I am starting to think the title Professor allows you to make random, poorly researched remarks, present them as facts and then expect everyone to just believe what you say without question, because you are a professor. It is obvious that this man has never actually looked at video games in person and thinks the only ones out there are those shown in media stories (GTA, Doom, Counter Strike, and so on).

@NovaBlack
Before Sims, best selling game was Myst, another really hyper violent game.

I think that its better to look at sales numbers (~40% Rated M) than production numbers (~6% Rated M)

GRIZZAM 512
only because publishers like cheap quickly made cash in titles.
:P

He has some points, such as games being violent for the sake of violent, NARC for example. And Duffy, I'm looking forward to the rant.

Sir Bedevere: What makes you think she's a witch?
Peasant 3: Well, she turned me into a newt!
Sir Bedevere: A newt?
Peasant 3: [meekly after a long pause] ... I got better.
Crowd: [shouts] Burn her anyway!

----------

The Witch: I'm not a witch I'm not a witch!
Sir Bedevere: But you are dressed as one
The Witch: *They* dressed me up like this!
Crowd: We didn't! We didn't...
The Witch: And this isn't my nose. It's a false one.
Sir Bedevere: [lifts up her false nose] Well?
Peasant 1: Well, we did do the nose.
Sir Bedevere: The nose?
Peasant 1: And the hat, but she is a witch!
Crowd: Yeah! Burn her! Burn her!
Sir Bedevere: Did you dress her up like this?
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 3: No!
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 1: Yes!
Peasant 2: Yes!
Peasant 1: Yeah a bit.
Peasant 3: A bit!
Peasant 1, Peasant 2: A bit!
Peasant 2: a bit
Peasant 1: But she has got a wart!
Random Person in the crowd: *cough* *cough*

--------------

Sir Bedevere: There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
Peasant 1: Are there? Oh well, tell us.
Sir Bedevere: Tell me. What do you do with witches?
Peasant 1: Burn them.
Sir Bedevere: And what do you burn, apart from witches?
Peasant 1: More witches.
Peasant 2: Wood.
Sir Bedevere: Good. Now, why do witches burn?
Peasant 3: ...because they're made of... wood?
Sir Bedevere: Good. So how do you tell whether she is made of wood?
Peasant 1: Build a bridge out of her.
Sir Bedevere: But can you not also build bridges out of stone?
Peasant 1: Oh yeah.
Sir Bedevere: Does wood sink in water?
Peasant 1: No, no, it floats!... It floats! Throw her into the pond!
Sir Bedevere: No, no. What else floats in water?
Peasant 1: Bread.
Peasant 2: Apples.
Peasant 3: Very small rocks.
Peasant 1: Cider.
Peasant 2: Gravy.
Peasant 3: Cherries.
Peasant 1: Mud.
Peasant 2: Churches.
Peasant 3: Lead! Lead!
King Arthur: A Duck.
Sir Bedevere: ...Exactly. So, logically...
Peasant 1: If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood.
Sir Bedevere: And therefore...
Peasant 2: ...A witch!

You have to wonder how people like this lunatic and Jack Thompson got their licenses when they're clearly spouting bullshit.

OKAMI
Seriously, anyone who thinks that games are all about violence, destruction, and have no originality should play Okami.
Or Eternal Sonata, which has a fairly interesting combat system, and is, can you believe it, educational.
And then of course there are games like Ico and Shadow of the Colossus, which are amazing works of art.

@ Ichi: You're kidding, right?

The thing about Japanese culture is, as someone (I think Suda51) put it, that violence in Japan cannot exist on its own, it needs a reason to be there. This is very much unlike the US, where games get hyped because they have excessive violence and the level of pointless violence seems to become a measure of quality.

Oh, forget it, I just read the paragraph about the 360. You ARE kidding.

I don't know about you guys, but as a kid when I played "make-believe" me and my buddies were always acting out "violent" games. War, superheroes, and other such things. As an adult, if I ever slip into a day dream or the like, most of the time I do see my self in law and order or a tea party. We like violent games because we are not violent in real life. It is an escape from the mundane world in which we live.

