Flogging a Dead Horse?

If you believe the likes of Jack Thompson, video games are the root of all evil, are the single biggest cause in the break-down of morality and will see our society crumble to the stage where we have to surround our homes with bunkers and barbed-wire to protect ourselves from the masses of axe-wielding 13-year olds.


It's almost inevitable that when a teenager attacks, or even kills someone else, there's almost always mention of a violent video game or movie. Perhaps one of the most high profile being the infamous "Manhunt Murder" in 2004.

Today's announcement that Microsoft are to announce safety settings on it's XBOX 360 console which would prevent games with certain age rating being played without a password would therefore go someway to halting the inevitable youth crime spree then surely?

Well....no. Not exactly.

You see, in the very same article, the BBC website links to this story which states that despite crystal clear guidelines on how suitable a game is for various age groups, the public are just too ignorant towards them, or too stupid to understand a two-digit number.

Video games rating are very clear.
All games now have a white sticker on the back with an age rating displayed in bold black letters. It's a simple system. For those games that are deemed to be violent or have large portions of content such as Manhunt or Grand Theft Auto, the BBFC (who classify all films in the UK) steps in and places not only a recommendation, but a legal restriction. Basically, if a film or game has a BBFC rating of "18", it isn't just advised you don't play it if you are under the age of 18, it is illegal for you even buy the thing.
So, with all that legislation, how do 13-year-olds get their hands on a game where the intention is to car-jack, smuggle drugs from Columbia, pick-up prostitutes and then shoot them in the face?
Simple, the parents. Prior to the release of San Andreas in 2004, the Grand Theft Auto brand had sold 32 million copies worldwide and San Andreas itself is thought to have sold a further 10 million.
Anyone with half a mind can see from those figure alone that ratings and advisory logos are beyond useless.

The problem is that many people of that age don't understand the computing or games industry. You see it at Christmas with the mad rush for PlayStation's and XBOX's. People are running around like a lunatic to buy one for their kids, but that haven't a clue what they are actually buying. People still have the impression that video games are like 'Pong' and 'Frogger' with the cute characters and innocent play, not realising that the games industry today is much like the Hollywood movie industry, with the capability to create a chainsaw wielding manic with frighting accuracy.

I'm not going into the debate as to whether video games do affect teenagers to the point they themselves become violent because, quite simply, I don't know the answer (and nobody really does). There are two different camps. The gamers will tell you that there is nothing wrong with violent games as there is a clear distinction between reality and fantasy whilst the pro-censorship camp will claim that games attempt to depict reality.
I myself have experienced these games and don't feel the urge to hit someone over the head with a baseball bat but we all work in different ways. I've never been one to imitate people, plenty of other people are.

What I will say though is that Microsoft are wasting their time in the same way that Sky wasted their time putting parental controls on their Satellite receivers. People make their own choices what to allow their children to access and no amount of marketing or legislation will make any considerable alteration.
Perhaps Bill Gates realises that to some extent and is just launching this publicity stunt to get the anti-violence mob of his back for a little while in the run-up to the years biggest sales period.