If you see the above graphic someplace, chances are that the individual who placed it there isn’t trying to bring back roman numerals. This is just one of the ways that Rockstar Games is promoting Grand Theft Auto 4. As of today, they announced the official release date for this anticipated title. It is due to hit the streets April 29th, 2008. If you’re interested, you can read their actual press release.
Before we go into a little history, let’s establish that the Grand Theft Auto series has been steeped in controversy since the original was released in 1997. In fact, I would venture to say that GTA is considered by many to be the most notorious gaming franchise on the planet. Many parent organizations point to this series when they want to criticize videogames. We expect that another wave of uproar will coincide with the imminent release of GTA4 - the first incarnation of the series on this generation of consoles (PS3 and Xbox 360).
We are not here to tell you what is good or bad. We’re here to help you make informed decisions for yourselves. The fact is that we have played these games over the years and we consider the Grand Theft Auto games to be some of the most impressive titles in the industry…for adults. These are very much mature games and are rated accordingly by the ESRB. These games are NOT intended for children. You should think carefully about the subject matter of these titles if you are considering bringing them into your household. They are violent. They include strong language. They involve drugs. They are filled with sexual subject matter. Yet the content is no stronger than most R-rated movies. Having said that, my children won’t be watching such movies or playing these games for many years.
In a special December supplement of the Journal of Adolescent Health, a number of articles focus on media impact on violence. The suppliment entitled Youth Violence and Electronic Media: Similar Behaviors, Different Venues? is available is available online for free here.
There are a number of interesting articles focused on electronic-mediated bullying and harassment. Though much of this is not focused on gaming in general, these are important and relevant studies to parents. Noted in one of the studies was the fact that approximately 50% of the victims of “online social cruelty” did not know who the bully was. Thus, technology provides the method and opportunity for adolescents to remain anonymous while being hurtful to their peers.
Closer to home is this article on the effects of media violence. In this case, the researcher L. Rowell Huesmann, Ph.D. states that exposure to electronic media violence conclusively “increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior.” This is reinforced with a bar graph that notes the significance of known health threats and places “Media violence and aggression” second only to “Smoking and lung cancer” and above “Condom use and sexually transmitted HIV.”
Whether or not you agree with all of the observations and conclusions presented here, there is some important work and significant data worth noting. If for no other reason than to increase our awareness as parents. Because knowing what to look for helps us better to guide and inspire our children.
Above is our brief comment about last week’s Rockstar release, Manhunt 2. Let me say that we do not have any bone to pick with Rockstar Games. In fact, we took our time to post this comment because we didn’t want to be a part of the media hype.
We believe that they have the right to publish content as long as there is an audience for it and as long as it is targeted appropriately. Having said that, we want to help fellow parents identify whether or not games are appropriate for their families. For the most part, we try to provide you the information so that you can judge. But I believe that it’s clear that this title is neither intended, nor appropriate for children.
Having said that, the Halloween release date seemed appropriate for a horror/slasher title. I believe that the real source of concern over this title is based in the misconception that videogames are only for children. This is just no longer the case.
This article in the November issue of the journal Pediatrics identifies a link between viewing violent content and aggressive behavior. In particular, boys ages 2-4 who view violent video content or play violent videogames are predisposed to antisocial behavior evident five years later (ages 7-9).
Interestingly, there was virtually no correlation for the girls of the same age in this study. The researchers suggest that this could be attributed to the difference in socialization between genders.
Special thanks to avid reader David Stoddard for the info!
This past Saturday (October 20th), Fox News program Cashin’ In provided yet another opportunity for Jack Thompson to vilify the gaming industry. Click here to view this YouTube clip posted by News Hounds. Perhaps what was most disturbing about this broadcast was the fact that the counter to his view, Jonathan Hoenig, was truly obnoxious and unable to properly address Thompson’s assertions point-for-point. Add to this the fact that the moderator (for lack of a better term) did nothing to balance the discussion and, eventually, joined Thompson by criticizing Hoenig’s stance by shouting over him and saying that a parent can’t prevent what their child sees at their friend’s house. Honestly, it felt like the whole thing was staged to make Thompson look good and to take an already sensationalized subject and push it further over the top.
The fact is that I am no fan of Mr. Thompson’s approach nor do I appreciate the way he spouts factiods¹ at the drop of a hat. However, he represents a voice and an opinion regarding gaming and children. Further, I believe that if we were to tear away the layers of misinformation, blatant attacks on the gaming industry, and myriad insults that he casts at gamers in general, we may find something of value. Somewhere underneath it all is an agenda. The questions is, “What is his agenda?” I believe that this is either: 1) to protect children from inappropriate content, or 2) to make a name for himself by highlighting controversial issues and appeal to the tabloid mentality.
If I proceed under the assumption that the first agenda is Thompson’s motivation, he would have a valid reason for bringing public attention to particular issues. In fact, I’d go so far to say that Thompson might be right regarding the gaming industry. He could be spot on in recognizing that an ESRB rating of “M” makes kids want the game more, just as much as an “R” film tempts them. He may also be correct when he says that the gaming industry relies on this and expects these “M” rated games to be purchased by teens under 17 and that, in fact, the industry fears that if it enforces the “M” rating through retailers that it will drastically reduce their profits. Honestly, this wouldn’t be the first time that a business put it’s own profits ahead of public interest, would it?
However, if I were to grant Mr. Thompson all of these points, it wouldn’t change the fact that he cannot argue his way out of a paper bag. He is supposed to be a lawyer, right? The weakest member of my high school debate team could make mincemeat out of him. I can’t help but think that if his agenda is in the public interest, that he could approach this in a much more productive manner. Instead, all he does is offend people who play games and try to stir up controversey. His actions seem synchronous with agenda #2.
As for this particular appearance, Thompson was speaking out to have Manhunt 2² banned in the United States. I will take this as an opportunity to strongly encourage all parents to keep this title off your under-17-year-old’s Christmas list this year. I don’t think that it should be banned any more than the movies Seven or Saw. But it is not meant for children or those with a weak stomach.
¹Factoids are not facts. Merriam-Webster defines them as, “an invented fact believed to be true because of its appearance in print.” For further clarification, see the WikiPedia entry here.
²Manhunt 2 is an extremely violent title in which the protagonist is a doctor who volunteers as a guinea pig for a neurological weapons project when funding is pulled. The result puts him in an asylum where he stays for 6 years trying to determine if his life with a wife and two children was a real memory or a fabrication. The game begins on a fateful night when the asylum loses power and our (anti-) hero escapes. In order to find out the truth about his life and those who destroyed it, he must travel a very dark path.
GamePolitics brought our attention to this gem. Canadian researcher Richard Tremblay has invested some time in studying a fairly large group of children to identify the roots of physical aggression. How much time you ask? 20 years. How many participants in the study? 35,000.
According to the original article in Scientific American, Tremblay notes that violence is a part of human development. It is through socialization that we minimize the need to revert to violence. However, individuals who have trouble communicating with those around them are more predisposed to utilize violence as a form of expression. The observable behavior is one of chronic aggression. However, Tremblay noted that these individuals have less expressed genes. Therefore, these behavior patterns are not caused by exposure to violent media.
Though this is just one of many studies, it is truly significant due to its longevity and the number of participants. Yet, I wouldn’t use this as an excuse to let my 4-year-old watch Apocolypse Now or play Resistance: Fall of Man.
What are your thoughts? Join the conversation below!