This just in:

A fair majority of games don't feature mindless violence.

Untouchable
and look at the titles that use a violent theme thats all of the M and most of the T titles.

Even with violence (cartoon or otherwise) begin a main sthick of all media they seem overly focused on what the M rated games that are 5%(?) of the rated pie?

Who is known to make the best games. Nintendo. Are they violent filled massacres... no. So they can't even used the excuse that only the violent filled games are the successful ones.

Oh god.. another moron who's seeing only what he wants to see.

The whole 6% of the games out there... wow... I had no idea 6 was such a HUGE number.

Shame on the game industry because 6% of their games are rated M.... DAMN THEM!!!

He wants diversity? There are games out there where you play as a fucking DOLPHIN on a quest to save his pod!

Just because the games that are most publicized are the violent ones doesn't mean that they display the majority of the library.

I'd like to add something : although I hear what Prof. Hoechsmann says about the "lack of diversity", at least for blockbuster games, I think that targeting the game industry as a whole for every kind of problem involving one single game (or company) is a very, very bad habit. It's guilt by association, and it contributes to polarize any debate about video games. IMO, game developers and publishers should not be seen as a monolithic block, such as Hollywood.

Could somebody PLEASE mail Prof. Michael Hoechsmann a copy of Professor Layton?

/sarcasm

I don't like one of my favorite games of the year being used to discuss unoriginality. Adam shut down any argument this guy had with some interesting statistics. I had no idea there were so few M rated games out there I figured they where in the majority. Then again 6 is a pretty big number to some critics out there.

I agree that game companies are choosing stale themes, but calling the 'industry' (if such a thing exists) barbaric is plain hyperbole.

Violence sells, whether it's E, E10, T or M. If there's a market, there's a product. But I won't ignore the growing popularity of off-the-wall non-violent games out there, like certain "Conclusions Before Proof" Professors out there . . .

Endless Ocean, anyone?

newsflash: society thrives on conflict. violence is the most notable kind of conflict known to human history.

InJM, thats what it kind of seems like to me. Why single out Army of Two besides the fact you play as a P.M.C.

This is pretty typical of any knee-jerk response to any issue that makes a public splash. Uninformed and unresearched, this guy's point is as laughable as moot anything Jack Thompason has ever spewed from his rotting piehole.

Ignore him and he'll go away.

I find it amusing this, Prof. Michael Hoechsmann, lacks sound judgement to his 'research'.

According to the ERSB 2007 report, something like 2000+ new titles came out. Of those, 6% were rated M. Note however, that a rating of M, does not nessisarly mean sexual or violent content. Could also mean contentent meant for a serious and mature person.

The professor has jumped on the violent video game bandwagon, to score points for his school and myself.

I wonder if he has any books selling on Amazon.com?

While this professor is off-base in his assertions, we should point out that most of the best-selling games on the X-Box 360 have been violent.

Halo 3
Gears of War
Call of Duty (2, 3 and 4)
Elder Scrolls: Oblivion

Then there's a good chunk of top-sellers that aren't considered "violent":
Madden
Guitar Hero (2 and 3)
Rock Band

What does this prove? Adults, the people with the money, will buy games that they want to buy. I'm sorry, but I have little need for something like "My Little Pony Farmyard Adventures" or whatever this professor says we need on the gaming market. If I had a 5-year-old daughter, that might be a different story.

Oh, and to add to the list of X-Box Live Arcade games that are pretty good, Zuma is really addictive (and completely non-violent).

Hmmmmm lets see why do i play violent video games....because I'm an adrenalin junkie. Does playing a game make me want to go out and shoot people? No. Should my kids be playing the game, no. Do they? No. Why? Because i do my job as a parent. People, from I've seen parents are pretty well informed out the rateings on the games they just don't care. They don't care when there kids come home with bad grades, theydon't care when there kid punches another kid on the play ground...kids will be kids right. Then they go and they read that the violent video games make kids do such things and they go."See, im not a bad parent after all. The video games are to blame. My little Billy would never do this on his own."
Almost makes me wish there was some sort of licenes requirement to breed.

