Brazil Following in Venezuela’s Footsteps

Eerily mirroring my tradition of mindlessly reposting GamePolitics articles to this blog, Brazil is in the process of copying Venezuela’s decision to completely ban violent or otherwise offensive video games countrywide.

As of this posting, the measure, authored by Brazilian senator Valdir Raupp, has been approved by the Education Commission of the Senate and now needs to be voted on by the Committee on Constitution and Justice.

According to the oddly translated article that serves as an overview of Raupp’s bill, the new legislation is aimed at punishing the act of manufacturing, importing, distributing, and otherwise interacting with video games that are deemed offensive to people in any way, whether due to attacking their culture, religion, or sexuality.  The article’s justification for these measures reads, “…’the law shall punish any acts of discrimination against the rights and freedoms.’  Thus, we believe that freedom of expression in video games can not be confused with anarchy, disrespect to the image and honor of people and faiths and their scriptures.”

The effect this legislation will have on the video game market in Brazil seems questionable considering the fact that game piracy in the country is utterly out of control.  According to this Escapist article, it’s more than likely that “if you play video games in Brazil, you’re committing a crime.”  Numbers cited in the article indicate that, as of 2004, 94 percent of the nation’s games market consisted of pirated merchandise, while illegally imported titles made up 80 percent of the country’s games market overall and 94 percent of its home console market.

Officially at least, Brazil seems innately hostile to electronic entertainment, apparently to protect its own interests.  According to an Internet commentator going by the handle of Bokusatsu_Tenshi, import taxes for electronics can reach up to 70 percent of the product’s initial price, excluding shipping.  While Brazil experienced a boom in the games development industry during the 90s, a new president was elected and government funds for the industry were shut down.  Bokusatsu_Tenshi writes, “So you can imagine how hard it is to create cultural content to criticize the government.  We still do, it’s true, far more than other latin american countries… and Brazil still enjoys plenty of democracy compared to some of its neighbors.  But it’s not as good as our government makes it to be.”

Sega on Germany Release of Aliens vs. Predator: “Not Worth It”

Warning: Intense German

Sega has disclosed that it will not bother to try and release its upcoming title Aliens vs. Predator in Germany due to the country’s stringent ratings system, according to PC Games Hardware.

Riemann Link, the article’s author, says that the press release he was working from made it clear that Sega did not expect the country’s rating board, the USK, to approve the title due to the intense violence that comes as a part of the gameplay experience.  Sega is also unwilling to let the title’s content be compromised at the behest of the ratings board, and therefore fit its ideas of proper entertainment, due to the fact that the game “has been designed in coherence with the Alien and Predator brands–gameplay, graphics, and story all meet a mature theme.”  Ultimately, Link writes, the combination of the costs involved in translating the game and altering its content would not be compensated in Germany due to the significantly smaller available audience allowed to buy it due to its lack of official rating.

The story was picked up by The Escapist as well, which predicts that the game will be submitted for approval in the similarly conservative Australia due to the fact that no language barrier needs to be overcome before it can be released.

The USK has a history of refusing to classify many titles released elsewhere in the world, Australia included, a habit which it has attracted criticism for in the past.  In the linked article, the head of EA’s Germany branch advocates the adoption of the PEGI ratings system, which bears more similarity to the ESRB of all of North America and several other countries in the western hemisphere.  Curiously, USK head Marek Brunner says that his organization is not the true culprit behind what EA is calling censorship–that would be the Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons, or the BPjM, which defines what is and what is not considered offensive or damaging content in German media.

At least one Internet writer hopes that some good will come out of this latest ban, believing that if Germany can’t be motivated to reassess its ratings system due to public outcry, maybe the “videogame-shaped hole” in its economy will.

Law Professor’s Paper: “Somebody Think of the Children!”

A research paper written by a law professor from the University of Michigan is calling for an examination of current video game legislation to increase the chances of content control laws being passed in the future, according to GamePolitics.

From Research Conclusions to Real Change: Understanding the First Amendment’s (Non) Response to Negative Effects of Mass Media on Children by Looking to the Example of Violent Video Game Regulations, by Renee Newman Knake, argues that the American court system is not addressing the threat posed by mass media to the delicate sensibilities of children while using past court cases concerning video game legislation as examples throughout the paper. 

According to the article’s abstract, “The disconnect between law and social science has led scholars like Professor Barbara Bennett Woodhouse to propose a reframing of the issues.  She calls for a paradigm shift from family law’s traditional approach of the parent-child-state triangle to recognize the influence of what she terms ‘mass-media marketing.’  She proposes a new ‘a child-centered approach [sic] to environmental ethics’ or, in her words ‘ecogenerism,’ and suggests that those who advocate for the protection of children from the harms of mass media and marketing have much to learn from the environmental law and ethics movement.”

