@freakout: Grow the fuck up? This is the guy who says that "and we realise even if we rate games R and have heaps of violence, 99% of under 18s will still play and be attracted by it so we can't lose".

This is Activision that are making a superalliance thats even worse than EA.

And an Activision that allows its GH studio to not only steal from Rock Band but also to ruin the GH brand.

Sorry mate but Activision have long since fallen. Perhaps the growing up needs to be handled by tu.

Communist_Gamer

@freakout: ...although Madworld obviously hasn't sold any copies yet, millions or otherwise, being unreleased and all....

Still waiting for an edit button, Kotaku!

freakout

@Communist_Gamer: Oh, grow the fuck up. Activision has a long history of publishing (and developing, in the Atari days) fantastic games loved by all.

As usual, it's nice to see him give an honest reply to the question. We do enjoy gratuitous violence, Gears of War's chainsaw an excellent case in point. Sure it will turn some off, but the millions of copies sold of games that feature it (the aforementioned Gears, Mortal Kombat, the upcoming Madworld) seems to indicate it's a desire that isn't going away anytime soon.

freakout

I like how they release that embarassing Guitar Hero: On Tour ad and then the very same day, claim that they focus on the 18+ audience.

QualityJeverage

12 year olds enjoy games made "for adults" more then adults do it seems >_>

D Mitsuki

Well I personally like the idea that game companies aren't shying away from mature content, but I do agree that the violence or sex or language or situations need to often be in the context of a mature story.

Remember that "gratuitous" means that it is uncalled for or unnecessary, but that those are terms that are up to the audience. What might be gratuitous for some might be deemed necessary by others.

In the rush for companies to hit the casual market, it is nice to know that there will be offerings in other areas as well. That's a good thing.

lionkitten

@EmeraldCockroach: Does he really needs them? He always reminds me of this guy : [www.encyclopediadramatica.com]

Grey Gecko

What. A. Douche.

ibelli

Am I the only one who things violence for the sake of violence is immature, not mature? Give it a context.

Also, violence isn't the only thing you can be doing to make your game "mature" there, Bobby. Some of my favourite movies got 18+ ratings and have barely a hint of violence (or even sex).

Anyway, mature stories rant over before it becomes a thesis.

elevenoverzero

Activision. Burn. In. Hell.

Communist_Gamer

Bobby Kotick, Chairman and CEO of Guitar Hero-Maker Activision - D6 Highlights [All Things Digital]

Really... Activision made Guitar Hero... ... ... what?

I'm pretty sure it was Harmonix who developed "Guitar Hero". When will publishers learn that they aren't developers?

DaveKap

"and we realise even if we rate games R and have heaps of violence, 99% of under 18s will still play and be attracted by it so we can't lose"

i miss the picture where he had red eyes

EmeraldCockroach

I love that picture so much. It fits the image I have of Activision so well.

Samos42

@Communist_Gamer: It's not a stereotype. You're missing the point. Violent video games sell, so they are going to keep getting made.

I don't attribute popularity to sales either, but in GH3's case of massive, blockbuster sales, over a prolonged period of time - not just debut figures - it would indicate that more people liked it than didn't. This thread isn't about Guitar Hero anyway, so that's the last I'll say on it...

freakout

@freakout:

Ah I think you're a little confused here. I don't think games are good based on how well they sell. FUNNY THAT.

And don't tell me to "get over it" over violent videogames because I'm fully supportive of them. Its not the intentions of the idiot that matter, its what Kocktick was stereotyping.

Communist_Gamer

@otakucode:

Hear hear. New follower for you there. That must be nominated for best of week.

Communist_Gamer

@Communist_Gamer: Yes, Activision ruined the Guitar Hero brand. That's why GH3 was the most popular in the series yet, I guess. Makes perfect sense!

If 99% of under-18s are playing R rated games then that is the parent's problem, not Activision's. Nowhere does he say in the interview that they expect under-18s to play R-rated games. He's saying that if a large proportion of gamers, the average age of which is over 18, show a preference for gratutious (often humorous) violence in games - which they have via sales of violent games - then they're naturally going to make games that feature that.

