Warren Spector Calls Gamers to Action on Oct. 19 to 'Protect' the Video Game Industry
by Xav de Matos, Oct 15, 2010 3:00pm PDTToday is a day for fighting back, it seems. Renowned video game designer Warren Spector has issued a call to arms to gamers looking to protect the industry against the upcoming battle it will face at the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a message relayed to us from the Video Game Voters Network--an advocacy group fighting for their First Amendment protection--Spector asked gamers "stand up" for gamers urge their friends and family to join the cause on October 19. Getting involved is easy. Aside from joining the network, Spector urges those willing to post a message on Twitter and Facebook detailing the cause on that date. Details on how you can get involved can be found on the VGVN's "No Censorship" site.
Hopefully the tidal wave of messages on one day will show the rest of the world that this industry isn't to be underestimated. That is if you choose to participate.
You can read Spector's letter after the break.
Dear Friends,
Computer and video games are art, a form of artistic expression deserving of and, currently, protected by the First Amendment.
That hasn't stopped states though from trying to restrict the rights of our medium's artists, storytellers, and technical innovators. On November 2, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of a California law that would restrict the sale of video games. This is a case of great significance to you and me -- to all people who play or create games and believe in the First Amendment.
Let's not beat around the bush -- if the Court's ruling goes against us, this law could lead to the future censorship of games, could irrevocably harm developers and would validate the absurd notion that video games are somehow a lesser form of creative expression.
We must act now. On October 19, I'm asking you to join me in urging all of your friends and co-workers, real-world or virtual, to stand up for video games by joining the Video Game Voters Network, an advocacy group fighting for their First Amendment protection.
Many people, including some of my personal heroes, like Stan Lee, have already encouraged us to take a stand. Now is the time for gamers to come together and spread the word through our social networks. Now is the time to ask every gamer we can reach to stand up with us and protect our First Amendment rights.
Here's the link: Video Game Voters Network: No Censorship
Thank you for considering this call to action.
-- Warren Spector
You can find the Twitter and Facebook messages, recommended for posting on October 19, at the Video Game Voters Network website.
Splinter Cell Blacklist co-op modes partially detailed
FIFA 14 on PC won't use Ignite engine
Ace Attorney Trilogy coming to iOS next week
Far Cry 3 editor jazzed up with Blood Dragon shinies
Epic Mickey 2 for Vita coming June 18
Poker Night 2 antes up on iOS
Warhammer Quest hitting iOS May 30
Super Stardust dev making 'spiritual successor' for PS4
Dungeons & Dragons: Chronicles of Mystara preview: classic arcade revival
Final Fantasy XIV gets reborn on August 27; collector's edition detailed



Comments
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 4 replies.
This law doesn't censor game at all. The language of the law calls for the restriction of sales of "extremely violent 17+ rated games to minors." That is to say, without an accompanying adult, a minor can not purchase a M-rated game, same as not being able to walk into an R-rated movie.
I'm a CA resident and I don't personally think in many cases games reported to be highly graphic do in fact deliver on the said premise of "realistic portrayal of violence." GTA IV's shooting mechanics, for example, aren't that realistic. This would not be true in every case, some games do rely on the gameplay crutches of shoot-to-kill too damn much. However this is an issue at the retail-publishing level. If ESA fears retailers banning the sales of M-rated games altogether, preventing any from being made in the future, it's an issue to be solved b/w retailers and industry.
I'm leaning toward voting this down cus personally I don't think this law will do very much in the way of its intention which is to shield minor from violent media, there are too many channels. But the industry does indeed need to take a hard look into moving this "art form" beyond too many cases of purely shooting-at-people games.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 9 replies.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 5 replies.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 7 replies.
We tried self regulating. But its hard to feel empathy when you log in to MW2 or MOH and a 7 year old is talking about fucking your mother.
So maybe after 20 years of this, we SHOULD try some good ol' fashioned government involvement.
If that means that its not done with surgical precision (as we all know it wont be) but with a broad sword. Then so be it.
Just means that everyone has to work a little harder.
Means the clerk at the counter HAS to check ID, means the brick and mortar and online retailers will have to verify age.
I'm all for the first amendment but not to protect shit that don't work.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 3 replies.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 3 replies.
I could give a rats butt about this law. I see nothing wrong with it. What, devs/pub upset they can't sell their adult oriented content directly to kids....boohoo Let the parents make the final decision not corporations and their greed. It there needs to be a law for parents not familiar with the gaming arena because both are gone 10hours a day working to pay the bills and put a roof over their heads then there's nothing wrong with that. WE have to remember or if you don't know todays games are MUCH more realistic/controversial than what parents grew up with in the 70s and 80s. You say video game and they are thinking Pac Man, Donkey Kong, Mario.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 5 replies.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 2 replies.
It comes down to this.
A: Games = censored = Terrorist Win. :p
B: Games may go on as they have been and may do WTF they want = First Amendment in tact = we WIN!.
If it loses, we as Americans FAIL. Hmm ... In some ways we already do :|
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 4 replies.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 2 replies.
Here is the full text of the California law in question:
http://law.justia.com/california/codes/2009/civ/1746-1746.5.html
The Media Coaltition submited an amicus brief which you can read here: I reccomend at least taking a look at page 23 onward, where it dissects the California Law:
http://mediacoalition.org/mediaimages/Schwarzenegger%20v%20EMA_Media%20Coalition%20Amicus%20Brief_09.16.10.pdf
I'm not sure this is really the end of the world as they make it out to be; the californa law is rather short. It essence, it does what Xulu describes: It forbids the sale of games that are defined as "violent" (indeed, the bulk of the law concerns how this is interperted.) to anyone who is a minor. Seeing as some stores already do this in essence, I'm not sure we're breaking new ground here.
I can see where this would affect business much though. This hurts sales tremendously if kids have to get their parents to buy the game for them every time they want the new CoD release.
Drawing parallels to the comic book industry before, comic books were in their whole censored and forbidden, not placed higher into an age bracket like we do with movies. The ESRB shows that the industry is more than happy to support this at face value, so long as it's the one controlling the enforcement. They're not stupid: They know kids are going to set the year to "1900" every time the age check comes up.
The California Law, in my opinion even gives itself an out in section A, points i, ii, and iii, where it stipulates that a violent game must meet one of those conditions. So violence that exists in the context of say, a historical game, could possible disclassify it. just as you can spin games as being excessivally violent, so can you spin them as having violence necessary int he depection of a greater story. (and if you think I'm being silly, just look at TV. =)
Even assuming the worst however, and a game is branded as really violent, it gets a +18 rating. That's it.
I think Gabe surmises things well:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/3/20/
In the end, I don't think this is the apoclypse people are making it out to be.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 2 replies.
You must be logged in to post.