Important facts:

1. The fact is… the vast majority of video games are appropriate for young kids. That is, the majority of video games are rated “E” for “Everyone” or “E 10+” for “Everyone 10 and older” by the [ESRB]

2. Who Purchases Computer and Video Games?
Ninety-three percent of people who make the actual purchase of computer games and 83% of people who make the actual purchase of video games are 18 years of age or older. The average age of the game buyer is 40 years old.
(Source for #2 is http://www.theesa.com/facts/gamer_data.php))

So..The Majotity of games on the market are safe for kids to play (Rated E)) And a small percent of them are Rated M for Adults.
And The majority of video game consumers in the US are around 18-40. Adults. Not children.

Hmm..

- Warren Lewis

*Continues playing Skate*

Diversity is good, and game industry has it... While there's more Everybody and 10+ than anything, the M games do get the most time in public eye.

I guess that's one place where movie/tv entertainment win in comparisons (assuming ppl like this prof are, comparing games.. even w/o stating it).. While both entertainment industries are able to sell action, humor translates better into film/tv (and we get lots of funny movies, romantic comedies, sit-coms) but don't tend to make a good game by itself... at least not good enough to get as much ad/media attention as the action genre. Not saying there's no humor in games, there's plenty, but it's usually mixed into action.. a Seinfeld game where u control Jerry or Kramer, and walk them around doing nothing but picking witty retorts and one liners, wouldn't work well (RT = "What's the deal with...", LT = "Newman!", X = Kramer bursts through door?,...) But it made a hit TV show.

The game industry has a greater diversity of games and game genres than there are movie genres, music genres, or tv genres.

"The game industry is not doing us any favours by continually choosing subject matter and adventures that involve guns, violence and warfare."

As opposed to television, movies, books, comics, and various forms of media? Seriously, come on. Why are games so quick to be blamed, but not other forms of media? People are stupid. If you don't like the game, it is as simple as NOT PLAYING IT! Don't gripe about it. If you don't want your children playing it, DON'T BUY IT FOR THEM! If you're a moron parent who claims "I didn't know it would be violent" then learn to read the box. I guess a big letter "M" for mature, the words 17+ don't clue people in. Not to mention that the BACK of the box, in a very noticeable place, is the exact contents of the game in relation to violence, sex, drugs, alcohol, etc. Has America really become so stupid that the average citizen cannot read? (I AM American, and I'm not proud of it if people are going to continue to be THIS stupid)

/rant

oh and as for the violent games being teh most successfull.. think again


the best selling recently was the sims, before that i think it was Barbie (honestly) and some horse riding game. check it out if you dont believe me!

Just in the past few weeks we've seen the release of Frontline: Fuel of War, Turning Point, Conflict, the Club,, and several others that all are about guns, war, and general violence. I'm not saying any of these are bad games because of it, but the market is saturated but Soldier games. Hell,t he big titles people are looking forward too right now are 'Rainbow 6 Vegas 2' and 'Gears of War 2'

I have to agree with this guy that the gaming industry is shooting itself in the foot when it comes to this whole gaming violence debate. Regardless if the games suck or if they don't even sell, when you look a a shelf of new releases and all you see if soldiers, super soldiers, or psychopaths with guns, you're kind of inclined to make a blanket statement.

So why am I playing Guitar Hero???
This game makes me far more violent than playing a shoot-em-up for hours on end, Ive been trying to perfect TTFAF for a full feckin week now.

Makes me wanna shoot up a school or something...oh wait, not it doesnt.
Why....coz Im a fully developed responsible human being.

+ 1 to gamers.

Army of Two won't make anyone violent nor will any other game. I play AoT not for the violence (it still helps) but because of the actual game mechanics, story line and the fact I look like Salem who is the masked fellow on the left side of the box.

It's a pretty easy answer, I think. Compare games to movies - the so-called "chick-flick". There really doesn't seem to be much of a market for making such a thing interactive.. The Sims is about the closest I can think of, but even then, the point of the game isn't to stand around and talk about your virtual feelings!