Violent video games are a reflection of our violent nature as a species. It's never going to go away, unless we all evolve into Super-Pussies like the populace of San Angeles in Demolition Man. Get over it.

freakout

@D Mitsuki: Because 12 year olds are just as mature as adults as far as brain development goes. They lack experience, but that's it. If sufficiently explained, they possess all the tools of rational thought that any adult does. And, because they lack in experience, they have a much higher level of curiosity. Adults have mostly had their curiosity killed by the educational system or adults yelling at them for getting into stuff that they're "too young for".

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a kid who was negatively affected by a videogame. It's been well over 20 years, billions of games have been sold, millions of children have played hundreds of millions of hours of games of all kinds.... and there still isn't a single person who was ever harmed by a videogame. That ought to tell us something. And then we ought to tell the ESRB something closesly related.

otakucode

@R3load:

I dont really get that. Just for some reason I insert french words for no reason. But I don't get whats so funny XD

Answers on a postcard to Karl Mark, London... etc.

Communist_Gamer

@Communist_Gamer: Sorry mate but Activision have long since fallen. Perhaps the growing up needs to be handled by tu.

For some reason the bold section made me seriously lol.

R3load

Good luck. With the ESRB in town, it'll never happen. They exist to make sure that games remain the realm of pubescents. Out of the top 10 movies in the IMDB Top 250, every single one except for maybe Casablanca would be rated AO if it were turned into a game. People assume that M rated games are equivalent to R rated movies. Wrong. M rated games are equivalent to PG-13 rated movies, except they're allowed to say "fuck" more and PG-13 movies don't have as many minor quick tit flashes as they used to. But pick up a real R rated movie and then pick up an M rated game. You'll notice in the movie, there's highly retailed gore. Closeups. Mature themes. Nudity. With pubic hair and penises and breasts and asses and everything. The ESRB will not let this happen in games. Period.

otakucode

Someone over at Activision should ask Midway how well their "make crap games with 40% more violence than the leading brand" strategy has worked out for them...

Vexorg

My god.. he doesn't even need red eyes.

The problem is that they think content for 18+ audience means ultra-violent. I would rather just a more mature storyline, give me some believable relationships, some romance, a bit of tastefully done sexual content. Give me some situtations that aren't about shooting everyone you see and blowing things up.

So many of the characters in 'adult' games have all the depth of a cardboard cutout.

It's one of the reasons I think I've enjoyed GTAIV so much, despite originally being adamant that I wouldn't go near it. There is depth to every character you meet in that game. Which is worth infinitely more than all the violence in that game.

Sigh. Gamers will probably always be treated as soulless, infantile perverts though. I can dream, though.

Polite_Society

Games should be violent simply for the sake of catering to adults?

What's with the honesty?

MoaM

@wild homes: Wow, you haven't read the legislation or my comments, have you? Right now the ESRB prevents YOU, and ADULT, from playing any game which the ESRB things is too extreme for an M rating. And they are ultraconservative, so that means anything worse than a PG-13 movie. If you want to sit back and let your freedom be trampled for absolutely no reason whatsoever, then please, just sit back, but don't speak up and defend the ESRB.

We don't rate books. We haven't for thousands of years. And there have been approximately 0 problems from them. Studies show there are no problems with games. There is no reason whatsoever for the ESRB to exist. Game companies can label their games for content very easily so that parents can decide what to let their kid play. We don't need an organization declaring how old your kid should be before they can play a certain game.

