Like other art forms, video games shouldn’t be censored by the law
CHRISTINE DANNER/daily bruin
By Salim Zymet
Nov. 18, 2010 12:01 a.m.
Decapitation, torture and murder are but a few of the violent ways in which video games engage their mature audiences.
It’s certainly true that the most popular video games of our time, be they “Call of Duty” or “Halo,” “StarCraft” or “Assassin’s Creed,” deliver most of their game play via the act of killing, but all of these games also tell stories, often of the same caliber one would find in a Hollywood blockbuster.
Additionally, college campuses nationwide have begun to accept video games as the legitimate entertainment medium that they are. Game design majors have been steadily gaining popularity and, although UCLA lacks a formal major, which I’ve advocated for in the past, we at least have a couple of classes devoted to teaching people how to create video games.
You may disagree with the artistic merits of video games, but if “Saw VI” enjoys equal protection under the law, so should “Grand Theft Auto.”
One of the most respected developers in the video game industry, Blizzard Entertainment was started by three UCLA alumni. One of their hit series, “Diablo,” is rated mature because of its graphic depictions of hell. “Diablo” may be an over-the-top, violent game, but it also has a story which has spawned numerous comic books and novels. Because games like “Diablo” are truly forms of artistic expression, they are currently and should continue to be protected by the First Amendment.
A bill signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005, which bans the sale of violent video games to minors, is now up for debate in front of the Supreme Court after being struck down in California because of its violation of the First Amendment. Just to clarify, games rated mature are not pornographic and contain similar scenes to what you would find in a R-rated movie.
As the target audience (18 and older) of the highest-selling violent video games and as one of the most avid game-playing demographic groups, college students are uniquely affected by this.
Video game detractors buoy their arguments by citing studies done on children, which indicate that playing violent video games lead to increased levels of aggression and misbehavior. They say that the “obscene” level of violence in video games is unparalleled by film and, as such, video games require special regulations.
These arguments fall flat when we examine the evidence. Hundreds of studies have been done on video games to determine their positive or negative effects on children, and all the results are inconclusive. At the very least, no researcher has been able to prove that a causal link between violence in media and violence in children exists.
If found constitutional, the law would criminalize the act of selling mature-rated games to minors and force retailers to add additional labels to violent video games and sell them in a different section, similar to how retailers currently sell pornographic magazines and movies.
Although the law would have no effect on our ability to legally purchase the games we want to play, it would equate buying mature games to purchasing “Girls Gone Wild” and similar content. When is the last time you saw someone purchase pornography from a Best Buy, or purchase pornography, period? Millions currently line up to purchase the latest mature video game releases; these numbers will tumble if the law is put into effect.
Video games, as a medium, have proven to be just as compelling as movies. Games like “Call of Duty” and “Halo” constantly challenge the film industry in its current dominance of American entertainment. If the Supreme Court sides with California’s lawyers, the video game industry will suffer a major blow, and a legitimate form of expression will be censored as a result.
Do you have an itchy virtual trigger finger?
E-mail Zymet at [email protected].
Send general comments to [email protected].