On the other hand, the interactivity of games naturally leads to competition, which is, by nature, aggressive.

The same argument could be made for sports. Most of the team-based ones involve hitting something, usually a player on the other team. And soccer obviously makes people violent, so we should ban it!

*yawn*

Another hack trying to get his 15 minutes by joining the bandwagon and using his status as a crutch in order to gain attention.

Nothing to see here, move along.

It is human nature to be competitive, and video games are effective in amplifying competition into outrageous situations in the virtual world. It's pretty obvious that these situations are somehow going to include violence along the way, and it's about the only medium where you can do many things without real-life consequence.

Hell, the first true digital video game, Spacewar, has violent themes. You have to continually blast the crap out of your opponent, while avoiding getting sucked into the sun's gravity. Ralph Baer invented the first game on a game console, and it used light guns (which were made from shells of REAL guns in the prototype) and you had to shoot at the moving dots.

To say we have more violent themes in our video games than we did 30 years ago is debatable. The only major change is technology, which has made it possible to make the scenes look more realistic.

I would really like to see some data comparing the percentages of video games given the "violence" or "sexual themes" descriptors by the ESRB compared to the percentage of movies given the same descriptors by the MPAA over any given period of time.

Heck, I'd like to see data comparing those numbers to the number of TV shows given Violence and Sexual descriptors, as well...

I'm just a little too lazy to go track down those numbers myself... plus, I doubt the MPAA or TV ratings boards have web sites nearly as easy to search through as the ESRB does...

@JP it seems this way because those are the games you look for, it is a perception. and the problem the Game Industry really has. whane you think about it.
Guitar Hero,
Karaoke revolution,
Madden and every let's put a year at the end sports franchise,
Sims let,'s do another expanson for the sake of it,
Gran Tourismo and every Racing game
Brain Age
Mario Galaxy
Wii Sports

But the game industry as a whole seems to represented by a few games that are violent and that the vocal majority of gamer are waiting for those games and following them the so called hardcore

E. Zachary Knight
I have a feeling Prof. Michael Hoechsmann was going after all titles that have a action based theme that is centered on violence, add in 30-60% of T rated games its a interesting summation, however even if half of all games are based around violence be it cartoon or otherwise all he is doing is whining about games while ignoring film,book and everything else.

Buckeye531
and more than half of witch use action/violence as a core gameplay mechanic...

5 do not use violence of any kind they are puzzle games.

@JP

Well, the thing about sales values (which are actually around 15%) is that it is no reflection on what the Industry produces anyway, if he's going by sales then surely he should be blaming the people who buy the games, not those who make them.

This is very much a case of the Media telling someone with a degree something, and them being gullible enough to provide them with a quoteable response without checking the validity of the information they have been given. It's bad reporting meets bad science.

I suppose one thing that ought to be noted in fairness is that Mr Thierer's blog kind of diverges, since he starts off talking about the amount of violence and then goes on to compare it with the level of game ratings. A sceptic could argue that simply because it is rated E or E10, does not mean it does not contain violence, it simply means that violence is considered acceptable to younger audiences (Tom and Jerry et al). That in itself isn't a serious thing but it could be misinterpreted.

Wii Sports...

OMG THE CARNAGE!!!

Who cares about a random professer? GP is just giving him a chance to let him run his mouth about false crap publicly with this article.

i am constantly disgusted by human beings lol perhaps we should ban them?

@Zippy
I know there is violence in most of those games. The games I mentioned do not have the level of vilence the professor is talking about.

The game industry is not doing us any favours by continually choosing subject matter and adventures that involve guns, violence and warfare.

Funny how he singles out games. Guess what, many, many films have the same shit.

@GRIZZAM

Too bad more people PERIOD don't think that way :( Although I often find there are very reasonable people here :) Which helps me believe there are some people out there who I can relate to.