It's obvious you just don't want to be bothered with giving it though, so why do you bother even replying? Does it offend you that I am concerned that my hobby is being infantilized and that the human race is being deniced a great venue of creative expression simply because a few controlling wanks in the ESRB get their rocks off by controlling people? Sorry, but I don't plan to ever stop until someone can come up with some mechanism by which games even CAN be harmful. I happen to like freedom.

otakucode

@freakout: You're misinterpreting that. When they say that it is not as "developed" as an adults, they simply mean they don't have enough experience. The brain develops through experience. For instance, a 2 year old has all of the mental faculties to speak. That part of their brain is completely ready to form the connections necessary for speech. But they have to have experience in order to actually be able to do it. 12 year olds are the same way with their prefrontal cortex. Everything is there, and it's turned on full blast. They just have to have experiences (like watching movies, playing games, and other mature activities... unless you want them to have to experience extremely dangerous things in real life to develop correctly... or like most parents, just don't want them to develop at all) to form the connections they need to learn how to prevent them from feeling everything so deeply.

A 12 year olds brain is not the same as an adults, you are correct. The 12 year old NEEDS experiences with extreme content, either in their life or through entertainment, in order to develop properly. Preventing them completely (luckily all of our methods for preventing them from seeing mature movies and reading mature books and such are very porous and they get around them) would be like preventing a child whoi has not yet learned to speak be around people who are speaking. That has happened in the cases of children left in the wilderness. When they grow up, they not only can't speak, but they can't learn. There is research done over the past 4 or 5 years that suggests that the skyrocketing rates of depression and other mental disorders, as well as adult difficulties with forming and maintaining relationships, may be caused by the infantilization of pubscents. Adolescents used to be allowed to roam far from home and have much more life experience than kids today are allowed. And it's very possible we're stunting their development - for the rest of their life - because of it. And for what gain? What have we protected them from if a 12 year old is prevented from playing GTA? We know from studies that it doesn't cause them to be violent or affect their reactions to violence, it only affects their reaction to other violent videos (there is a HUGE distinction between watching a video and actually witnessing real violence, the studies that acknowledge this, the few that there are, all agree that videogames are harmless). It's a significant issue, and I've been meaning to put up a site with all of the facts in one place since so many people seem tricked so easily by the snakes at the ESRB and people like them.

otakucode

@wild homes: "even the most stringent gaming legislation isnt trying to keep me from playing"

That is the effect some legislation wuld have. For instance the law that was proposed for the state of New York that would have made selling a game to a minor a felony would have had nearly all games being censored. What retailer is going to carry a game where if their employee forgets to card someone and they turn out to be 16 they go to jail for a couple years? At what level would the store be liable?

There is no reason why gaming needs to be treated differently from other forms of media. That is why some of us occassionally get upset about the topic.

JustinS

@otakucode: I am actually at the opposite end of the spectrum. I am not waiting to see someone messed up by games. I don't want that-- I don't want to see games have a detrimental effect on someone. I don't need some kind of crass validation that comes from seeing gaming vindicated, the same way I realise that when gaming comes under fire it's not an affront to ME.

Gaming is my hobby. But I recognise that whatever happens to gaming doesn't happen to me. We take all that way too seriously-- even the most stringent gaming legislation isnt trying to keep me from playing, it's trying to make the parents of young kids responsible for what they do. Why the fuck do we act like that's such a bad idea?

wild homes

I'm glad someone understands who pays for games that give them their paycheck...yeah..us adults, not some 13 year olds. Now it doesn't have to be violence and FPS shooters, just games that adult find interesting to play. The video game is an adult toy...stick with GI Joes kids.

karateka

@Polite_Society: While dreaming, please support anyone who suggests we get rid of the ESRB. They are responsible for the stereotypes and insuring that we never get actual mature games. They would rate them AO and ban them. Look at ANY mature work of fiction. Almost every single one contains stuff the ESRB would freak out over. So long as everyone keeps parroting the "We need the ESRB, society would fall apart if game creators were allowed to make whatever they wanted", gaming will never advance. You think they're going to relax their restrictions? They've only gotten more restrictive as graphics have gotten more realistic or interaction methods got better (you know Manhunt 2 would have caused any problem if not for the Wii interface).

