason I don't think that the average Escapist is familiar with Ayn Rand's works, and if you liked "1984" I would recomend "Anthem" by Mrs. Rand.

I think everyone on the internet is familiar with Ayn Rand's works after about a month-two months in a forum. Don't flatter yourself.

OT: something, something, censorship is bad in this case. Some of those Supreme Court Judges sound hella cool.

I dunno about that. Perhaps I haven't been hanging around here long enough to be an authority on the issue, but if what limited experiences I have had are any useful indication, then I'm inclined to agree with LarenzoAOG.

JDKJ:
But, of course, those store policies are driven more by external pressures and corporate image concerns more than anything else. I'd imagine that if they ever lost their minds and decided to sell M-rated games to whomever wanted to buy them and argued that there's no law against them doing so, then a horde of white, middle-class, middle-aged, suburban mothers would descend upon their annual shareholder meetings in a convoy of minivans and quickly make them regret that decision. Otherwise, and as long as to do so showed a profit at the bottom line, they'd be selling M-rated games to kids hand over fist.

But that's beside the point, isn't it? The fact is their company policy already restricts who can buy the games. Making that same rule into a federal law shouldn't really change anything for retailers or their revenue. I can't imagine they're seeing massive profits from illegally selling to minors, so nothing should change. Maybe digital distribution could run into problems with age verification, but there's probably simple enough ways for sellers to ensure that their asses are covered. Shouldn't it be just as illegal for a kid to buy a Mature game as it is for a store to sell them one?

My opinions:
(Biggest concern bolded)
I find it very concerning that the ESRB was only mentioned twice in a 72-page transcript in a case about keeping violent games away from minors.

Both sides were ripped apart by the Justices, IMO, but that's them doing their jobs. The thing is, the guys siding with California sounded EXTREMELY ignorant about the medium. I mean Jack Thompson levels of ignorant, but at least they made the EMA lawyer have to answer some tough questions. It's just a shame the guy had such trouble answering. The ones siding with the EMA weren't exactly game-savy, but at least they knew enough about how the medium and it's relation with the law, and law itself. It exposed some of the biggest flaws of the California law. This could honestly go either way...

On a side note: Postal 2 was a footnote in gaming history. Not even a footnote. Yet these guys seem to treat this game like it's Mario: Gaming's mascot. THEY are glorifying Postal 2, not the game industry.

rsvp42:

JDKJ:
But, of course, those store policies are driven more by external pressures and corporate image concerns more than anything else. I'd imagine that if they ever lost their minds and decided to sell M-rated games to whomever wanted to buy them and argued that there's no law against them doing so, then a horde of white, middle-class, middle-aged, suburban mothers would descend upon their annual shareholder meetings in a convoy of minivans and quickly make them regret that decision. Otherwise, and as long as to do so showed a profit at the bottom line, they'd be selling M-rated games to kids hand over fist.

But that's beside the point, isn't it? The fact is their company policy already restricts who can buy the games. Making that same rule into a federal law shouldn't really change anything for retailers or their revenue. I can't imagine they're seeing massive profits from illegally selling to minors, so nothing should change. Maybe digital distribution could run into problems with age verification, but there's probably simple enough ways for sellers to ensure that their asses are covered. Shouldn't it be just as illegal for a kid to buy a Mature game as it is for a store to sell them one?

Not to avoid the question actually posed, but if you take as a given the studies that indicate 2 out of 10 attempts by the underage to purchase age-restricted games are successful and extrapolate that to the sales of a nationwide brick and mortar super-chain, I'd bet we're talking about a nice chunk o' change.

imnotparanoid:

Altorin:
It's always postal 2 they go for.

Postal 2 is such a small blip on the gaming radar that it really shouldn't even be in the debate. It's ancient, we all know it's horrible, and its gimmick doesn't last long even in the hands of children. But politicians LOVE it, because they can point to it and say "Look at that horrible games industry, look what they did".

Does Anyone own that, that thing.

I honestly don't know anyone that does, and I know a lot of PC gamers. It's one of those games that people pirate for a couple lols, get tired of, and delete.

But politicians keep bringing it up like it's the ONLY THING THAT GAMING HAS EVER PRODUCED

TraderJimmy:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your hearts content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

No worries, I knew you were joking, that why I used the word "shall" so much. Orwell's not my cup of tea, lord, reading Animal Farm was torture! If someone doesn't like my references they can kiss my ass for all I'm concerned, and for some reason I don't think that the average Escapist is familiar with Ayn Rand's works, and if you liked "1984" I would recomend "Anthem" by Mrs. Rand.