According to the GamePolitics article, Knake comes to the conclusion that the courts are unreasonably refusing to compromise the first amendment to the United States Constitution in favor of waiting for science to “catch up” to the point where it can effectively prove that violent video games, and media in general, are having an adverse effect on America’s children.

The paper appears to be in response to the industry’s winning streak against similar legislation in general and the recent striking down of a California law which would ban the sale of violent video games to anyone under 18 years of age, which the paper explicitly refers to.

What the paper ignores (or at least avoids mentioning in its abstract) is a fact elaborated upon in a previous post, which is that there are no well-run studies that have come to the conclusion that it is video games that cause violent behavior in its players.  Also unaddressed by both Knake and Governor Schwarzenegger is the fact that a system has existed for several years to keep violent video games out of the hands of an audience that the ESRB deems to young to play them.

Valve Accepts OFLC’s Demands, For Now

 

 

An artist's depiction of what Australian gamers can expect from Left 4 Dead 2

Left 4 Dead 2 has been approved for release in Australia by the OFLC after removing much of the gore present in the original submission, according to Edge.com.

 The OFLC let the game through with an MA 15+ rating after fairly significant editing, with the quote in Edge’s article saying that it has removed “depictions of decapitation, dismemberment, wound detail and piles of dead bodies lying about the environment.”  The items that cause such effects, which include chain saws and fire axes, remain in the game as usable weapons.

Non-Australian gamers who fear that the worldwide release will be similarly bowderlized don’t need to worry.  According to G4 (who themselves are cribbing from a variety of sources), only the Australian release will be censored in such a fashion, so everyone else can hack the rabid undead into bloody giblets to their heart’s content.  In fact, even this bit of censorship is technically up in the air at this point.  Valve’s appeal to have the gorier version of L4D2 will come under review on October 22, and if it goes through a free patch will be released to add the juicy parts back in (unless we’re talking about the XBox 360 version, maybe–see the G4 article).

The reasons behind Valve’s blasé  response to this whole mess–the one I unprofessionally used to say that Valve didn’t have a backbone in my last post on this issue–becomes more understandable considering that the company predicts that the title will be the “fastest-selling product in the company’s history,” based on pre-orders.

Venezuela Puts Wheels On Own Ban Wagon

Courtesy of the Associated Press

According to an Associated Press article recently written by Christopher Toothaker, Venezuela will be voting on legislation that will completely prohibit violent video games and toys in order to curb the country’s incredibly high murder rate within the coming weeks.

While the legislation was proposed as far back as August 27, it only received approval in September and is expected to pass through Venezuela’s National Assembly to get a final vote soon.  According to Toothaker’s article, the new law will give the country’s “consumer protection agency” the ability to decide what toys and video games are allowed to come into and be sold in Venezuela, with fines for breaking it running as high as $128,000.  The law is depending on the idea that there is a connection between pastimes simulating violent behavior and actual violent actions in order to curtail the country’s astronomical murder rate—according to Toothaker’s article, the estimated number of homicides within the country per year numbers around 7,900, which is five times that of Texas despite Venezuela having a comparable population size.  Further, the law would implement “crime prevention classes” in public schools, force the media to report on the perceived dangers of violent video games, and have the government “promote the production, distribution, sales and use” of games that teach consumers to respect their adversaries.

There are, of course, a number of problems with this plan.  Pointed out within the article is the fact that Venezuela has a huge market for pirated video games, which many members of the country’s working class sell on street corners.  The article says they will likely remain unaffected by the law, given the fact that they have been tolerated up to this point.  Further, even if the legislation is meant to target them, the consumer protection agency mentioned above has its hands full making sure supermarkets remain capable of selling food at reasonable prices, and will probably not have the time to go after a bunch of street corner vendors.

Courtesy of the Associated Press

Second is the fact that the high murder rate likely does not have any connection to violent games.  There have been no studies that have accurately drawn links between violent video games and violent behavior, despite constant attempts to do so.  The most recent “conclusive” study, reported on by the Washington Post and conducted by Pediatrics, turns out to have been poorly conducted due problems measuring and defining “aggressive behavior” in its subjects.  Game Politics reported on both the initial study and why it turned out to be inaccurate, and have more recently covered a research project saying that there is evidence suggesting that violent behavior has its roots in peer delinquency and depression.

Lastly, Hugo Chavez may have defeated himself in his attempts to have the government teach its citizens to show respect to one’s enemies, given what he’s been saying about the Bush administration for years and refuses to let anyone forget.

The last time Venezuela made major gaming news was in 2006, when the country’s leaders spoke out against Mercenaries 2: World in Flames.  Politicians said they believed it was meant to act as a piece of anti-Chavez propaganda designed to lay the groundwork for an invasion of their country by the United States.