Violence is an age-old theme that has been used in all forms of entertainment in all cultures to convey drama and ultimate conflict.It is an emotionally engaging thing that has captured the hearts of billions of people.There is nothing wrong with it still being a strong and frequent theme in modern day entertainment.

Sorry for the double post, but also I would just like to point out the HUGE disparity in ratings of the two genres pretty much pidgeon-holes industry games into more violent themes if they attempt to capture a mature adult audiance. You want themes that don't necessarily rely on violence to tell a story fine, how about you have a story about relationships... o wait, any sex in games, beyond what you could show on network television will get your ass slapped with an AO ban. So basically games are forced to degrade themselves to a 15 year old level in discussing human sexuality, whereas they have near (but as we all know not completely and not at cinema level) free range in dealing with violence. Hell, even when a game does try and include a tasteful sex-scene that would be alright for NBC to air at 1:00 in the afternoon it gets present as "Pixelated Porn" by the maistream media. How many movies, some of which aren't even rated R (which, according to the MPAA means it's ok for 17 year olds meaning that even if AO wasn't a ban, a similar game getting that rating is still held to stricter standards than its movie equivalent) but many times PG-13 show at LEAST topless women, and of those how many does the media laud as "genius" or a work of art? Fact is, if this industry wants to create mature, not necessarily violent, good quality products, the ESRB needs a MAJOR overhaul of its policies, because right now violence is one of the only options they have to work with.

@Marlow

Agreed.

I must admit I'm with the professor on this one. Can't prominent game developers find ways to make great games that AREN'T violent. As someone else wrote, I'm tired of playing the same game over and over again. I mean why does it have to be 'kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, kill'? After a while it just gets BORING.

erm, my first link broke: let me try again

I read somewhere that the reason violence is a common theme in video games is because most game genres are still fundamentally about things colliding with other things. Can things collide in a non-violent way?

Is Everyday Shooter considered a 'violent' game?

"[Army of Two is] not a political statement. We’re not pro and we’re not against [private military contractors]. We want to make people aware of the subject."

I think it would better read, of course this is just me, "[Army of Two is] not a political statement. We’re not pro and we’re not against [private military contractors]. We just felt like making a game about mercenaries."

Thing is, I played with Action Man as a kid, propogating violence and warfare as something glamourous and macho is hardly a new proposition, violence has been glorified in Media since before Homer.

@Spartan

Exactly.

Oh gee, I can't find any REAL research work to make me famous, so let me follow in Jack Thompson's footsteps!

"The game industry is not doing us any favours by continually choosing subject matter and adventures that involve guns, violence and warfare."

Humans like guns. This is nothing new. Companies are going after what we crave in a non-violent manner. Let me put it this way. If I didn't spend all the money I spend on games right now I could probably OWN a gun.

@ Rob

"Before Sims, best selling game was Myst, another really hyper violent game. "

good point!

just shows that there are many games, and bestselling ones for that matter (for all the people who keep saying they arent) that arent violent.

[...] Professor claims games are ‘barbaric’ March 01st, 2008 | Category: Gaming News A McGill University professor has attacked the games industry for its focus on violent composition. Michael Hoechsmann has claimed that focusing on guns, violence and warfare does society no favors and is unimaginative. Perhaps, but I NEED TO SHOOT THINGS OR I WILL KILL MY NEIGHBOR IRL! [...]

@Jay - An excellent post.

The film industry isn't any diffirent.

does anyone know how you can put an article into submission

Okami: kill demons while you rebuild the world.
Eternal Sonata: kill monsters while you save the world.
Ico: kill the queen who is trying to kill you
Shadow of the Colossus: MURDER giant beasts who have done nothing to you.

oh yeah, none of those games are about or involve violence in any way...

@ Ichi

I wouldn't exactly point to Mass Effect and Bioshock as being innovative. They're good games, but they're both basically copies of games that came before them. Mass Effect was preceded by KotOR, Bioshock by System Shock 2.

Two brothers got into a fight last week that resulted in one of them being stabbed guess what they were arguing about.... *coughs*




http://www.nypost.com/seven/02262008/news/nationalnews/political_fight_d...

