Looking back at 2012
 

Hello, everyone,

this is a series of imho worthwhle articles from Gamasutra.

They give a good overlook and summary on what happened in 2012.

5 disappointments : http://gamasutra.com/view/news/18322…p#.UMntjCA0NI4

5 "shocking events" : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1…p#.UMnvBCA0NI4

5 controversies (shitstorms included) : http://gamasutra.com/view/news/18315…p#.UMnvAiA0NI4

5 trends : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1…p#.UMnu_iA0NI4

5 game surprises : http://gamasutra.com/view/news/18328…p#.UMntMCA0NI4

Related : Sexism in the games industry : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1…p#.UMnv7CA0NI5

Sexism as well : http://kotaku.com/5917400/youll-want…rvy-lara-croft
Read the commentary there.

Alrik

Same old stuff every year. The sexism articles never get boring. Both sides are good for a long debate with no compromise. Just like politics.:lol:

I was just reading through this "controversies" comments line http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1…p#.UMnvBCA0NI4 , and one comment is there which I found interesting :

The point is, whenever someone says "it's a mature game", he or she means in fact : "This game is violent". Nothing else.

"Matureness" of games can be

- intellectual
- about art
- about politics

etc. . A game isn't necessarily "mature" if it contains lots of violence.

But everybody says so.

I believe that it is a good idea to read these comments there, too.
And of course the "controversies" article itself. Especially its last part.


On sexism, I quote this :

I honestly don't remember anyone saying so.

I don't care what ordinary articles mean when saying mature. Most of them never heard of, previewed, reviewed or played Sven (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sven_B%C3%B8mw%C3%B8llen) games. Also I don't recall I've seen much Bonetown (www.bonetown.com) reviews.

That's not a pre requisite per se but on the other hand, would you say that a violent game is suited for children… ?

I never said that a violent game is suited for chilren.

My point was exactly that peiople says a game is "mature" if it contains violence.

It's so as if someone says hat a game which contains high-level politics isn't "mature" because it contains zero violence.

It's almost - warning, Satire ! - as if someone says that a fruit juice is healthy because it is yellow.
It isn't because it is yellow : It is because it contains Vitamins ! (Of which some are actually yellow-looking …)

Yeah, that is a case of a language shortcut causing issues. "M" rated doesn't mean the game is mature, it means that the game is intended for an audience that is mature enough to not have the violence/sex in the game mess with their development process.

I think it would be more accurate to call the game "Rated SITW" - intended for people so Set In Their Ways that a video game isn't going to phase them. ;)

I perfectly understand your point here but I wanted to underline that the ERSB system is intended to give parents an idea about the content of games they never heard of. Don't get me wrong, I do not think it's perfect in any way but it's been created as that it can be easily and quickly understood. So if a game contains violent scenes, it's perfectly normal for it to get an M rating. Don't you think ? As I understand what you were saying, I think you meant that a game including violence doesn't necessarily deserve to be rated M. I think it must, to comply with the rating philosophy, no matter how we (as adults) individually perceive this kind of content.

The thread you initiated is intended to discuss something different than the rating system at its core, right, so I think maybe you should've presented your point through a different approach. As : Is the violence indispensable to create a game for adults ? But that's just my guessing and I maybe wrong or missed your point completely ;)