I think there is a bit of confusion here. Prof. Hoechsmann didn't target "mindless violence", but "violent themes", something you can find even on T-rated games. Granted, the majority of video games are rated "E". But are these games the most successful and praised ones ?

Plus, I can't blame this professor to rant against the lack of originality of video game industry, because many gamers rant against the tendancy of big companies to copy each other by publishing tons of blockbusters dealing with the same themes again and again, ad nauseam.

"The game industry is not doing us any favours by continually choosing subject matter and adventures that involve guns, violence and warfare."

um lets play devils advocate here. lets say the majority of games have violence in (infact only 6% are rated M or higher.. but lets pretend).

What makes that any different from the acceptability ppl have toward action movies with the same plot in OVER AND OVER just for the sake of guns and violence.

but as it stands, around 6% is the figure for 'violent games'.

yeah continually choosing. yeah... all the time. do some research

@ Linenoise

Have you ever heard of a game called Facade? It is basically a chick flick. You play a friend visiting a couple having marital problems. What you say to them in you coversations determines if they can work through the difficulties of the break up.

Although it is an indie title, it shows what can be done with the "chick flick" or should I call it a "dame game"?

@ Kommisar

They don't. The MPAA site, will only show you 50 random titles when you select just a rating.

@ JP

Actually, M rated games only accounted for 15.5% of game sales according to NPD.

MonkeyPeaches is playing The Legend Of Zelda Twilight Princess

And you know what, it's not the case that there are 'plenty of nonviolent games' on store shelves. Sure, there are plenty of nonviolent games, but they get no shelf space at Best Buy or Gamestop because they are poorly made junk made by startup companies and amateurs who are so desperate to see nonviolent games, and so tired of waiting for the big game companies to make them, that they make their own.

So while the 94% of games that are nonviolent slowly make their way to the bargain bin (if they ever even get there) the other 6% (the super violent games) fill 99% of the big store shelf space. And I do go into the stores and I do play games, so I know what I'm talking about.

So let's stop the nonsense about most games being nonviolent - as if that reflects the reality of what we find in our local Gamestop.

*head-desk*

WHY cant SMART people make SMART researched commentary! Argh!

@ anthony

the reason the japanese don't have this problem is that they havn't changed the basic rules of video games for a long time. There are a few exceptions like MGS 4, but other than that japanese game makers have been largely trying to replicate the same old formula in hopes people will still like. Western game makers have caught up and are alsways pushing the boundaries.

When was the last time you saw a japanese game as innovative as Mass Effect or Bioshock?

Thats why the 360 controls the hardcore gamer market in almost everywhere but japan, the games are innovative and keep coming(mind you i say this only because the 360 is a largely western developer based game unlike other the systems where its across the category and because the 360 is largely rejected in japan on that basis and only received any kind of open arm welcoming when lost odyssey and blue dragon came out)

While the debate rages and all sorts of angles are explored, I am curious as to why there are no posts that question whether, or to what extent, the journalist got it right. It's tough to control the message in an interview and when you speak to the print media it's a crap shoot, because you don't know what will be kept and what will be left out. For the record, the “it” that I called, or intended to call, barbaric was the Army of Two game, not the industry as a whole. And it was a gut reaction.

As for my research and the “expert” label – I didn’t go looking for this role. It all started after the Kimveer Gill shooting in Montreal. I was speaking about youth cultures - in that case, gaming, Goth and metal. I don't spout the usual moral panic rhetoric, and I thought I should continue to voice my thoughts on the matter. If it’s left just to some other critics, gamers will continue to be labelled as asocial. Not that those that sent me hate mail deserve better.

I am not the worst of your worries. Believe it or not, I have defended video games/gamers/gaming consistently in media interviews, constantly rebutting the media effects model of thinking that suggests that game playing causes violence. I take serious Janet Muray's claims about the future of narrative in simulation, Jim Gee's points about learning in/and games, and Steven Johnson's arguments about games making us smarter.

I also agree that game themes/designs evolve with the tastes of gamers and that most/many games are no more violent than the average Tarantino flick.

