When life-like virtual reality is finally invented, we’ll all just plug ourselves in, feed through a straw and forget the real world ever existed. Until that glorious da though, we still have the thorny issue of game censorship to contend with. Here’s an article I wrote for The Telegraph, just as Rule of Rose was hitting the front pages. I also went on Sky News to defend a game I didn’t even like against the tirade of an ill-informed Italian government official. Strange times indeed.
Originally printed in The Telegraph, 25th November 2006.
A controversial game is trying to break new ground, says Guy Cocker
Last week, the issues surrounding violent video games were raised again thanks to PlayStation 2′s Rule of Rose, the pretty revolting Japanese survival horror title that sees a 19-year-old girl tortured and humiliated by a group of children.
Within the first hour, players will see a victim bound and gagged while a rat is thrust into her face, while sexual undertones run throughout.
On paper, it’s easy to see why there have been calls for the game to be banned and following negative publicity, the developer, 505 Games, has abandoned plans for its UK release. However, it’s readily available on non-UK-based retail websites for anyone to buy. It raises questions concerning the classification of games with mature content. While the Pan-European Game Information (PEGI) body makes age recommendations for interactive software, submittal is voluntary and the results aren’t legally binding. Although Rule of Rose was presented with a PEGI 16+ rating, there’s nothing to stop children from buying the game.
Of course, the same child could also buy an album filled with profanity, or a book containing sexually explicit material. While I’d hope that a responsible sales assistant would refuse to sell any of those items to a minor, the current system needs to be updated to classify games with mature subject matter properly.
Part of this responsibility lies with the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC). Its rating system legally prevents under-age people from buying restricted material, but the BBFC currently only assesses video games that are voluntarily submitted to it. Even then, the classification guidelines only cover games with “human sexual activity, human genital organs or gross acts of violence”.
Rule of Rose wasn’t submitted to the BBFC, but as it only contains implied sexuality and psychological violence, it’s unlikely that it would have received a rating. The irony is that most explicit video games wear their “18″ BBFC rating like a badge of honour – a way of attracting violence-obsessed gamers to a mediocre title.
Critics derided games such as The Punisher and Postal, but their brutality helped them to sell millions of copies. The Punisher allowed players to use guns, knives and animals to torture foes, while Postal offers the chance to use a stun gun on victims to the point where they urinate themselves.
As with the Grand Theft Auto series, the controversy surrounding Rule of Rose will only help it to gain more sales. Unlike Grand Theft Auto, though, Rule of Rose is undeserving of its imminent success: if players dig into the game, they will find it is nearly as boring as it is annoying to play.
What Rule of Rose is noteworthy for is proving that video games are moving beyond simple brutality and experimenting with more challenging themes. Despite preconceptions, video gamers aren’t teenage boys any more: the Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association says their average age is 23. While the blood and gore of The Punisher will satisfy many, it’s the same disposable cartoon violence found in a Hollywood action film. I look forward to seeing a talented game developer take on a project with David Lynch sensibilities.
When games start to use atmosphere and threat instead of snipers and chainsaws, it will be more memorable than any number of high-definition exploding head-shots.
Social Profiles