A Quickie Review of Australia’s R18+ Policy

How the Australian rating system manages to stay out of sync with the rest of the world, courtesy of EveryonePlays

This won’t come as news to Australian visitors, but the land down under has been mired in controversy over game censorship (and censorship in general) for quite a long time.  My post from Monday touched upon some of the far-reaching effects that came to block Left 4 Dead 2′s release, but its ban–that it to say, its status of “Refused Classification”–is merely a symptom of the affliction Australia is suffering under.

Left 4 Dead 2 was only one of several games refused classification by the OFLC this year.  As of the time of this writing, a search of the classification database reveals that three others had been effectively banned in the country–Risen, Sexy Poker, and Necrovision.  Sexy Poker has the dubious honor of being the only WiiWare game in the country to be denied a rating, considering the Nintendo Wii’s immense success with casual gamers and comparatively family-friendly image compared to the PS3 and Xbox 360.  The last big game to nearly end up on the list was Fallout 3 due to “in-game drug use,” which referred to the ability to take morphine in the game.  Bethesda managed to sidestep the issue by replacing the morphine with the significantly more fictional drug “Med-X,” which allowed the title to pass with an MA15+.  There are, of course, many others, as this Wikipedia list indicates.

What makes this doubly tragic is the fact that Australia has been teasing its citizens with the promise of an R18+ rating for months now, while taking no action on it.  The proposal was made on April 1 of this year (and the government had been gathering opinions about it for at least a year prior) but has since appeared to have gone nowhere.  In the meantime, the government has instead made plans to put an ISP filter in place to completely block internet access to any game that goes over the MA15+ rating, whether through download or by selling physical copies.

The last, and perhaps most annoying, impediment to getting games into the country uncensored is the process through which the proposal has to be passed.  As EveryonePlays explains it, every State Attorney-General has to agree to the amendment allowing the R18+ classification to come into effect.  Micheal Atkinson, the Attorney-General of South Australia, is the only individual standing in the way of it passing into effect.  Despite his claim that he has three other Attorneys backing him up, he has consistently been the only one to vote against the proposal.  If random internet commentators are anything to go by, the people of Australia appear to believe that this is a misapplication of the democratic process.

EA Stands Up For Valve

Screen courtesy of, but not at all exclusive to, MTV Multiplayer

If for some reason all you Valve fans out there haven’t heard the news, the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification has refused to give the upcoming title Left 4 Dead 2 an actual rating, effectively banning its sale in the country.  That’s not the news here, though—it’s that the game’s publisher, Electronics Arts, has stood up on its behalf and challenged the OFLC in an attempt to call the country on apparent hypocrisy.

The two sentences that have been repeated by several bloggers and news outlets around the internet were said by Tiffany Steckler, an EA spokesperson, during an interview on Gamespot Australia on September 23.  According to the article, Steckler said that “It’s funny that a place like Australia, which has come up with some pretty violent material in the past like Mad Max, can effectively ban video games for the same reason.  EA believes that adults should have the right to make their own choices when it comes to the content they consume.”

Steckler’s words were in sharp contrast to Valve’s rather muted response to the news.  Doug Lombardi, Valve’s vice president of marketing, spoke to Shacknews way back on September 18.  “We were surprised to hear of this news yesterday,” he said.  “Obviously, everybody at Valve is pretty bummed.  It would be a shame if folks in Australia, or anywhere else, are unable to purchase Left 4 Dead 2 because of a ratings issue.”

“Pretty bummed,” Mr. Lombardi?  If someone told me that they were censoring my work after accepting what I’d handed them before while letting a game like MadWorld through, the phrase I would be using would sound more like “immensely disappointed,” or “insulted,” or “pissed off.”  It has been noted that Valve has filed for an appeal, so at least it’s not taking this lying down.

(Warning: Profane language, references to deviant sexual behaviour, over-the-top violence)

To be fair, part of the problem may be the fact that Australia still considers video games a kiddie pastime and has no “adult” rating—the highest their rating goes is MA15+, which means everything over it (like MadWorld) has to have its representatives convince people like the OFLC that it’s suitable for a fifteen-year-old or be banned.  This is according to EveryonePlays, a site that is currently pushing for the very simple solution of creating an R18+ rating.  I can’t tell you if that would technically make games falling under that rating “pornography,” but I’m sure Australia’s video game market wouldn’t mind if they got to enjoy the mature fare everyone else gets to play without having it yanked out of their hands.

For those interested (who should be everyone who actually bothered reading this post) Kotaku.com published a fine article detailing the reasons why Left 4 Dead 2 got passed over, as well as mentioning that lenience was shown by some of the board members voting on the issue.  As EveryonePlays points out, though, just because some politicians were willing to bend the rules for the sake of sanity doesn’t mean the system isn’t still broken… or is it?  Please provide feedback on exactly what you think of this issue.