#oneaday, Day 39: Games Maketh the Man

“Is Bulletstorm the worst video game in the world?”

That’s the question Fox News asked earlier with an article that was hyperbolic and scaremongering, even by their questionable standards. According to Fox’s “experts”, including Carol Lieberman, a psychologist and book author, “the increase in rapes can be attributed in large part to the playing out of [sexual] scenes in video games”.

Whoa there. Hold on a minute. The playing out of sexual scenes in video games (which, I might add, are typically incredibly tame and rather immature in the way they are handled) is a “large” contributing factor to the increase in rapes?

This is scaremongering against games taken to a whole other level. Unbelievable stuff. And, of course, complete and utter nonsense. If we follow through Lieberman’s arguments to a natural (and exaggerated) conclusion, here’s how the life of an average gamer would generally go:

09:00 – Wake up wearing same clothes you’ve been wearing for the last six months because game characters never change their outfits. Skip breakfast because game characters never eat. Skip going to toilet for same reason.

09:05 – Leave house. Run down road because game characters never walk except in cutscenes.

09:06 – See passer-by, assume they’re enemy. Kill them for XP and loot and/or rape them if they’re female.

09:07 – Repeat process ad nauseam until reaching work.

09:30 – Reach work, still running. Enter work building. Start lurking around corners.

09:35 – Shoot out security camera in case it sees you, despite the fact you actually work here.

09:40 – Run around office using cubicles as cover, shooting anyone you happen to catch a glimpse of in the head.

10:00 – Called into boss’s office.

10:05 – Defeat boss by filling him full of lead.

10:10 – Rape him for good measure.

10:15 – Loot his body, because bosses always carry the phattest lewt.

11:00 – Take elevator up to next level. Repeat process.

12:00 – Police arrive. Shootout ensues.

12:10 – Die. Fail to respawn because you don’t get to do that in real life.

Now, granted, there are some absolute fuckwits in the world to whom that probably sounds like a great way to live out the last few hours of their lives. But, as is frequently pointed out by rational people every time such a tragedy happens, if someone is going to go on a killing and/or raping rampage, it’s probably not games that caused it in the first place. To assume that the average person doesn’t have the appropriate filters in their brain to differentiate between the darkly comic, over-the-top, ridiculously exaggerated violence in Bulletstorm—a game intended for (immature) adults, let’s not forget—and how horrifying it would be to witness real-life violence or rape? That’s just insulting to, well, everyone.

The article does raise one valid point about control and “censorship”, though. Parents still aren’t taking responsibility for the entertainment their kids are interacting with. Personally, I strongly believe that there should be tighter controls on how games are sold. I’m not talking about censorship, I’m talking about stricter enforcement of age ratings—and a change in the ridiculous policies that most retailers adopt that allow parents to buy age-inappropriate games for their children. If the parent is by themself, then sure, there’s not much that can be done. But as it stands right now, if a parent is obviously buying a game for the kid they have with them, most retailers won’t do a damn thing about it.

The above will probably have made clear that I don’t believe that there’s a direct causal link between violence and sexual content in the media and the way people behave. But I do believe that children shouldn’t be exposed to such content from such an early age these days—more so they can hold on to the increasingly-irrelevant concept of “youth” more than anything else.

Sadly, though, it’s pretty clear that it’s too late. To backtrack now and enforce tighter controls would be difficult, if not impossible to do. So we’re just going to have to live with the consequences. Which, according to Fox News, is a society full of joypad-wielding rapists.

I shall leave you with two interesting thoughts to mull over:

#oneaday, Day 33: Twitter: A Skewed Window on a Weird World

Twitter is many things, as I’ve said a number of times on this blog before. It’s arguably my primary means of communication these days, since the vast majority of my friends are quite-to-a-very long way away, and asynchronous communication is nice and convenient. It’s a good source of information (in fact, Twitter themselves now describe themselves as an “information source” rather than a means of “short, timely messages” like they used to) and a good way to keep up with what people you’re interested in are up to—and not just when they’re having a shit.