That said, I'm no fan of militarism in pop culture from GI Joe to shoot-em-ups in video games, and I do find games like Army of Two barbaric. I could find worse words for what I think of them. War is only a game in the privileged, myopic confines of the North American over-consumptive entertainment cultures and if the games industry wants to flaunt product like Army of Two they should expect something less than a cozy embrace from critics and theorists.

As for the "cultivation" of attitudes and worldviews, see over 40 years work from the Annenberg School of Communication. It is not a media effects model, but a long-term incubation.

Yes, I do believe the industry can be more creative and imaginative. When Canadian kids were surveyed by the CTF (2005), they said they liked "action," good graphics and good functionalities in a video game. They did not say "violence" though the games industry likes to hide behind the claim that they are only producing what the consumer wants. OK, I know that many, even most, gamers are not kids, but that is the same case for TV audiences, and we don’t let TV networks off the hook with a shrug and a wink.

Last comment - the defensiveness and the animosity that I read from many of these posts leaves me befuddled.

MH

Why...why do people nowadays bash crap of any subject with out knowing jack about what they are bashing? The stupidity of some really annoys me and now its from a freakin professor. Who cares anyways? Its our right to have violent video games even if it made up 99% of video games. If he doesn't want want us to have our rights then he doesn't deserve his own. Take away his free speech and see how he feels!

@thomas

There is tons of media about the japanese falling behind in innovation. I mentioned there are some shining examples of the exact opposite, but guess what? Around 90% of the games they make are crappy rehashes of final fantasy or dragon quest or devil may cry, with the same pointy haired character, the same amnesia, the same morality that just goes beyond corny, it's the same game and plot with a different look for the most part and I am just tired of it. I don't deny that the greatest games ever have prolly come out of japan. I don't deny that great games still come out of japan. But be honest, when was the last time a japanese RPG didn't have same basic plot lines and morality that every other one has mostly had.

Don't drag the fact that I took a 360 into this. I was trying to explain and prove a point using a largely western system, don't lose all credibility by turning this into a stupid console wars discussion.

@ GRLGMER

Thanks for actually being polite, what I was trying to show was that yes these two are improvements off of old games. That's the point though because they are mostly that game, but in a lose sense, the plots changed and the gameplay was improved tremendously, I cnt say innovative as something entirely new because there is no such thing. I was trying to show how new systems in the game play and improvement on the gameplay, but with different story lines is the point. It's nest to impossible to have something totally new, but the point is to improve upon the system you are basing a game off of, not to make the exact same thing. There are great Japanese game developers like team ninja for instance, but its just mostly remakes of the same thing with little or no innovation and I for one(not to mention many other gamers and communities) am getting tired of it.

Keep it serious, if you want games to be taken serious as a form of media you can't squabble about which systems better and discredit an argument because I used the 360 as an example, fanboys are bad for the industry and obsession is what makes the media at large consider gaming a child's activity.

You would think that a professor would understand the value of research.

I actually do agree with him, though, that there should be more diversity in games. My reasoning is much more simplistic, though - I want more diversity in games because I'm tired of playing the same damned game over and over again. I just can't muster any excitement for another bog standard shoot-em-up with a two-minute gimmick.

Lets face it. Who's going to buy a stupid, non-violent sports game.

Ohshi-!

I can see how he would make that mistake though.

If the only thing that gets the attention of gamers are violent games, even *I* would be mislead into thinking that there's only violent games. Yes, there are a lot of none violent games, and they outshadow the violent ones, but let's be honest: Which one gets the most attention?

How about this: Violent games are the only ones that are blown into sensations by the news. :/

So the movie industry can make violent movies but the game industry can't?

DeusPayne - Lol, obviously 6% is the majority

Double Standards are delicious.

"[Army of Two is] not a political statement. We’re not pro and we’re not against [private military contractors]. We want to make people aware of the subject."

Seriously? They're releasing the game to make us aware of mercenaries? What kind of statement is that? By that logic, was "Burnout Paradise" supposed to make me aware of these things called 'cars'?