If the ESRB enabled the game developers to make games like the movies Irreversible, Ken Park, Leolo, Pulp Fiction, Dexter (the TV show where the main character is a serial killer who describes in detail how much he loves killing people, and he is the hero you are meant to sympathize with), Se7en, Clockwork Orange, American Beauty, Trainspotting, Candy, Boys Don't Cry, Blue Velvet, Mysterious Skin, etc... then I'll stop bitching about the ESRB. Until then, I'm on a one man crusade arguing against all the spineless pussies who either can't see that the ESRB is hurting us all, or are too afraid of mothers afraid of nothing to say anything.

otakucode

@otakucode: The prefrontal cortex - your executive decision-maker, as it were - isn't fully developed until early adulthood:

"In addition to being one of the last regions of the brain to evolve, the frontal cortex is one of the last regions to reach maturity during human development. The slow course of the development of the frontal cortex has been charted in several ways, including using the measures noted above for the brain in general.

This research shows that the frontal cortex develops rapidly in early childhood, with important changes occurring at particular ages (at the end of the first year of life, between 3 and 6 years, and around puberty), and then continues to develop into adulthood. Grey matter, for example, doesn't reach adult levels in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex until at least the end of adolescence, and myelination of this region continues into the 20s or possibly 30s."

[www.aboutkidshealth.ca]

A 12 year-olds brain is not the same as an adult's.

freakout

He's right to do this; it is a business after all...

...Yet somehow, he still comes off as one of those annoying "money, money, MONEY" executives.

Drake Lake

I like what this guy has to say! He knows people will complain, and he knows to ignore them, and even mock them with the small animal joke.

RonJeremy4Pres

@JustinS: Really? No one would sell a product where you could get in trouble for selling it to a minor? Do they not sell cigarettes where you live? Do they not sell alcohol? Do some stores in certain states not sell marijuana for 'medical use' when selling it to anyone for any reason is against FEDERAL LAW?

Please, fuck that. People wil sell anything they think can make money for them.

And schoolboy, you need to check up on what the ESRB does. The ESRB doesn't stop you from playing anything that's too 'hardcore' for a mature rating. The ESRB have a rating for those games. You need to complain to the console manufacturers who won't allow AO games to be licensed for their devices. That's not the fault of the ESRB.

wild homes

"We try to stick to violence against small animals," said Kotick, (hopefully) joking,"

Lol...

So you're saying it's better to be violent towards people than towards animals?

Maybe you should snag a job at a slaughterhouse =)

I_fit_in

@otakucode: I don't think I agree. And judging by your aggressiveness and cute use of the term 'spineless pussies' I am unsure that you even NEED to have access to adult material.

Did you ever notice how sometimes two films, relatively equal in terms of adult situations and content, can get different ratings? While the MPAA ratings are pretty itemised (this content is PG, that content is PG13, that other content is R) there is still a little leeway to the whole thing? Like, maybe they realise that (for example) not all violence, not even all SPECIFIC VIOLENCE, is created equal? That's because filmmakers can operate with degrees of subtlety that make 'absolute categorisation' difficult. Tarantino might make a film that features swordplay where people get killed in bloody heaps and it's deserving of a certain rating but Kurosawa can make a film that feature swordplay where people get killed in bloody heaps and maybe the violence isn't deserving of the same rating because of subtle differences in what the violence represents? As an industry, gaming has not yet achieved much subtlety. Most games amble on like there's no need for it. Maybe they DON'T need it-- maybe gaming is just an exercise where we act like the fucking Neanderthals we can't be in our real lives. Or maybe subtlety and nuance in game development will only breed true across a few generations. Who knows.

But right now, we should be glad for the ESRB.

wild homes

@DARTH_TIGRIS: He didnt say that having violence in video games makes the games "mature". He said that people over 18 watch movies with violent themes and since they are targetting the same demogrphic some of their games will also contain violence. He even says "Part of that demographic audience enjoys in-game violence" he didnt say all do.

JustinS

@otakucode: Totally with you, dude. Me and my siblings grew up with violent media in our lives and I think we're the better for it.

Don't think I misinterpreted - oversimplified though. ;)

freakout

@elevenoverzero:
@wild homes:

Two BRILLIANT post. You two deserve credit for bringing the maturity.

I'm WELL over 18 and Kotick obviously doesn't have a clue as to what I do. I don't go to a movie, watch a TV show or buy a game based on a rating. It has to be quality. And the more ultraviolent it is, the more juvenile it is. Gaming will never grow up properly or be respected when the heads of companies as large and powerful as Activision have such little respect for its consumers or the medium.

DARTH_TIGRIS

Gratuitous violence. Ha. Is there any other kind?

NPlace

@DARTH_TIGRIS: Thank you!

Oh, and: nice to meet you!

wild homes

Crap! The second part of that post should be directed to otakucode. Sorry!

wild homes

about damn time :P

Pornosaur

I call bullshit. If he did cater to adults, he'd realize most of them already dropped down the money for Rock Band and they don't have the physical room for another whole set of music peripherals. I'm cramped enough as it is.

AuraHACK

@wild homes: His point is that by purposefully hiding children from what they're going to encounter in the real world as adults, we're actually doing them a disservice and setting them up to be manipulated by those who already have experience with adult concepts.

This doesn't mean forcing your kids to watch stuff like Pulp Fiction, or play violent games if they're not comfortable with it. It means letting them develop at their own rate, and if they make a choice to explore violent material then the parent's job is to give them guidance about it, not try and hide them from it. You can warn them they might not like it, but they should still be free to make their own choices and experience the consequences of those choices.

Therefore, because bodies like the ESRB act like an over-protective uber-parent, slapping adult ratings on games that many parents are obviously perfectly happy with their kids playing, it's actually doing us all a disservice in helping prepare children for the adult world.

Unfortunately, I believe that the ESRB and bodies like it are a necessary evil. There's always going to be the overzealous moral crusaders in society determined to stop the rest of us from having fun, and orgs like the ESRB are our shield. "Don't like it? But look, we put a warning on it!" C'est la vie...

freakout

@JustinS: Actually, I think you accidentally highlighted a point I'm not sure you intended to make. Gaming legislation is not aimed at keeping mature-rated titles out of the hands of adults; however, you make the point that if gaming legislation passes many retailers could stop carrying mature-rated titles out of fear of consequences, and adults will then effectively be unable to purchase mature-rated games, and thus you oppose gaming legislation.

This is almost comically ridiculous. The end does not justify the means. It is almost uncondonable to oppose a law only because you're afraid of some POSSIBLE side effect of that law. Not even a CERTAIN side effect, and definitely not something that is intended by the law itself. That's just cowardly fearmongering. If they make it so thirteen year olds cannot play Manhunt then it will make it harder for you twenty and thirty year old adults to play Manhunt! Legislators are targeting you by passing laws that don't actually target you at all!

Welcome to America, where we pass laws that have to survive judicial review. We do not use the speculative consequences of just and constitutional laws as self-serving reasons to oppose those same laws.

wild homes

And boobs. This also incorporates boobs.

UNDERSTAND THIS.

sir_carrot

@elevenoverzero: "Am I the only one who things violence for the sake of violence is immature, not mature?"

Maybe, but I can tell you that violence for the sake of violence has no appeal with me or many people I know. Actually it can get rather annoying, maybe I should associate it with immature gaming.

Replica23

@freakout: Fair enough, my friend, and I appreciate you making his point a bit clearer, but does he understand the ESRB is a voluntary organisation created by the developers and publishers of the videogame industry? The government gave the industry a chance to police itself! The same type of ratings system that movies have, and television, and music? The fact is that whether or not you agree with gaming legislation, the ESRB is not doing anything to stop parents from letting their kids play WHATEVER. The AO rating is just like the MPAA's NC17 rating-- publishers are more than welcome to make AO games and NC17 films, and the ESRB and the MPAA are more than happy to rate them accordingly. His whole arguement has NOTHING to do with the ESRB and everything to do with the console makers who will not license AO titles for their devices.

wild homes

@wild homes: Just for the record here I am not opposed to the ESRB. I am opposed to government enforcement of the ESRB ratings system or a system similar to it. I think its great that retailers voluntarily adhere to the system.