By far the most remarkable thing it does, though, is something that it wasn’t originally designed to do, but which it was always naturally going to do, given its nature. And that is the way it can give an eye-opening snapshot of “this day in history”. Even when seemingly nothing is happening.

Today, there happened to be several things of (in some cases questionable) note occurring. Depending on where the tweets were coming from, it was interesting to see the differences and priorities.

By far the most horrifying tweets were emanating from the Middle East, where Egypt has been undergoing some not-inconsiderable turmoil. Today, there were violent clashes in Tahrir square, and via one Middle East-based person I follow who was RTing someone stuck in the middle of the violence and horror, it was possible to get a “first-hand” account of what was going on. It was oddly sobering to see the whole thing unfold, and although I didn’t know the person being RTed in question, I was hoping that their tweets would keep coming and end on a positive note. I didn’t want to think about what a sudden cessation of the “commentary” would have meant.

Elsewhere in the world, Australia was preparing for an enormous cyclone. They haven’t had a great deal of luck over there recently. Due to the fact I don’t think I follow anyone who actually lives in Australia, most of the reportage on the incident that I saw today was pretty cold and clinical, although this image, showing what said cyclone would look like if it were en route to the UK instead of Australia, gave pause for thought.

And then there was the curious incident of Justin Lee Collins’ new girlfriend, which was reported by the Daily Mail today featuring a series of obnoxious paparazzi pictures of the couple on holiday. The article in itself was objectionable enough—as far as I’m concerned, celebrity squeezes aren’t news, even if they’re squeezing another celebrity—but what I found rather surprising was the reaction from quite a few (games journalist) people I knew on Twitter.

It transpires that the “mystery brunette” the Mail was referring to is actually someone who works in PR for the video games industry. I don’t know the person in question and have never had any direct contact with her, so I wasn’t much the wiser once people had explained the whole situation to me. But a lot of people seemed to find the whole situation hilarious—something which I found rather bewildering.

Now, granted, there’s a certain element of “hey, I know that person!” if you see an acquaintance or friend in the paper. But personally speaking, whether or not the games journalism biz had “got one up on the Mail” (normally cause for celebration), if I was the woman in question, I’m not sure I’d be particularly happy about the widespread discussion amongst a number of people I may well have had direct contact with in the past. It’s not her fault she got snapped by some paparazzi scumbag. Some may say it’s an occupational hazard of dating a “celebrity”, but that’s no excuse. Her privacy has been invaded; and while the discussion of the fact “we know who she is and the Mail doesn’t” hasn’t been malicious in tone, it’s drawn an unwarranted degree of attention to her.

In my opinion, anyway. But then I’ve never been one for any kind of gossip; people’s relationships are their own business—not mine, not yours and certainly not the Daily fucking Mail’s.

On a more uplifting note, one positive thing that came out of Twitter today was the #whatstigma hashtag started by comedienne @RebeccaFront. Via this hashtag, she was encouraging people to speak openly about mental illness, depression, anxiety and so forth, without fear of judgement or, well, stigma. It was heartening to see how many people took to it, and proof positive that there are plenty of people out there who are getting on with their lives despite struggling with difficult mental conditions. It was also, hopefully, a slap in the face to the sort of people who like to say “get over it”. (Hello again, Daily Mail.) I’d actually like to write a bit more on this subject as it’s one I do feel strongly about, but I think I’ll save that for another day.

So, on the 2nd of February 2011, what happened? Several shit things. One invasion of privacy. And thousands of people stepping up to publicly say something about themselves without fear or shame.

While not the most positive day the world has ever seen, to say the least, it was certainly an interesting day. Will it go down in the history books? Who knows? But those of us who were here have our own personalised record of the whole thing. And that’s pretty cool.

Good job, Internet.

#oneaday, Day 297: Read This Or I’ll Punch You In The Balls/Face

The latest episode of The Squadron of Shame SquadCast is currently uploading. In it, we discuss the ever-present topic of video game violence. Is it really destroying our children and turning them into violent assholes?

