Vietnam Comes Down Hard on Online Games

July 29, 2010 -

The government of Vietnam has implemented a few (previously alluded to) measures restricting online games as it bides time in order to formulate an overall master plan for dealing with the industry.

Minister of Information and Communications (MoIC) Le Doan Hop called for the immediate  implementation of a trio of stop-gap measures reports Saigon Daily: until new laws are drafted and propagated, all new licenses for online games will be suspended, all public media ads for online games are banned and Internet cafes will have to shut down game services between 11PM and 6AM every day. Vietnam News stated that these measures will be in place through year-end.

Gamers will also be limited to three hours of playtime for any title that interacts “with a server,” though taking part in educational or cultural games will be permitted for four or five hours per day. The Ministry will also draft a provision for dealing with offline games.

The Department of Information and Communication also ordered game operators to detail the level of violence in titles they offered via a report which “must include video clips that illustrate the violent nature of particular games.” They have until August 2 to submit these reports, according to Vietnam Net.

Operators also must break down games into acceptable age groups, selecting from six and under, 6-11, 12 to 15, 15 to 18 and 18+.

The measures were taken, according to Vietnam News, following “a public outcry about their (online games) negative influences on the youth.”

The paper added that a whopping 100 percent of respondents to a survey conducted by the Ministry of Education and Training indicated that they played games on the the weekend. During the week, the number dropped to 70 percent for kids in Ha Noi and 76 percent for children from Ho Chi Minh City.


Comments

Re: Vietnam Comes Down Hard on Online Games

I wonder how the "interacts with a server" thing will come into play with games that have to verify with an external server, like anything using Ubisoft's scheme.

Re: Vietnam Comes Down Hard on Online Games

How does the government plan to effectively enforce the regulation of that three hour limit of server interaction? I guess it could be possible if the servers and/or service providers are in Vietnam. But how would it be done for games that interact with servers outside the country? Do they also plan to regulate the play time for offline games?

Also, they're doing all of this over a public outcry over alleged bad influence on the youth? So if there is a public outcry over violence or aggression being instlled by competetive contact sports, they'll plan to regulate it as well? I mean, computer/console games aren't the only source of interactive "violence" in the world.

Re: Vietnam Comes Down Hard on Online Games

Well, there's the inch, I wonder how many miles they'll takes.

At least they're ahead of Australia in haibng an 18 and over rating.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will we ever get Half-Life 3?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
prh99The articles by Leigh Alexander and others were in response to what happened to Anita and Quinn.10/02/2014 - 9:02am
E. Zachary KnightSleaker, My timeline puts events in the order that prh99 just laid out. Had Quinn's ex-boyfriend not been an incredible douchebag, we might not be where we are.10/02/2014 - 9:00am
prh99The blog post by Quinn's exboyfriend suggesting she slept with journalists to get favorable reviews was impetus for #gamergate.10/02/2014 - 8:54am
SleakerTechRaptor seems to do a decent job of breaking down things in it's currently 6-part series: http://techraptor.net/2014/09/23/good-morning-orthodoxy-1/ - and why atleast for him, the whole Media-thing is offensive.10/02/2014 - 8:53am
SleakerSo from all of the articles I've read that give timelines and show tag trends, there's nothing to support GG being about AS or Quinn. These were a minority of people harassing.. The large portion of GG started when the 'Gamers are dead' articles started.10/02/2014 - 8:45am
prh99Btw apparently they've gone as far as creating a GitHub for this Operation Disrespectful Nod. http://bit.ly/1qsbWcq10/02/2014 - 8:44am
Sleakerthey don't consider the issue. This is the consumeristic nature of a market.10/02/2014 - 8:41am
prh99Attacking their integrity and now getting advertisers to pull their ads from those sites.10/02/2014 - 8:40am
Sleaker@EZK - Telling a company you disagree with the nature of a news sites methodology and feel it negatively impacts the ad-running company as a supporter of said articles is not censorship. It's voicing your opinion that you will vote with your wallet if10/02/2014 - 8:38am
prh99I don't think they have any interested in debate. They scared Anita and Quinn with threats of violence, now they are going to try and damage organizations who called them their behavior.10/02/2014 - 8:36am
E. Zachary KnightWhat I can't understand is why gamergate supporters feel the need to silence their critics. Why can't they simply fight free speech with free speech.10/02/2014 - 8:23am
E. Zachary KnightSo what I am saying is that since gamergate failed to force Gamasutra to retract their editorial directly, they are now going the starvation route.10/02/2014 - 8:22am
E. Zachary KnightAs an illustration, you can kill someone by shooting them in the head, or you can starve them to death. The means don't matter, just the ends.10/02/2014 - 8:18am
E. Zachary Knightquiknkold, I can't speak for James, but trying to silence a critic by blocking its financial supporters is a censorious activity. It may not be the same as direct censoring, but its ends are the same.10/02/2014 - 8:18am
E. Zachary KnightMecha, I found neither the title nor the content of Gamasutra's Gamers are Dead article inflammatory. But I guess that just means I was the target audience for it.10/02/2014 - 8:16am
prh99@james_fudge Agreed, but then again this group doesn't exactly have high ethical standards or even a grasp of hypocrisy. They do pretty much anything to damage their targets.10/02/2014 - 8:14am
MechaTama31Are... Are you guys suggesting that the content of the "Gamers are over" article is *less* inflammatory than the title?10/02/2014 - 7:58am
quiknkoldhey James, Boycotts are not Censorship. Supreme Court NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. (1982)10/02/2014 - 7:37am
Michael ChandraWhat's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. That said, the name says it all.10/02/2014 - 7:34am
E. Zachary KnightYes.10/02/2014 - 7:29am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician