Stan Beer
Monday, 31 March 2008 15:44
Opinion and Analysis
Page 2 of 2
The question therefore becomes whether exposing a minor
to an adult video game is roughly equivalent to exposing a minor to an
adult movie. This is not an easy question to answer but there is at
least anecdotal evidence to suggest that the two mediums are quite
different.
Movie watching is a physically and mentally
passive experience while video game playing is very much an active - an
interactive - experience that engages the participant on a much higher
sensory level.
The act of watching a simulated sex, violent confrontation or realistic
horror scene in a movie can indeed have a substantial emotional effect
on a viewer. There have even been reports of violent crimes being
inspired by the participants watching a particular movie.
Anyone who has played a video game, however, can attest to the fact
that they are something else. There is much more involvement in the
simulated action by a video game player than a movie watcher.
Especially in the sights of anti-game advocates are the shooting games
which, in the wake of multiple random shooting massacres around the
world but especially in the US, have been described by opponents as
killing simulators.
However, whether video games are indeed training disturbed individuals
to be expert rapid-fire marksmen who then go on to massacre innocent
people is beside the point in this particular argument. There are
already more than enough MA15+ sophisticated shoot 'em up games on the
market that have been accused of being at least partially responsible
for past massacres.
The question is: do we need an even higher rating for games that
involve players in even more explicit simulated acts of sex and
violence that would otherwise be banned by censors because they present
a danger to children?
As far as Michael Atkinson is concerned, the answer is no because he
believes these games should not be available to anyone. On moral
grounds he may be right. However, this cannot be Mr Atkinson's call
because 93% of Australians do not live in South Australia and did not
have any say on whether he or his government were elected.
On the other hand, there are many outside South Australia who do agree
with Mr Atkinson's principled stand, which is why public consultation
on the issue is the only answer.