by The Escapist
 | |  | ||
In 1954, the Comics Code Authority put restrictions on the content of comic books in the United States, with the aim of removing anything that could be considered unwholesome, harmful or otherwise inappropriate. Some notable clauses in the code included a prohibition on excessive violence; an outright ban on nudity and that good must triumph over evil in every instance. CCA approval was not a legal requirement, but many distributors would refuse to carry titles that did not bear the Authority's seal.
While this might not seem to have a great deal to do with video games, with Germany considering a complete ban on violent video games, and Japan's Ethics Organization for Computer Software imposing new restrictions on erogefollowing the outcry over Rapelay, there seems to be a prevailing trend globally towards the type of censorship that the CCA espoused. Of course, America has long had a CCA-like body for video games in the ESRB, which – while entirely voluntary – carries sufficient sway with retailers to significantly influence video game content. [In the UK, the BBFC keeps an eye on game content but the extent of its influence on retailers – other than the obvious ability to ban a game, thereby making it illegal for sale – has yet to be demonstrated.]
The parallels to the kind of hoops that comic books had to jump through run fairly deep. Nudity and sex are already big issues and you need only look at the furor generated by the 'Hot Coffee' incident, or the wholly consensual sex scene in Mass Effect to see how true that is, and the 'excessive' violence of games has frequently come under fire from a horde of vociferous, though well-meaning, critics.
However, if this trend gains momentum, and leads to more stringent restrictions on games – which doesn't seem all that unlikely when you consider that some news outlets will try and shoehorn gaming in where it doesn't belong – history provides us with hope for the future. While some publishers saw their stable of titles devastated by the Comics Code, others thrived. Only a few years after the Code's introduction, Marvel debuted some of the most iconic characters, and began to tell stories in a different way, giving their characters a complexity that proved a big hit with those who had grown tired of the alien ubermensch and billionaire playboy detectives other publishers were producing.
As social attitudes changed, the Code grew less and less restrictive, although some things took longer than to change than others. For example, the ban on the depiction of narcotics in comics was relaxed in 1971, but the prohibition on homosexuality in the medium was only lifted in 1989.
The point of this is that when the traditional staples were taken away, the comic book industry found new ways to tell stories. While censorship is never desirable, if it transpires that it is unavoidable, then like the comic book publishers, the games industry will have to find new ways to tell stories. Once the crutches of violence and gore have been taken away, developers are going to have to stretch themselves if they want to tell a half decent story.
Obviously there will be those who will scoff at the idea that censorship could have anything other than a negative effect on the industry, and consider it naïve, or ill-informed to think otherwise. They will point to the lacklustre library of titles on the Wii as evidence that a platform without violence is barely a platform at all. To a certain degree, these people will be correct, as there will undoubtedly be lazy developers that will make shovelware titles, but the companies who actually care about what they're doing, companies like Epic, Lionhead and Valve, to name but a few, will continue to make quality titles, and when these hypothetical restrictions on game content are relaxed, as they inevitably will be, we gamers will reap the benefits of an industry that has learnt to tell stories properly.
While this might not seem to have a great deal to do with video games, with Germany considering a complete ban on violent video games, and Japan's Ethics Organization for Computer Software imposing new restrictions on erogefollowing the outcry over Rapelay, there seems to be a prevailing trend globally towards the type of censorship that the CCA espoused. Of course, America has long had a CCA-like body for video games in the ESRB, which – while entirely voluntary – carries sufficient sway with retailers to significantly influence video game content. [In the UK, the BBFC keeps an eye on game content but the extent of its influence on retailers – other than the obvious ability to ban a game, thereby making it illegal for sale – has yet to be demonstrated.]
The parallels to the kind of hoops that comic books had to jump through run fairly deep. Nudity and sex are already big issues and you need only look at the furor generated by the 'Hot Coffee' incident, or the wholly consensual sex scene in Mass Effect to see how true that is, and the 'excessive' violence of games has frequently come under fire from a horde of vociferous, though well-meaning, critics.
However, if this trend gains momentum, and leads to more stringent restrictions on games – which doesn't seem all that unlikely when you consider that some news outlets will try and shoehorn gaming in where it doesn't belong – history provides us with hope for the future. While some publishers saw their stable of titles devastated by the Comics Code, others thrived. Only a few years after the Code's introduction, Marvel debuted some of the most iconic characters, and began to tell stories in a different way, giving their characters a complexity that proved a big hit with those who had grown tired of the alien ubermensch and billionaire playboy detectives other publishers were producing.
As social attitudes changed, the Code grew less and less restrictive, although some things took longer than to change than others. For example, the ban on the depiction of narcotics in comics was relaxed in 1971, but the prohibition on homosexuality in the medium was only lifted in 1989.
The point of this is that when the traditional staples were taken away, the comic book industry found new ways to tell stories. While censorship is never desirable, if it transpires that it is unavoidable, then like the comic book publishers, the games industry will have to find new ways to tell stories. Once the crutches of violence and gore have been taken away, developers are going to have to stretch themselves if they want to tell a half decent story.
Obviously there will be those who will scoff at the idea that censorship could have anything other than a negative effect on the industry, and consider it naïve, or ill-informed to think otherwise. They will point to the lacklustre library of titles on the Wii as evidence that a platform without violence is barely a platform at all. To a certain degree, these people will be correct, as there will undoubtedly be lazy developers that will make shovelware titles, but the companies who actually care about what they're doing, companies like Epic, Lionhead and Valve, to name but a few, will continue to make quality titles, and when these hypothetical restrictions on game content are relaxed, as they inevitably will be, we gamers will reap the benefits of an industry that has learnt to tell stories properly.
I think the article raises some good points. The greatest writing has always been in a time of censorship as it requires great imagination to get your point across in a way that connects with the reader and still avoids the censorship. The greatest example of this for has always been The Crucible during McCarthyism.
What are your thoughts on this and censorship in general?
Log in to comment