@Jay

It's mostly hated because generally people hate being generalized. And hey, our rights are threatened as much as your's are, even if on the other end.

Michael Hoechsmann willingly works for a government that actually applauded the slaughter of its own people by the Israeli's in Lebanon, because these murdered Canadian citizens happened to be muslim. Hoechsmann willingly works for a government that gave every support to Israel, when this terrorist nation dropped hundreds of millions of military 'nail-bombs' over vast areas of civilian habitation in Lebanon. Hoechsmann willingly works for a government that actively supports the recent Israeli Holocaust (the official term actually used by the Israeli government) in Gaza.

Hoechsmann knows exactly what kind of distraction propaganda he is involved in. Any decent Human that cares about reducing violence in this world would need a million lifetimes just to address the genocide by western powers in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Chechnya, Lebanon, and in the coming weeks, Lebanon (again), Syria, and Iran.

Today, Israel, and its allies, are busy building the actual robotic murder machines that previously have been the fictional creation of books, films and games. Hoechsmann, and people like him, know that without efforts to demonise the entertainment of the people, the people may well turn their attention to the crimes against Humanity being planned and perpertrated by their governments.

However, the irony is that we lose either way. Without a doubt, the biggest software houses are reaping significant rewards from bodies like the US Department of Defense (and other more covert ones) to include anti-muslim propaganda in their games whenever they have a war like theme.

Worse, in growing numbers of countries (including Australia and Germany), it is a crimal offence for games with a war theme to portray the US and its allies as anything other than the 'good guys'. And even worse again, the US, UK and other allied nations have signalled their intent to start prosecuting muslim online gameplayers under terrorism laws (fools amongst you will laugh at this, but both the US and UK have sent muslims to prison as terrorists for doing nothing more than playing paintball games in their local woods).

Gamers outside the US (where the constitution and the supreme court have killed multiple attempts by the government to interfere with free speech online and in games) are about to lose, and lose bigger than they could imagine in their worst nightmares. In the UK, now the worst police state ever seen on the planet, all computer game creation is about to be bought under government control. The first impact of this will be to make all user mods illegal, since non-government approved game code will be strictly forbidden. Those of you that think this will be easily ignored might be right save for one thing. The UK is massively increasing prison sentences for all offences, and will simple create penalties at such a level that most will be too frightened to disobey (fancy 2 years in prison for using a game mod, or 5 years for writing one?).

Action in the UK will embolden other EU nations. Germany, in particular, will act to criminalise all 'violent' computer games, carrying out its threat to put developers like Crytek into prison or exile. Servers hosting online gameplay for games like counterstrike etc., will be easy targets for law enforcement. Single player wargames (that promote the idea of UK/US/Israeli moral supremacy in war) will still be permitted in most countries, and indeed, the giant publishers will co-operate with the governments over the new laws and grow at the expense of all smaller software publishers.

Would YOU be prepared to go to prison, if told that this would be the cost of playing the arab side in Battlefield 3? In the next year, multiple sources are going to 'prove' that videogames represent the greatest risk to young people, and that freedom to publish is nothing compared with the need to do something about this. On the other hand, when President Blair and President Clinton are both in power next year, computer game freedom will be the least of our worries.

@Hoechs :

Sounds like I'm a bit late, but thanks for joining and defending your point of view. And by the way, thanks for what you said about Bully's Scholarship Edition.

@ zak,
I think
A. your talking out of your ass
B. Pay attention to the news, How many straight victories has Obama now won? Ohio and Texas are Clinton's last hope and she would have to win both of them to STAY in the race, not win it. Pay attention, Obama is probably going to get the candidacy
C. If your going to sound serious and intelligent, then actually be intelligent and back up your argument with actual articles, no one will take you seriously with that unless you give us actual research, the British government isn't looking to take control of game creation, it's looking to more realistically have a better rating system and is looking for facts before it makes its decision.

Don't go ahead and do your little anti capitalist, anti whatever without any kind of fact. Gimme actual facts and I will maybe take you seriousely