They will always sell fishsticks in the frozen foods section.
As reported by GamePolitics:
"Earlier this week, New Jersey's The Star-Ledger polled the readers of its Parental Guidance blog on what they thought of Nintendo's forthcoming Wii Zapper, a plastic shell that combines the Wiimote and Nunchuk into a rifle-looking device for use in first-person shooter games. "
GamePolitics posted a small sampling of the opinions. One in particular caught my eye, and I am so glad they chose to post it, otherwise I might very well simply have read on through the article without giving it much thought. The statement is as follows:
"I think it's irresponsible for Wii to come out with a controller that looks like a gun so kids can play games simulating shooting. What kind of message are we sending as parents when we buy these things for our kids?"
As I said, I am extremely pleased that someone said this, because I think it is an excellent two-sentence summary of what I consider to be the problematic attitude towards games and gaming systems. I will begin with the second sentence, then discuss the first. The best way I can come up with to respond to the question posed here is flipping the question around and asking it the other way. What kind of message can you send as a parent if you _don't_ buy these things for your kids? The idea that the mere existence of a product necessitates your purchasing of said item for your kids is misguided at best, and more realistically it is outright ridiculous. This fits in the context of the larger, what I call, "helplessness complex" exhibited by modern day parents. It seems that parents have been taught to see the world as a place filled with horrifying images and activities around every corner just waiting to seduce their children into a life of murder, rape, and drug use. I.e., companies are going to make video games that depict violence, your kids are going to play them, and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. To be fair, it is difficult to put that entirely on the parents. We live in The Age of the Evenening News, where corporate bigwigs have but 30 minutes to grab the attention of over-worked middle-class adults. If they want those ratings, they have to keep them coming back for more every night. And what better way than to keep them ever in fear of "what is placing your child in peril today?" or the reversed "what horrifying things is your child doing RIGHT NOW?" With such a boundless array of devious entities dedicated to destroying your child, it is easy to respond by forming activist groups to combat these evildoers, and to forget that in the end you can make choices about what you allow into your home. But so long as this fear permeates our culture and our minds, the Jack Thompsons of the world will have a voice to push an agenda of fighting evil rather than nurturing good.
But I digress. Our next question: Is Wii (or more accurately, Nintendo) really behaving irresponsibly by releasing a (very loosely) gun-shaped video game controller for use in first-person shooter style games? Well, certainly, as we just discussed, the onus falls on the parental units to monitor their child's activities. Yes, parents, there is some actual effort you will have to put forth in raising your child. The video game companies will not do it for you. Those bastards. So where, then, is the line of corporate responsibility to be drawn? At what point can we legitimately hold a company responsible for what our children are doing when we aren't standing in the room with them? Well, the short answer, in my opinion, is that we can't. It is the responsibility of the company to produce safe products, meaning that Nintendo is required to create a product which, when used for its intended purpose, will not cause physical harm. Since the Wii Zapper(tm) does not literally fire bullets, and is made of plastic, it would be difficult to cause much physical harm with it, short of mercilessly beating your little brother with it when he tries to take it away from you or jumps in front of the screen while you are on the last level of Super Awesome Blood-Gore First-Person Shooter Game, rated M for Mature. Clearly, this falls outside of that "intended use" clause mentioned previously. But, well, if you're the type of parent who, by not excersising your parental power, sends a message to your children that it is ok to play graphic video games with gun-like controllers and savagely bludgeon their siblings if they try to get in the way, I guess it could be a fairly likely scenario.
I am interested in your thoughts on this. So if you have any, don't hesitate to let me know. As always, I'd love to be told I'm wrong ;).
GamePolitics: http://www.gamepolitics.com
Star-Ledger Survey: http://blog.nj.com/parentalguidance/2007/09/what_do_we_think_of_wii.html (read at your own risk, it is not much better than a forum fight)
"Earlier this week, New Jersey's The Star-Ledger polled the readers of its Parental Guidance blog on what they thought of Nintendo's forthcoming Wii Zapper, a plastic shell that combines the Wiimote and Nunchuk into a rifle-looking device for use in first-person shooter games. "
GamePolitics posted a small sampling of the opinions. One in particular caught my eye, and I am so glad they chose to post it, otherwise I might very well simply have read on through the article without giving it much thought. The statement is as follows:
"I think it's irresponsible for Wii to come out with a controller that looks like a gun so kids can play games simulating shooting. What kind of message are we sending as parents when we buy these things for our kids?"
As I said, I am extremely pleased that someone said this, because I think it is an excellent two-sentence summary of what I consider to be the problematic attitude towards games and gaming systems. I will begin with the second sentence, then discuss the first. The best way I can come up with to respond to the question posed here is flipping the question around and asking it the other way. What kind of message can you send as a parent if you _don't_ buy these things for your kids? The idea that the mere existence of a product necessitates your purchasing of said item for your kids is misguided at best, and more realistically it is outright ridiculous. This fits in the context of the larger, what I call, "helplessness complex" exhibited by modern day parents. It seems that parents have been taught to see the world as a place filled with horrifying images and activities around every corner just waiting to seduce their children into a life of murder, rape, and drug use. I.e., companies are going to make video games that depict violence, your kids are going to play them, and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. To be fair, it is difficult to put that entirely on the parents. We live in The Age of the Evenening News, where corporate bigwigs have but 30 minutes to grab the attention of over-worked middle-class adults. If they want those ratings, they have to keep them coming back for more every night. And what better way than to keep them ever in fear of "what is placing your child in peril today?" or the reversed "what horrifying things is your child doing RIGHT NOW?" With such a boundless array of devious entities dedicated to destroying your child, it is easy to respond by forming activist groups to combat these evildoers, and to forget that in the end you can make choices about what you allow into your home. But so long as this fear permeates our culture and our minds, the Jack Thompsons of the world will have a voice to push an agenda of fighting evil rather than nurturing good.
But I digress. Our next question: Is Wii (or more accurately, Nintendo) really behaving irresponsibly by releasing a (very loosely) gun-shaped video game controller for use in first-person shooter style games? Well, certainly, as we just discussed, the onus falls on the parental units to monitor their child's activities. Yes, parents, there is some actual effort you will have to put forth in raising your child. The video game companies will not do it for you. Those bastards. So where, then, is the line of corporate responsibility to be drawn? At what point can we legitimately hold a company responsible for what our children are doing when we aren't standing in the room with them? Well, the short answer, in my opinion, is that we can't. It is the responsibility of the company to produce safe products, meaning that Nintendo is required to create a product which, when used for its intended purpose, will not cause physical harm. Since the Wii Zapper(tm) does not literally fire bullets, and is made of plastic, it would be difficult to cause much physical harm with it, short of mercilessly beating your little brother with it when he tries to take it away from you or jumps in front of the screen while you are on the last level of Super Awesome Blood-Gore First-Person Shooter Game, rated M for Mature. Clearly, this falls outside of that "intended use" clause mentioned previously. But, well, if you're the type of parent who, by not excersising your parental power, sends a message to your children that it is ok to play graphic video games with gun-like controllers and savagely bludgeon their siblings if they try to get in the way, I guess it could be a fairly likely scenario.
I am interested in your thoughts on this. So if you have any, don't hesitate to let me know. As always, I'd love to be told I'm wrong ;).
GamePolitics: http://www.gamepolitics.com
Star-Ledger Survey: http://blog.nj.com/parentalguidance/2007/09/what_do_we_think_of_wii.html (read at your own risk, it is not much better than a forum fight)