China bans MMOGs with PK content for minors

[Yeltsu]

I just read this article http://www.gameinsider.com/comments.php?id=837&catid=1

So now china has banned MMOGs that contain PK (player kills) for minors (read, those below the age of 18) That means that games like WoW that ad a 12+ age limit, now get a 18+

" Liu Shifa, head of the MOC's Internet Culture Division, which drafts policies governing the online gaming market, told Interfax. "Online games that have PK content usually also contain acts of violence and leads to players spending too much time trying to increase the power of their characters. They are harmful to young people."


What are your opinions on this? I don't like it, WoW has a 12+ rating, so why raise that to 18+? I don't see the point, and concerning PK, I hardly see that that's the most harmful thing in computer games these days

[Ravager]

It's a politics thing. Communism protecting the people of China and probably wins them extra support.

Also, it seems generalised to anything that contains killing. While some games and MMORPG's deserve such a rating (Manhunt comes to mind), others are purely fantasy and are less graphic.

[Denethorn]

I'm not in 100% agreement with that policy, but I can see where they are coming from . Player killing is demonstration of superiority over another player/human. Which is a little more significant than just killing fantasy computer monsters or whatever.

I don't think it would have any serious psychological effects but others might

[fable]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yeltsu So now china has banned MMOGs that contain PK (player kills) for minors (read, those below the age of 18) That means that games like WoW that ad a 12+ age limit, now get a 18+... What are your opinions on this? I don't like it, WoW has a 12+ rating, so why raise that to 18+? I don't see the point, and concerning PK, I hardly see that that's the most harmful thing in computer games these days

Your announcement isn't surprising. This is Chinese culture, one of the oldest and most traditional (despite sharp changes on a government level) in the world. They're used to private morals being reflected by public conduct, or at least, an attempt to achieve this, and the individualized, emotion-driven conduct of Westerners often fills them with disgust and horror.

[Galuf the Dwarf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denethorn I'm not in 100% agreement with that policy, but I can see where they are coming from . Player killing is demonstration of superiority over another player/human. Which is a little more significant than just killing fantasy computer monsters or whatever. I don't think it would have any serious psychological effects but others might

I'm with Denethorn on this one. He pretty much sums up my thoughts.

[dragon wench]

And I suppose they can take the moral high ground on this.... since everyone knows China abhors violence of absolutely any kind. Why! They're one of the most peaceful nations around!

Sorry, I know that's a bit off topic, but given matters such as Tibet, I find the hypocrisy utterly galling.

[fable]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon wench And I suppose they can take the moral high ground on this.... since everyone knows China abhors violence of absolutely any kind. Why! They're one of the most peaceful nations around! Sorry, I know that's a bit off topic, but given matters such as Tibet, I find the hypocrisy utterly galling.

It's not hypocrisy if you look back at Chinese history. They have owned Tibet, at least once or twice. Mind, they conquered it each time, but then, what land hasn't been conquered by invaders, by now? To the Chinese government, they're taking back what's theirs. Mind, it's not theirs, they're invaders, and their destroying another, totally separate culture.

So I wouldn't call them hypocrites. Imperialistic, warmongering bureaucrats with hearts of ice, but hey, who's perfect?

[Xandax]

While I don't really agree with it - I see nothing wrong with it either per se.
In my viewpoint, it is very similar to any other country placing a 18+ lable on a game which contains killing each other or other "dangerous" content.
Afterall - the both the US and EU are hypocritical as well when it comes to lableing computer games and other forms of entertainment. In the US it is just sexual content instead of murder and mayhem which is labled as dangerous to the younger people. I still remember vividly when I discoverd that my EU version of Fallout 2 had all children removed due to some countrys legislation about pixled children NPCs mixing with content involving drugs
Or when some version of Carmagedon in Germany (EU version?) had all people replaced with robots or something.....

The fact that it this time is China doesn't make much difference in my opinion.

[Xandax]

Bump with some added information which I didn't feel warrented a new thread:

China blocks online gamers from playing for more than 3 consecutive hours
(Now - I'm not familiar with this source, so I can't guarentee it's valid, could be a red herring.)

Now this sounds "annoying". When I think of all the sessions I've had where I've gamed upwards to 10-14 hours practically in a row

I wonder how long it will be before China "get its way" (what seems to be "their" way) and MMORPG/Game developers don't even want the hassle of trying to get into the chinese market of gamers. But the money there is as good as anywhere else, and there is much of it - so I guess for a while yet, the government can act as it wishes withouth gamers revolting. Heh - could be a "fun" notion, if a government was overthrown by a gamer-revolution.

However, seriously - then it is quite common knowlegde that players in most MMOGs players can't accomplish anything significant in a 3 hour time frame.

[Brynn]

Whoa.

18 seems a bit strict for me...

I wonder if there's a difference (psychologically) between PKs in games that imitate real war and in fantasy games... You kill the other player in both environments, but for some reason aiming a gun at someone or running through a village with a tank seems more disturbing for me than launching a Fireball which is not likely to happen in real life. (I'm not protecting WoW here, I'm just wondering if the connection to reality makes any difference about the "killing experience").

[Brynn]

Xan:

If this is true, I'll eat my hat. Unbeliveable. Sure, very nice thought, prevent addiction, but with this kind of thinking they might as well knock the cigarette out of smokers' hands or ban alcohol... They simply have no right to limit users' playing hours when they PAY for a 24/7 internet access and MMOG...

[Dottie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brynn They simply have no right to limit users' playing hours when they PAY for a 24/7 internet access and MMOG...

Why not? what makes a gouvernment have a "right" at all? I don't think the fact that you have paid for something makes it exceptionally imoral to prohibit it.

I don't agree with them either, but I can't really see anything outrageous with it.

[Brynn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dottie Why not? what makes a gouvernment have a "right" at all? I don't think the fact that you have paid for something makes it exceptionally imoral to prohibit it. I don't agree with them either, but I can't really see anything outrageous with it.

It's obviously interfereing in one's private life, isn't it? What does the government has to do with what I do in my free time??? It doesn't hurt anybody, does it? Ban smoking first!

I do find it outrageous that they want to limit an activity like gaming... What's the reason behind this? I'm pretty sure none of the leaders give a shoot about the mental/physical health of the players...

[crazy]

that sucks but hey we are talking about china right? i am pretty sure the people of republic of china will think it as an another kind of joke and challenge by the government and try to make it as enjoyable as possible.

[fable]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brynn It's obviously interfereing in one's private life, isn't it? What does the government has to do with what I do in my free time???

The concept of a government existing to serve its citizenry, largely from the background, is a very modern construct. I think Dottie is trying to point out that this idea of how and why a government exists isn't a given, and that we shouldn't express moral outrage because other nations apply other standards.