Besides, "Mercenaries" made me away of mercenaries years ago ;)

As far as Hoechsmann's statements go; he's not totally wrong. There does seem to be gluts of similar games with different names being released at times. GTA clones, Rainbow Six clones, FPS X whicdh is only different from FPS Y because this one has destructible walls. Army of Tqwo may or may not turn out to be an awesome game, but it's not going to be a terribly unique one as far as its themes go.

Which is not to say that unique games do not get released, you just have to look or them. Katamari Damacy, Psychonauts, and Guitar Hero are great examples of unique (when they first came out at least) games that were also fairly non-violent. The problem is that for every Guitar Hero that takes off with popularity there are a couple of Psychonauts which, while deserving to be super popular, never catch on with the gaming public and don't turn enough profit to warrant making more games like them when the execs know that GTA-set-in-Dallas is sure to sell like hotcakes.

There is a tremendous lack of imagination on the part of the games industry. I think it’s barbaric.

I have to agree there, the repetitious tedium of games is starting to shit me. I've just been disappointed by seeing the combat of Too Human, everything was looking great until I saw the fighting, god damn it looks generic.

Dude, Professor Layton! SO VIOLENT!!!! :p Murder! Mystery! And a whole town of freaks. What a horrible plot for a game!

Frankly, I do agree with Hoechsmann as far as the lack of originality in the games industry goes. Very rarely do games deviate from certain conventions, and it only seems to get worse the longer a series goes on e.g Sonic.

The focus on violence? As has already been pointed out, 6% of games are mature and involve the type of violence I suspect he's talking about. I don't think he's jumping on a bandwagon, just led to believe that violent games are the norm. He should have done his research on this one.

I would also like to congratulate him on being one of the few professors, or any media figure for that matter, to actually state that the worst games can do is change someones perspective - Even though that is considered one of the best things the film industry can do

Hey, look at that tree! Ignore the rest of the forest, we just want you to look at that one tree.

Shame on the industry for putting out a product that people want to buy!
Clearly there would be no demand for such a thing if they did not make violent games!

i'd like to see a real breakdown. Say, take all the games the ESRB rated in the last 24 months, and show us how many were rated in each category, as well as how many were supposedly "ultra violent" which maybe could have been AO Ratings (if the jack-thompsons had thier way)

I bet the GTA's make up less than 1% of all games.

*sigh*

For once, for fucking once, I wish one of these jackholes would base their opinion off actually taking their ass to the store, looking at the games rack, and start reading the back. Violent games and games with violent overtnes are, in fact, a minority in the industry. Hell, I love violent games but even I have to marvel how few in my rack are truly over the top versus "jump on bad guy."

But whatever. He feels so strongly about this subject so obviously he's well-informed. Right? RIGHT?!?

I agree with the professor about the lack of diversity and imagination in video games and that companies keep copying each other, some with the only motive to make money or a blockbuster.

I think this was an issue among video game developers where the executives are afraid of going outside the box and that the money (in huge amounts) they invested would result in poor profits or they would develop games that are sure to make money. For example, games with movie tie-ins (Fantastic Four, the Bee movie games).

I think a lot of you guys that think he's right about the lack of diversity in games.... aren't looking hard enough. Look at the Xbox Live Arcade or the PSN, it's filled to the brim with innovative and bloodless games. Some of them are PC re-releases, but most of them new to me: Eets, Wik:fable of Souls, Marble Blast Ultra (not so innovative but it was damn fun), Geometry Wars, etc.

For consoles shooters are noticeably repetitive, but for every Black Site that comes out, you have a (admitedly bland) licensed, sports, or really good different adventure/puzzle game. The numbers speak for themselves, it's the gamers that are the visible demographic that perpetuate that stereotype, and there's nothing wrong with us 18-24 violence loving males, it just sucks when people use that against us for legislative purposes.

Most of Hollywood SEEMS to appear to appeal to the same crowd, but that's ignoring the vast majority of the film community that I think loves the indie/drama/documentary stuff which don't have the budget for big action blowouts.

TL;DR- If you can't find fun and bloodless games, you aren't even trying to look beyond the largely advertised titles.

oh well /rant

Last five games I played

1 Appolo Justice : Ace attorney (DS) ... lack of imagination? just look at the legal system of that game and tell me if it's lacking imagination ;) seriously your playing a lawyer there's not much violence except for the initial cases.

