Saturday, 14 March 2009

Violent games are taxing

I can understand why things such as alcohol and cigarettes would have extra tax on them. They have proven negative effects on people’s health and pleasantries. I do not necessarily agree with taxes on them 100%, but I do see the arguments behind it.

On the other hand however, I do not see the reasoning behind taxing violent videogames, as was suggested earlier in the week. The genius thought behind this one is that if violent games were a little dearer, those who might be tempted to buy the game, like it too much, and kill their family with a hammer, might be put off.

I know this is a major bit of dead equine floggery, but violent games do not kill people. It’s the few crazies that slip off the edge that carry out unspeakable acts and then when they have no where to go, might blame the games, if the jury doesn’t first.

I do not mean to sound insensitive, but blaming games for society’s ills really is stupid. In a similarly stupid vein, so is suggesting that a high tax will help curb the alleged problem.

The main argument for putting a tax on violent games is that they are turning our sweet innocent youth of society into hoody wearing, knife toting muggers and rapists. So if the games are more expensive they will have less access, helping communities live together in a little more harmony.

Has it struck them that making games cost more could go in the completely wrong direction, and so instead of just thugs, we will have thugs who are more desperate because they spent all their money on games.

Surely the best thing to do is to try and treat games retail a bit more like alcohol sales and enforce a stricter challenge 25 out look to it?


On a slightly different note, Mad World comes out soon and if reviews are anything to go by, it is fun but a little short (around six hours apparently). Is this still regarded as short nowadays? I only ask because to me it seems that this is becoming the average, which is a huge shame.

From the videos I have seen, the game’s protagonist, Jack, has an arm mounted chainsaw that is put to a rather gloriously violent use. I think that that he may have over looked the lucrative aspects of selling such a device to lumber jacks who are always on the move. A retractable chainsaw would make equipment management so much simpler for them.

1 comment:

Matt Mountford said...

I concur. Society always looks for a scapegoat when there is no obvious culprit to pin the blame on. The borderline between criminal and insanity isn’t as clear cut as many would think. Can’t every criminal be said to have a slight mental disability (as deemed by society) in so far as there must have been something slightly askew with them in some metal form for them to carry out these actions when the bulk of society under the same influences did not? Humans are not impervious to their own innate instincts, and it has always been our instincts to kill other animals. We'll who does that nowadays? Could it be that the murderous streak that some of us have is just a protrusion of this instinct which is left unfulfilled by the social and economic mechanisms we have created? I’m not saying that we should all go out and kill a cow, but that maybe these games could in fact be serving a purpose, and that by demoting them, we could in fact be making things worse. Just my two pennies worth.