Well, you’ll have to listen to the podcast for our group conclusions, but here’s my take on the whole thing. Video game violence has now been around for some time. In fact, it’s been around for quite a bit longer than some people realise. A couple of the guys brought up Forbidden Forest on the Commodore 64, a game which, while laughable now, was pretty shocking and gory for the time. I know that certainly five-year old me would have been freaked out by the big-ass spiders.

One side-effect of the violence issue being around for so long is that it’s now somewhat taken for granted. Whether or not this is “desensitisation” per se is a matter of opinion. But the fact is, violence in video games is very rarely shocking these days. Shoot someone in Call of Duty and it doesn’t carry much in the way of emotional impact, because you do it so much. Shoot someone in Heavy Rain, though, and it carries much more gravitas due to the context, and the fact it happens less.

But desensitisation to violence in the video games medium doesn’t mean that we as a culture are desensitised to violence as a whole. I’ve played a ton of games that involve ultra-violence, dismemberment, heads exploding, that sort of thing. One of my favourite games in recent memory was Bayonetta, which features a huge range of over-the-top violence and implements of extreme torture. But if I saw something like that happening in real life, I would be horrified and disgusted. I see a photograph of something violent and I feel sick. And anything involving eyes—even if it’s just on a TV show or a movie—ugh, count me out.

So it’s clear, then, that video games haven’t desensitised me, personally, to anything except video game violence, which is something much more akin to cartoon violence than anyone else. I doubt there’s anything that can adequately prepare you for real-world violence and gore, save being immersed in it for some time by being either a psychopath or a soldier on active duty. And neither of those things are particularly desirable.

What I have observed, though, is a knock-on effect from some of these games, and it’s not necessarily the violence itself that is to blame. Back where I used to live, a lot of kids used to play in the streets rather noisily. Nothing unusual, you might say, until you heard the language they were coming out with. It became abundantly clear to me from listening to them, and the fact I had played through Modern Warfare 2 relatively recently, that they were re-enacting something they’d seen in a video game. And the parents didn’t seem to care that their kids—aged between about 5 and 10, I’d wager—were out in the street, yelling “MOTHERFUCKER!” at each other and threatening to blow each others’ legs off.

“Kids will be kids,” is the easy response, of course. But these kids picked up on this material from somewhere, and obviously hadn’t had a discussion with their parent(s) about what was appropriate to be shouting in the street, and what wasn’t.

I don’t envy the task that parents have these days. There is so much crap out there that kids can access easily. So the challenge is not to stop them from seeing it at all—that’s an impossible mission that grows more impossible by the day—but to help them understand what is and isn’t “appropriate” in certain contexts. And some parents, it seems, just can’t be bothered to have those conversations. And, as a result, assholes beget assholes.

It’s a big topic, far more than just one blog post can cover. Want to hear more? Then check out the latest episode of the SquadCast, which will be up online very soon. Head over to the Squadron of Shame Squawkbox in the meantime to debate the issue.

#oneaday, Day 113: Mini-Memes and Offensive GIFs (NSFW)

I have no idea who Bernard Pivot is. The only thing I think of when I hear the word “Pivot” is the array of moderately-to-extremely offensive stickman animations entitled Battle of the Sexes that my friend Sam and I produced using the piece of software of the same name (Pivot, not Battle of the Sexes) while we were back in university, a selection of which you can see at the end of this blog post. That was a very long sentence, wasn’t it? Never mind.

Anyway, the reason I bring up Bernard Pivot is Daniel Lipscombe’s recent post of the same name. Apparently something called Inside the Actors Studio always featured a questionnaire by Mr Pivot that everyone featured would answer. I’m sure Daniel can explain it much better than I can, so go and read his post for more details. I’m just going to answer the questions in a memerrific manner.

Yes, I’m feeling lazy. But I did go and dig into archive.org to go and find those GIF files, previously thought to be lost. I’m good to you, I am. So allow me a little laziness, particularly as I had a job interview today and had to spend seventy-five fucking pounds getting the train to Brighton (65 miles). Ripoff!

I appear to be procrastinating against answering these questions. It’s not deliberate. Here goes:

  1. What is your favorite word?
    “Ostensibly”. I’m not sure it’s actually my “favourite”, but I certainly use it a hell of a lot. I guess you could say that ostensibly my favourite word is “ostensibly”. Maybe. But that would make you a prat.
  2. What is your least favorite word?
    “Accountability”. Nothing good ever comes of someone using that word. See also: “leverage”, “monetize”, “transparency”, when not used the context of discussing a physical object that is not opaque.
  3. What turns you on?
    Porn! Errm, you didn’t mean it like that, did you? An in-depth and deeply, deeply nerdy conversation would be the next best thing.
  4. What turns you off?
    Staff meetings in hot, stuffy rooms. I can’t help my eyes getting heavy. I’ve never actually fallen asleep in one but I’ve come perilously close lots of times. Also, spiders.
  5. What sound or noise do you love?
    That bubbly sound when you put a straw in a glass of drink and blow.
  6. What sound or noise do you hate?
    Bits of polystyrene scraping together.
  7. What is your favorite curse word?
    COCK! Said with aplomb.
  8. What profession other than your own would you like to attempt?
    I am currently profession-less, technically, unless you count supply teaching. In which case, video game journalism, which I’m sort of doing already anyway. For something completely different, I wouldn’t mind doing something involving driving.
  9. What profession would you not like to do?
    Anything that involves sick, poo or blood.
  10. If Heaven exists, what would you like to hear God say when you arrive at the Pearly Gates?
    “Well done for surviving My many challenges that I have thrown in your way! You win my Grand Prize.”

Do have a go at answering these questions in the comments below because I like comments and they make me feel loved and appreciated. While you wait, here are some offensive GIFs involving stickmen and women. I present Battle of the Sexes, a 2005 production of Angry Jedi and Rampant Goose. Click the pics to see the animations, since WordPress doesn’t seem to like displaying inline animated GIFs, at least not in this theme.

Episode 1: First Meeting

Episode 2: Anyone for Tennis?

Episode 3: Man’s Best Friend

Episode 4: Uneasy Alliance

Episode 5: Raging Horn

Episode 6: Supermale

Episode 7: Kiss and Make Up

Episode 8: Big Sister’s Story

Episode 9: Happy Home

I’m sorry. 🙂

One A Day, Day 27: Sportsmanship

There was a football match in my city today. Southampton vs Portsmouth. These two are traditionally great rivals, and everyone jokes that there’ll be “rioting” after a game between the two of them, as if that’s a perfectly normal thing to expect to happen after a sporting event.

I didn’t encounter any particular problems myself, but there sure were a lot of people wandering around to and from town, plus several local shops had either put up signs refusing to serve alcohol, or closed completely, citing the football match as the reason. As I walked through town in the middle of the day, there was a constant police presence, with officers on foot walking around the pedestrian area in the middle of town, while cars and vans raced around the major roads of the city, sirens blaring.

As I saw all this I had to think to myself “why?”

I know people get attached to their sports teams. This may be for personal reasons, it may be just something you’re interested in, or it may be a sense of loyalty to where you come from (although the last one is rather rarer than it used to be, with many people choosing to follow the clubs with the most money rather than the ones nearest them). It may even be a completely arbitrary decision.

The thing I don’t get is this: what is it about supporting a team that makes people get into such a state that a police presence approaching that required for a terrorist incident is necessary?

That was a terribly clumsy sentence. But do you see my point?

Surely if you enjoy watching football you enjoy watching football. Many people I know who do like football are perfectly normal people who have never been in a fight. So why all the police? Why do I hear shouting morons passing by my window on the way to the stadium? (Incidentally, the only noise I hate as much as people chewing is drunken football chanting.)

Perhaps one of my trans-Atlantic readers could shed some light on this issue. Does this sort of thing happen with American football games? I get the impression that the “local loyalty” thing is a much bigger deal in the States.