Some interesting Points

by Michael Sy

Mr. Gohan,

At the end of your last letter, you dare us "to even try and rebut every single one of [your] points." While I don't care to do so, since I agree with some of what you say, you might try sounding a little less arrogant next time. It's a good way to avoid alienating people.

You state that the violence in the US is caused by "console-based role-playing game and their characteristics". However, there are a couple points you fail to consider:

1. Not everyone that is violent plays RPG's. What evidence have you that the Trenchcoat Mafia, or any other violent youth has been playing violent console games? Is it merely that console games are the only reason for violence? Why not other potential factors, such as TV, certain music, or irresponsible parents?

2. Console games are much more popular in Japan than in the US. Yet I hear no news of Japanese school violence (inform me if I'm ignorant). If console games are the reason for US violence, why doesn't Japan experience a similiar and more severe phenomenon?

Now for the main points you were explaining:

1) "Realism is evil." (Realistic violence is evil.) I would like to know which FMV's are so violent as to provoke someone to murder. Also, why could FF6 not provide the same violent impulses as FF7? The graphics were quite different to be sure, but the same feelings and types of battles were there...the heat of battle, need to survive--a powerful adrenalin rush. Maybe your point of view is valid, and improved graphics are harming us. But you state "FF7 alone was responsible for much death and malicious impulses in our society"--if you consider this a strong "evidence", you should really provide some more evidence for your evidence! Was there an increase in violence after FF7 was released in this country? Have you known anyone to take a turn for the worse because of FF7?

2) Is character development really so bad? What if for all games, the characters were "left customizable blank slates for the player to fill in"? FF1 was great for the ability to choose your own class of characters. But why is it so bad to have the RPG be a story? Other people can provide a richer experience, by creating personalities and intracacies that I cannot provide by myself. Sometimes I like to make my own characters, but sometimes I enjoy experiencing a story, akin to sitting down and reading a book. Don't blast games and players because you have different criteria for an ideal game, just play the stuff you like and leave it at that.

You also talk a lot about how the games and characters influence how we think. Well, of course they do! Everytime we watch TV, read a book, go to school, talk with ANYONE, we are influenced. The world (for better or worse) shares its thoughts and values with us. Now, naturally, the question to ask is whether RPG characters are good role models--"What do they advertise?". You state that they advocate "violence, mass murder and going against the will of God". To support or refute that, let's observe some game characters. Who do you think advocates the values that you stated, Cloud or Sephiroth? Locke or Kefka? Obviously, the main characters are not perfect. But they are clearly trying to preserve "good" by fighting enemies who care nothing but power. Sephiroth destroys Nibelheim; Kefka arrogantly changes the world--they clearly are power-hungry, with no care for people. I don't think anyone would say the same for Cloud or Locke.

The point you brought up about the angels is interesting, and recent Square games do deal with a church. I don't doubt that some of the Square employees don't care much for Christianity. But be careful of assuming of anyone else's motives. You don't even know the people who made the games, much less have a firm reason to call them "selfish atheists who are making fun of Christianity." Also keep in mind that Satan himself was Lucifer, an angel of light before his fall. Biblically, all demons are simply angels who rebelled against God. Since these angel last bosses were clearly evil, there's no reason to dispute that they are angels who have sinned (remember Kefka's spell "Fallen One"?)

3) I agree that females don't make sense fighting in the front lines of battle. While it does pain the feminist movement to state this, males are in general stronger, faster, and tougher than females. Although keep in mind that there are those females who can be more than a match for males (especially wimpy ones, like me :-D). And again, be careful about seeming arrogant ("So [a female gamer's] opinion, while I guess it should still be considered, is far less important."). And yeah, we certainly don't need to see skimpily-clad women in RPG's.

Well, enough blowing sleepy time.

Original Editorial: Why RPGs Should be Severely Censored and Devoid of Character Development