Playing Nintendo v5 – You Are What You Play?

[4cr Guest Columnist - Nick Rumas]

In an interview with an American news magazine a few years ago, rock legend David Bowie made a comment that’s stayed with me to this day:

The really odd thing about America is the kind of Puritan tendency that still exists for people to jump on one side of the fence or the other when it comes not only to social issues but little things as well, such as proclamation of what kind of music one is “˜into’.

I couldn’t agree with him more. Whenever an issue of social importance comes up, I find it really funny how people, especially those in the media, like to jump on one side of the fence and start letting loose on those who disagree with them. This kind of battle has all but overtaken the gaming world recently.

The issue of violence in games seems more complicated than it’s ever been before. On one side are those vehemently against violent games, blaming them for everything from the Columbine shootings to the training of al Qaeda terrorists. This group is generally made up of conservative non-gamers. On the other side are those who claim that violent games have no proven negative effect on players. This latter group is mostly thought of as being very progressive, and gamers make up the large majority of it. The one thing I see to be sorely lacking from the rhetoric on both sides is the one necessary ingredient of a strong argument: good old common sense.

On one hand you’ve got the politicians, educators, and the Christian Right proclaiming that violent games, just like violent films and Marilyn Manson, will corrupt our youth and cause them to do unthinkable things. On the other hand you’ve got a slew of famous scholars, game publishers (Rockstar””duh), gamers, and countless gaming journalists passionately defending violence in games, basically claiming that the former group has no idea what they’re talking about. As far as I’m concerned, neither group has any idea what they’re talking about.

To help explain what I mean by “˜common sense’, I’ll share a brief story. Some years back, I caught a great episode of the PBS program Think Tank, where a very small group of noted individuals””scholars, reporters, artists, writers””get together to discuss an issue and try to make some sense out of it. This particular episode focused on the issue of censorship in films and the problems with the MPAA’s ratings system. The only widely recognizable participant was film director and actor Sydney Pollack, and his final comments were the only truly logical thing to come out of the discussion. After the participants ranted on and on about how explicit content in film has absolutely no effect on children, Pollack’s final comments went like this:

Censorship sucks. No artist in their right mind wants censorship. Art, whatever its medium, should hit the market solely as its creator intended it to. But ratings are a different story. When someone, especially someone young, becomes deeply emotionally involved in a movie, in music, or some other form of art, common sense says that it could legitimately have an impact on them. I sure as hell know that movies changed me””on many occasions, I walked into a movie theater and came out as an entirely different person. To say that art can’t have an effect, either good or bad, on the one subjected to it is ridiculous. A real artist would never say that.

Significantly, Nintendo’s Shigeru Miyamoto has, on many occasions, echoed such words. His take on the situation has been one of the only reasonable, balanced ones that I’ve heard. He acknowledges that a game like GTA and the moral choices that it holds out to players is an epic accomplishment, but also states that he’s not entirely sure it won’t affect the young or weak-minded adversely. Such common sense is sorely lacking in gaming journalism. Nearly everything is entirely subjective, and in reality is just saying, “I love GTA, so f**k off, soccer moms”. Such attitudes are not going to help gaming to progress at this point. One of the only good, objective articles I’ve read recently was at 1UP.com, where Jack Thompson and Henry Jenkins, perhaps the most vocal and celebrated leaders of the opposing sides were each interviewed, the two conversations displayed side by side. While both individuals miss the mark quite considerably, it’s a great read, and provides some real food for thought.

The situation today entirely echoes David Bowie’s words from the outset, and it defies logic. If those on both sides of the argument could just abandon their fear for a moment””fear of the unknown on one side, fear of losing something treasured (and money) on the other side””we might just be able to come together and make some sense of it all.

Contributed by: Nick Rumas