I think everyone on the internet is familiar with Ayn Rand's works after about a month-two months in a forum. Don't flatter yourself.

OT: something, something, censorship is bad in this case. Some of those Supreme Court Judges sound hella cool.

I'm not "Flattering myself" I just assumed that a site devoted to gaming may not be frequented by those that study Objectivist philosiphy, and I may have been wrong to assume but until today I hadn't talked to one.

Well if that's an accurate breakdown of the views of the justices on this matter then I'm not really worried. Ginsburg and Thomas and almost certain to side in favor of the EMA and against California. Ginsburg was a chief litigator of the ACLU and I would have a hard time seeing her decide a case in favor of restricting free speech. Thomas, on the other hand, is likely to live up to the joke of doing whatever Scalia does. As far as Kennedy goes, I have no idea.

It's an interesting breakdown with the justices failing to fall into the typical "liberal" vs. "conservative" camps we've come to expect from the Court.

BTW does anyone else find the image of a Supreme Court justice talking about Mortal Kombat in open court hilarious?

LarenzoAOG:

TraderJimmy:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:

JDKJ:

LarenzoAOG:
I wish John Galt was here...

How dare you make a literary reference?! And to Rand, of all authors?! Do you make literary references for a living?! Or do you have a degree from Stanford?! If the answers are "no" and "no," then just ramp down the attitude!

Well excuse me good sir or madam, but Ayn Rand is my favorite author, I shall reference her whenever I feel it to be appropriate! And I am still in high school, I shall not be receiving my degree for at least 4 and a half years. Present your degree before the good people of the Escapist and I shall gladly agree that my referencing was not the most appropriate for the situation. Good day to you!

It was an inside joke of the kind where you just had to be there to appreciate. Fret not. As far as I'm concerned, you can refer to Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to your hearts content (but others here may not appreciate it, so be forewarned). And I like Rand, too. Perhaps not my favorite (I'm an Orwell kinda guy), but some good stuff nevertheless.

No worries, I knew you were joking, that why I used the word "shall" so much. Orwell's not my cup of tea, lord, reading Animal Farm was torture! If someone doesn't like my references they can kiss my ass for all I'm concerned, and for some reason I don't think that the average Escapist is familiar with Ayn Rand's works, and if you liked "1984" I would recomend "Anthem" by Mrs. Rand.

I think everyone on the internet is familiar with Ayn Rand's works after about a month-two months in a forum. Don't flatter yourself.

OT: something, something, censorship is bad in this case. Some of those Supreme Court Judges sound hella cool.

I'm not "Flattering myself" I just assumed that a site devoted to gaming may not be frequented by those that study Objectivist philosiphy, and I may have been wrong to assume but until today I hadn't talked to one.

Who's got time for Objectivist Philosophy when there's always Psychophysiology?

Alito's argument is flawed, though, since the portrayal of violence in movies is equivocal to that in video games, neither of which being something that would not have been imagined at the time of writing the constitution. And Scalia appears to have no read some of Grimm's Fairy Tales, being some of the most violent literature commonly available to children.

Altorin:

imnotparanoid:

Altorin:
It's always postal 2 they go for.

Postal 2 is such a small blip on the gaming radar that it really shouldn't even be in the debate. It's ancient, we all know it's horrible, and its gimmick doesn't last long even in the hands of children. But politicians LOVE it, because they can point to it and say "Look at that horrible games industry, look what they did".

Does Anyone own that, that thing.

I honestly don't know anyone that does, and I know a lot of PC gamers. It's one of those games that people pirate for a couple lols, get tired of, and delete.

But politicians keep bringing it up like it's the ONLY THING THAT GAMING HAS EVER PRODUCED

I own it. It came with my copy of Postal the movie for free. Don't play it much, though. Tends to get old rather fast.

I'm (somewhat) surprised that two opposites like Scalia and Kagan could agree that this law seems pretty bad. It definitely shows this is a non-partisan issue, despite a select few people trying to point the finger at liberals or conservatives as wanting to infringe on free speech.

And which game was being referenced with the schoolgirl torture bit? If California's argument is based on some obscure (or even semi-obscure) pile of trash that even gamers barely know about, it's kind of hard to argue that little kids will want to get their hands on that game, isn't it? In which case, publishers are being responsible enough to not advertise such material to kids in the first place.

I guess in addition to being unconstitutional, the law just doesn't have any justification to exist.

 Pages 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