No Free Speech For You!

by Alan Knight 

First off let me state that I wholly agree with the views of this editorial - too much game is being placed on computer games and roleplaying games. I'd just like to present my thoughts on the subject.

Firstly, the issue of censorship, and in particular the cited example, that of Pokemon versus FF8. I'm well aware of the parallels between these two games, the fundamental element of battle. However, something that has to be factored in is the presentation. Pokemon, for all it's cutesy little creatures beating the crap out of each other, is still quintessentially cute - no Pokemon ever dies, they're incapable of it, and the general presentation is that of a world that kids will realise just isn't realistic - no-one has 8 inch eyes in the real world.

Conversely, Final Fantasy 8 looks and feels that much more realistic. No cutesy, cuddly monsties duking it out here - instead, we have realistic looking people (Broadly. I've never thought ages matched up to appearance.) swiping at other realistic people with big swords, whereupon those people fall over dead. In the very first FMV, you have Squall getting his eye slashed with a sword, and while you don't see any gore you do see blood and a nasty cut, and that presents a potential problem for censors. When it comes to censoring games, it's always better to be safe rather than sorry.

As for the issue of computer games being blamed, it's all a matter of free speech and preference. If someone doesn't like game X for whatever reason, they can badmouth it if they want. They can blame it if they want. In these situations, it's usually best to let people decide for themselves based on the reasons the bad-mouther has given. As the simplest of examples, the most common reason that AD&D and, say, Magic: The Gathering are badmouthed by the church is the existence of demons and angels - predominatantly the former. The reason that the games never got banned is simply because that's all it was - free speech from the churches, expressing their distaste for a product. However they want to do it is up to them, but it's just the same as, say, a Vampire: The Masquerade fan insulting AD&D - personal preference.

(It is to be noted here that Wizards of the Coast, the company behind both AD&D and M:tG did for a long period remove any reference to demons or things of a demonic nature, but that when controversy was at it's greatest reintroduced them. That takes style.)

When you look at it from such an oblique view, other things become apparent. Parallels can be drawn from the relationship between the nay-sayers and RPGs to the relationship between, say, half the RPG population and FF8, or half of the RPG population and FF7, or /any/ two groups at odds about something.

When it comes down to it, if you want to stop churches, oldies, contemporary society and the like badmouthing games, then you also have to stop articles like your editorial, because you are doing merely the same thing - expressing an opinion of a controversial subject in a public forum. They may regard it as truth, you may regard it as prejudice. But it all boils down to the same thing.

Finally, the issue of scapegoating. Yes, RPGs are scapegoats for the problems in society. But if you've ever been to a pen and paper RPG session, you'll realise that most RPG players really aren't wholly grounded in reality. It's a kind of pre-requisite, the ability to let your mind wander off into an imaginary head. The idea along tends to make most people at least suspicious if nothing else. Besides, RPGers are a small group, so they won't do anything to stop people blaming them, will they? Will they?