ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content Restrictions

October 28, 2008 -

Love the incentives, hate the content restrictions.

As reported by the Austin American-Statesman, that pretty much sums up what ESA CEO Michael Gallagher told the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce during a recent visit to Texas. While praising a grant package for film makers and game developers passed in 2007, Gallagher rightly criticized:

...a content requirement about not disparaging Texas. Those types of speech restrictions in general are not viewed in favor by the courts. They tend to lead to a lot of problems down the road.

The ESA boss reminded the Chamber crowd that Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) gave the keynote at this year's E3 (although he probably avoided mentioning how few E3 attendees showed up for the Guv).

The newspaper also mentions a concern that some Texas politicos have about providing grants to developers:

Legislators are warming to the idea of providing state funds to video game companies, but there is still some reluctance. Some fear that a political opponent could accuse them of voting to spend state funds on games like the violent "Grand Theft Auto."

Comments

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

Where you from son?

     Texas sir!

Holy @#$%, the only things that come outta Texas are steers and E-rated video games, and you ain't got no horns.. that sorta narrows it down. Do you play Viva Pinata?

     Sir no sir!!

Bull@#$%!!! I bet you've got the most vibrant garden of them all!!!

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

My response to that has always been

"... Moo sir!"

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

Sorry Gallhager, but the ESA still sucks ass.

 

-Remember kids, personal responsibility is for losers! -The Buck Stops Here. -Thou Shall Not Teamkill, Asshole.

Reality/////////////////////////////////////Fantasy. Seems like a pretty thick line to me...

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

I said it before and I'll say it again:  If the video game industry had any balls whatsoever they would tell Texas to shove this "incentive" up their ass.  But its fairly obvious at this point that they do not have any balls.  The proof of that is staggering.

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

So, you're advising the video games industry to not just look their gift horse in the mouth, but shoot the horse too? Fanatacism is not the way to get support.

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

Yes that is exactly what I am saying.  Shoot the horse and then you don't have to worry about the Trojans inside of it.

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

That's quite a sadistic way to look at it.  What's wrong with a state saying they'd like to promote E for Everyone gaming companies?  There's THOUSANDS of those and they do bring in the most dollars.  Seems like good business to me.  Honestly they've simply given other states the opportunity to reel in companies who focus on making more mature game content.  I don't see any censorship here.  Texas isn't saying "You can't make mature games here." They're simply saying those who make games targeted at everyone get incentives.

"Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

"Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

Giving a bias towards E games over M rated ones is nearly as bad as saying "You can't make matures games here".  Would you be okay if people whose last names started a letter yours didn't start with got a tax break and you didn't?  I mean its not like the state is saying you can't have that name right?

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

That's a bad analogy. Game ratings and people's names have nothing in common.

Texas isn't saying "Don't make M games." They're saying "Don't make games with these types of content, and we'll give you a tax break." And from what I can see (and correct me if I'm wrong, informed GPers), most of the content they're talking about has more to do with disrespecting the state than it does a Thompsonian ban on anything M-rated.

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

And what I'm saying is that the video game industry, even the ones who make exclusively M rated games, need to tell Texas to take their tax incentive and shove it up their ass.  Then for even daring make such an underhanded offer make a game that completely lampoons the state.  But this won't happen because, as I have stated earlier, the industry has no balls.  Rockstar adding the LSD filters to Manhunt 2 to pacify the ESRB and BBFC are testament to that.

 

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

No that's arbitrary whereas the incentive thing is conditional. A better analogy would be that people signed up for organ donation or who regularly give blood would get tax breaks but ones who don't would miss out.

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

The movie industry has the same caveat applied to it. I don't really see the "don't disparage Texas" clause as being used against games, though. The extent to which "violent content" as cause for refusal will affect the games industry has yet to be determined, and the restriction is likely very loose, given that the first tax credit was awarded to a war game.

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

Second link in the first sentence leads nowhere.

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

If the government doesn't want taxpayer's money spent on making violent or ojectionable games then that fine by me so long as they don't restrict or censor the creation or dissemination of the games or any other Free Speech media in general. The government can't decide what people can or can't watch/play/read or listen to but they can decide that taxpayer's money shouldn't go to it. That doesn't restrict Free Speech IMHO.

"No law means no law" - Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black on the First Amendment

"No law means no law" - Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black on the First Amendment

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

oh come on!  it's friggen TEXAS! they love shooting people, why are they going to get their panties in a wad over a new GTA?

besides, nobody really makes fun of Texas much anyway, just some of the yokels who reside there.

Here are we -- and yonder yawns the universe.

Here are we -- and yonder yawns the universe.

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

Fuck off.

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

No.

--- Official Protector of Videoland!

--- Official Protector of Videoland!

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

@_@

Re: ESA Boss Lauds Texas Game Dev Incentives, Dings Content

Its very... very frivolous and stupid. I could care less if someone makes fun of Texas to be honest. I love this state, but you got to draw a line between "state pride" and "state stupidity". That being said, the presence of the video game industry in Austin is nice for our economy.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.giantbomb.com/articles/jeff-gerstmann-heads-to-new-york-takes-questions/1100-4900/ He talks about the future games press and the games industry. It is worth your time even though it is a bit long, and stay for the QA. There are some good QA04/17/2014 - 5:28pm
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician