I spend a good amount of time following piracy, so I know sales figures can't 
really account for actual usage. However, steam probably plays a significant 
role today in managing access to certain-rated videogames.

Further, I agree the issue is fundamentally about violence, not speech or 
videogames alone. However, take affective emersion in digital settings, 
role-playing as first person, and the ability to simulate and execute violence. 
It's a different form of engagement than a more passive activity like watching 
or listening.

Anyway, I totally agree, we need to liberate our minds from the idea that sex 
is obscene and place that frustration on harm and violence.

I see no good future state solution to regulate or incentivize video game 
production. Violence sells, and in our current economic condition, fear of 
market disaster is stronger (or louder) than any will to strive for a more 
informed, empathetic society.

- Matt

----- Reply message -----
From: "Kevin Driscoll" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Jun 27, 2011 6:14 pm
Subject: [FC-discuss] Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn. affirmed
To: <[email protected]>

Great links and suggestions, Matt + Jacob. On the bright side, the FTC
suggests that the game industry is actually pretty good at restricting
access in retail settings. 87% of under-18 mystery shoppers were not
permitted to purchase a violent game:
http://www.esrb.org/about/awareness.jsp

One reason I opposed the CA law is that it singles out "video games"
without providing a justification for doing so. Have experimental
studies demonstrated a significantly stronger relationship between
violent video games and adult violence than, say, country-western
lyrics ("I shot a man in Reno / just to watch him die")?

If so, games must be very powerful indeed. Maybe the state could
explore ways to diversify the marketplace and help new companies
making new types of games survive?

Another fascinating dimension of this case is that it highlights the
bizarre historical distinction between violence and sex. Obscenity
(which is restricted) traditionally includes sex but not violence.

There was a rich discussion of the case on this morning's episode of
Air Talk on KPCC. Anyone interested in free speech, obscenity, and
media policy will enjoy it! You can listen to the archive here:
http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2011/06/27/supreme-court-cases/

Kevin


On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 12:18 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 11:49:42 -0700
> From: Matthew Senate <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn.
>        affirmed
>
> Great find Jacob, I appreciate the link.
>
> Here's a site run by Gonzalo Frasca, who coined the term "videogames of the
> oppressed" http://www.ludology.org/ it's closed, but he just happened to
> publish his dissertation on there this spring (you can also find his
> thesis), in case anybody's interested in some of the theory here.
>
> - Matt
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Mr. Caggiano 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Agree with your sentiment Matt. I recently stumbled upon a creative way to
>> use The Sims to highlight issues surrounding homelessness
>> http://aliceandkev.wordpress.com/
>>
>> ~Jacob
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss

Reply via email to