2 Prof Layton and the curious Village (DS) ... again a superb puzzle adventure game really good and no violence.

3 Sins of a Solar Empire. (PC) I admit there is violence in that game and on a scale few FPS achieve but let's face it it's not visual violence the kind he's talking about and certainly not grapical.

4 CSI Dark Motives (PC) again a good adventure where the only violence is the initial case and not the way you resolve it

5 Portal (360) once again the violence isn't the theme of the game.

I'll probably play GTAIV and I played COD4 and Halo3 but let's face it, it is not the only kind of games and if you look at it games innovate in more way then you might imagine. Makes you wonder how they imagine gamers

Mercenaries? Been there, done that, made a lot of fucking money.

Poor Research is Poor.

To Michael Hoechsmann: Do Proper Research or GTFO!

I guess he's never heard of Guitar Hero...

This guy needs to stop hugging a rainbows and get his head out of his pot of gold.



Does that make sense? I'm not sure because I'm half, no three quarters asleep......

DeusPayne:

The real danger of the number 6 is when there are three of them together. Then it is "666" which is OMG THE DEVIL'S NUMBER -- and it's in video game statistices which proves games are EVIL! :)

Probably the main reason games take the heat is because they're interactive. Instead of just watching the violence you're an active participant. Easier for people who don't understand to latch onto as a scapegoat.

Slam the film industry for violent movies, slam the television industry for violent shows, slam books for violent text, slam the music industry for violent lyrics, slam toy companies for making toy guns and knives.... etc then he has an argument.

ChrowX: during that same time we've also had games like Professor Layton, Audio Surf, N+, FIFA Street 3, and many other non-violent games. Yes, there ARE violent games, and when you ONLY look at violent games, all you're going to see is violence. Branch out, look at all the games. Hell, for every Gears of War, there's 20 PETZ or CATZ or BRATZ or other game marketed towards 2 year olds.

Judging the entire games industry on games like Army of Two is like judging the entire movie industry based on movies like Saw.

"The game industry is not doing us any favours by continually choosing subject matter and adventures that involve guns, violence and warfare."

"The game industry is showing great imagination by continually choosing subject matter and adventures that involve plumbers, goomba-hopping and mushrooms."

Fix'd.

"The game industry is not doing us any favours by continually choosing subject matter and adventures that involve guns, violence and warfare."

Um... how about NOT only looking at M-Rated games, hmmm? Even more than that, well... what sort of 'adventure' DOESN'T have some sort of conflict? What do you want, the market to have nothing but Mario games and dating sims?

"There is a tremendous lack of imagination on the part of the games industry. I think it’s barbaric. I don’t understand why there can’t be a greater diversity of titles."

I don't understand why YOU are apparently blind when you look at a video game cover.

"It would be far too simplistic to suggest that playing a game of this nature would cause someone to want to be a mercenary. At worst, what long-term exposure or even a very sustained exposure to games like this can do is that it can have some effects on the cultivation of attitudes and world views."

...should i even dignify this with a response?

There IS diversity, sir. You're just too lazy to LOOK for it.

Man... look at all those books. EVERY single one of them has words in them. Jeez... why can't they be more diverse
/sarcasm

(have i had a non-sarcastic post here in this thread? :p)

Dame Game! quality!

also those numbers are entirely made up in my mind, but they seem right

I guess the professor never heard of the following games/series/franchises:
Paper Mario
Super Mario
Mario Kart
Legend of Zelda (especially Ocarina of Time)
Final Fantasy
Ratchet & Clank
Sly Cooper
Kingdom Hearts
Shadow of the Colossus (sorry if I misspelled that)
Psychonauts
Katamari Damacy
Yoshi's Island
Tetris
Donkey Kong
Sonic the Hedgehog (this may take a while)
Animal Crossing
Guitar Hero
Rock Band
Pokemon
Pikmin
F-Zero
Fire Emblem
Super Smash Bros
Dr. Mario
Professional sports games
NCAA sports games
Trauma Center
Pheonix Wright

List goes on and on.