JustinS

@wild homes: Selling cigarettes to a minor is not a felony. Selling alcohol is not a felony.

Walmart, Kmart, and the other big retailers do not sell medical marijuana in California. The law would have made it harder for most people to find M rated games to purchase them. Eventually publishers would self censor their gamees so the major retailers would carry them. Manhunt is an over-the-top example of a violent video game; if retailers were to stop carrying M rated games it would make it harder to get Halo or MGS. When sales on those series begin to decline the developers will probably begin to self censor their games.

Its not comically rediculous and it is only your opinion that the ends do not justify the means when opposing anti-video game legislation. I believe that parents should be responsible enough to pay attention to what their children are doing and that government does not need to get involved. There is no real proof that video games effect children any more than movies and we do not have the same stigma attached to R rated movies as we do to M rated games. We do not have such laws purposed to make the sale of R rated movies to minors a felony. Why should games be different?

You can decide not to speculate on the side effects of passing a law if you want to. People speculate on the possible unintended consequences of laws all the time on whether or not to support them. You may not, but not everyone shares your opinion.

JustinS

"enjoys in-game violence" he must be kidding... >.>

Shad0X

@wild homes: It's cute that you think you have the right to decide who is and who is not deserving of access to adult content, and that using profanity to describe people who willingly submit to censorship excludes people from the group that ought be allowed access.

Beyond that, how about you tell me WHY we should be glad the ESRB exists? I don't disagree with your points that different movies containing the exact same thing can handle them in very different ways. That's why I argue that, even though M rated games contain violence, they never contain serious violence. They approach violence the way a PG-13 rated movie does, with fluff and no significant impact on the viewer. The ESRB won't allow violence like seen in movies like Pan's Labyrinth where a simple punch in the face makes the audience cringe because it is handled with such skill. But I don't see how you think that disallowing the gaming industry from even exploring avenues of mature content will ever lead to mature games.

As for the post where you say you meant to direct it at me where you call me a schoolboy? The ESRB knows that the AO rating is a de facto ban. They support that. When they rate a game AO, which is rare thanks to the chilling effect they have on free speech, they explain in no uncertain terms that they believe the game is unsuitable for adults. Such is their hubris and radical conservative stance on content. Please, keep in mind that no other form of media has ever suffered such blatant censorship. Not film with the Hayes Code in the 30s, not comics with the Comics Code, certainly not music with their Parental Advisory stickers, definitely not books with no ratings or content labelling whatsoever. Now, can you justify restricting the entertainment choices of teens and adults by the standards the ESRB applies? Going by the standard society sets for everything else, I don't think you can.

And note that I am not saying the ESRB is an illegal entity. I am not. Note that I'm not saying the ESRB is unconstitutional, or a government body. I am well aware that the ESRB is a group that the gaming industry claims to have created themselves. It does not change the fact that they are radically conservative, very immoral, and are castrating an art form from dealing with mature subject matter. It is also not only the ESRB but the console manufacturers and the game makers and publishers. They're all help it happen. But the ESRB is the lynch pin. If they couldn't point at the ESRB and say "we can't do that, they would rate it AO" then they would be taking chances and we, as adult gamers, would all benefit from them.

@JustinS: "Manhunt is an over-the-top example of a violent video game" That you would say that is an example of how the ESRB has tricked people. Why do you think Manhunt is over the top? Its violence is far, far more tame than many R rated movies. Its atmosphere is far lighter. Its realism far more meager. Manhunt would be an R rated movie, certainly, but if you released a film of gameplay footage, the MPAA would be trying to decide whether to rate it PG-13 or R, not R or NC-17. And I must point out, if it were rated R or NC-17 or left unrated, as an adult you'd still be able to play it. The DVD player manufacturers have more moral fiber than the console manufacturers and don't capitulate to a group of ultraconservative fuddy-duddies.

otakucode

That guy is awesome.

Ehetyz