@Tom

Professor and research? You are kidding right?

This guy is assistant professor in education and latin american studies. Within education neither of those is particularly known for their rigorous use of scientific methods. I mean, come on, this is a guy who, listed as one of his primary 'look at me!' papers is "Just do it: What Michael Jordan has to teach us."

The depressing part is the gazzette described him as an 'expert' in video games... which just shows that journalists don't bother doing (or valuing) research either.

The creativity pool is running kind of low.'Course it's the same with TV and movies.

Yet more FUD for the masses to be sure. What about the sports industries both human and machine oriented? Or the governments for having militaries or police forces?

The media is a reflective entity. There are violent video games BECAUSE people want violence, not the other way around. You're posing we cut off the cut to cure the headache, it makes no sense. If you want people to change, you have to try to make them WANT to change, you can't force them to stop wanting Violence... this whole media debacle about violence is asinine, they should take their heads out of their asses and use their brains for a change.

@Setesh

EXACTLY! Too bad anti-gamers don't get that.

If video games these days aren't imaginative it's because not as many companies are willing to "risk" cash on new ideas. Do you think a game that goes to the extent of Spore would have ever come this far into development if it wasn't coming from Will Wright? At first glance the concept of the Sims games looks downright stupid. Playing a game where you do ordinary, every day actions (for the most part)? Yet it worked because thought and planning was put into it. It fed on peoples love of short-term achievements and a feeling that your actions had an impact on the game world. However I also think many people miss why some violent games HAPPEN to be so good. It isn't due to the amount of violence. Violence is only used to show the severity of an action and help develop a realistic atmosphere for what may be an unrealistic situation. Many times these big name titles that have tons of gore offer some new and interesting game play mechanics that create the feeling that you can accomplish something using multiple strategies (Gears of War cover system?). If it was just as easy as pumping a game with high-end graphics and violence then there wouldn't be so many BAD games.

@KTP

I agree, I've been saying for quite a while that the Video Game industry stands at risk of turning into a 2000's version of Stock, Aitken and Waterman, with variations on the same theme being pumped out ad-nauseum, whilst only a few well known individuals or groups, such as Will Wright, Valve or Epic will truly be given the freedom to create new technology. That's somewhat a cause of concern for me, there are innovative games coming out under Indy labels, but the mainstream publishers are unwilling to risk investing in them.

I think it here that things such as Steam can really help the gaming community, I absolutely hated Steam when it first came out, but I've been pleasantly proved wrong by it up till now.

test

"At worst, what long-term exposure or even a very sustained exposure to games like this can do is that it can have some effects on the cultivation of attitudes and world views."
kudos to him for the inadvertent support that games don't turn gamers into killers. also, there is a great diversity of games that don't include violence. the violent games are just more fun.

*shakes head and turns up the hannah montana soundtrack*


God i cant believe people are still this idiotic with games and gaming? its unbelieveble that we still have to listen to this kind of crap.Oh well it just goes to show you that maybe gaming will never be accepted by society but i've learned to pretty much look at it this way...*cough* if society doesnt like me a 27 year old male playing violent video games then feel free to bite me and i wouldnt want to be a part of that society any ways...


Update for the Gp veterans here: i already let dennis know but the next jt story that runs you can expect a long over due duffy rant..Hopefully i will have the time do be able to do one and well i'm sure the oldies here wouldnt mind reading it...


Hope everyone is good i'm gonna go surf on vampirefreaks...duffy out

It would be interesting to get some statistical breakdown of percentage industry games last year had more violent themes (by which i'm not simply saying gameplay but also a more violent based storyline where a movie equivalent of that game would be considered "violent" i.e. jumping on goombah's doesn't count) vs. the percentage of studio films with such themes, i think the numbers are probably be closer than most people think, it's just a matter of what the mainstream media covers. In the realm of movies they cover... well good movies, academy award winners, etc. they don't give that much coverage to the new Rambo, they cover a particular film because of its artistic merits and overall quality. In the realm of video games, they cover controversy, you would think that 25 to Life was the bestselling game of all time, they don't cover video games because of quality, artistic merits or just being plain old-fashioned good. They take this to such an extreme as repeatedly talking about flash games like they were made by industry giants. Anyway my point is if such a study is out there, someone please link me to it because i'd be interested in seeing it.

This man is making a perfectly valid criticism of the games industry. It seems like all the best selling games not made by Nintendo are shooting games or have a lot of violence in them (and even then Pokemon and Super Smash Brothers are kinda violent for kids games). He's not saying violent games are bad nor is he suggesting that the government should stp oin and do something. He's criticising the game industry for being unoriginal which isn't undeserved. We need more games like Okami or Katamari Damacy.

Of course there is a reason for this, games are getting so expensive to make that if they try a new concept for a game and it fails it could cost the developers a lot of money.

And one could also argue that people like violent games and the developers are just catering to their demands (oh and the press generating controversy doesn't hurt either).

Oh and show of hands who here amongst here WASN'T surprised when you first heard E games make up the vast majority of games made . . . that's what I thought.

Marlowe. Sorry about that.

@Ian Cooper

And you know what, it’s not the case that there are ‘plenty of nonviolent games’ on store shelves. Sure, there are plenty of nonviolent games, but they get no shelf space at Best Buy or Gamestop because they are poorly made junk made by startup companies and amateurs who are so desperate to see nonviolent games, and so tired of waiting for the big game companies to make them, that they make their own.

Are you familiar with one of the more prominent console game developers in the market? One that tends to make games that are not violent, and have a lot of complexity and depth to them?

Or what about one of the more popular/most sold game series' that are out on the market? One that also, is not violent.

so, it appears maybe you suffer from terminal foot in mouth syndrome here.

I fear for this man's life if he ever walks into a movie theater. The number of violent action and horror movies contained within might very well threaten his health. [/sarcasm]

A few mates & I had a discussion about this sort of hobby-attitude association the other day. We're all the long haired metalhead types and therefore automatically assumed to be evil.

One of the guys talked about a multi-band gig that was on here a few weeks ago with a metal band & 2 pop/rap wastes of time. The metal crowd were enthusiastic and well behaved but the crowd for the other bands were utter dickheads who started all sorts of trouble.

The other mate was telling me that if there was a crowd of young trendies on one side of the street and a crowd of scary looking metallers on the other then he'd pick the metal side every time. Not because of their musical affiliation but because of the general experience he's had with the 2 types. Trendies are prone to ridiculing, not standing with their mates and being generally unpredictable whereas metalheads will accept most people, stand up for you if you get in trouble and generally be good people.

Violence in games does not have to be direct point & shoot type, think about the games that are sort of not violent in play but have very violent concepts. An exchange from the new Sam & Max springs to mind

Max: I'm proud we found a non-violent solution to our problem
Sam: Yes, ripping the brain from a freshly buried corpse is the start of a kinder, gentler Sam & Max

They should make a game where you're a metal listening, comic reading, counterstrike playing guy who has to outrun a crowd of people with flaming torches & pitchforks but who also has to do good deeds around town. Only after your 100th delivery of canned food to the needy do the crowd stop chasing you. At least till you put on some metal to celebrate, they'll remember why they hate you and then you're off and running again on the next level to the strains of Soilwork's "20 More Miles"

It would be kinda neat to see the game inustry stop using depictions of violence as an easy, overused way of forwarding the story. Same with movies. Or at least give the violence an interesting context to zazz it up a little.

The great struggles in life are what most people want to experience vicariously for most and from a safe position so to speak. And the greatest struggle is that of life vs death. So to me it is a no-brainer that so much popular culture focuses on violence in one form or another.

Exactly, people play Video Games and watch movies for the same reason they ride Rollercoasters, it's quite a modern phenomenon to be honest, people talk of the 'Thrill of the Hunt', but in reality it was the 'I hope I eat tonight' of the hunt, the idea of scaring ourselves for fun using violence is far from new, however, Beowulf is a wonderful example of heroes vs monsters, and with a very 'modern' bleakness about it as well for an ancient saga.

It's always struck me as k