About that SCOTUS ruling...

All the juicy info is over at http://gamepolitics.com/2011/06/27/esrb039s-reaction-statement-scotus-decision. I like the ESRB's take: empowering parents is the best way to go. I think that is a position that Magisterial-minded Catholics could agree with.

We've had plenty of discussions about video game violence and the like on this blog in the past. Now might be a good time to revisit them; in any case, a good Catholic approach to the issue can be found here:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2011/concupiscence-is-not-a-sin

Don't let the mask of "prudence" and "protecting children" lead you into rejecting Christ.

U.S. Supreme Court to hear case on Violent Video Games

h/t Sr. Helena at the Hell Burns blog.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-court-videos-20100427-39,0,5997035.story

Video Game Violence, Part Trio

Heavy Rain, QuanticDream's heavily anticipated "interactive movie" (their words, not mine) experience developed exclusively for the Playstation 3, released to a flurry of positive reviews this past week, and the flurries of snow here in Chicago didn't stop anyone here in the Chi from picking up the game - including one of my brother seminarians.

I have yet to play or even watch the game myself; however, the buzz about the game has reached my ears, and as it has some pertinence to the oft-discussed topic of video game violence here on CathVG, I'm going to offer the readership a chance to comment on it.

Now, the lexicon of the video gamer "chattering class" is awfully pretentious (the diction employed to describe the gaming experience is strictly limited to words like "innovative," "immersive," and "deep," and there's rarely any substantive attempt to distinguish between terms). Still, describing Heavy Rain as "immersive" is probably an understatement. The game takes a sort of "choose-your-own-ending" approach to the story; every action you as a player undertake has a dramatic effect on the story's progression. Anyone remember the "Goosebumps" books from the 90's, with the funky "alternative endings?" Yeah, it's kinda like that, only there's a seemingly limitless amount of endings to the story in Heavy Rain. Why is this important? Read on, gentle reader, read on...

Heavy Rain also "immerses" the player in its utilization of the Playstation 3's motion-sensing controller. Case in point: you character is a gun-wielding, neo-noir detective. You hold the controller as if you were holding a handgun (not too disimilar to the "light gun" arcade games of yore) as your character is forced with a moral dilemma: shoot an innocent bystander in cold blood (and thus save the character's son), or choose to back off and watch someone else die the same brutal death.

THE PLAYER pulls the trigger - or at least, this is what the game compels the player to think, as the motion-sensing control scheme demands that the player simulate the actual murder sequence.

So...with an immersive setting like that of Heavy Rain, is the moral culpability of the player any different? It's awfully clear that the developers are pushing the envelope in that direction, blurring the line between the "player-as-viewer" and "player-as-agent," per se. At the very least, the postmodern, "it's all just a matter of perspective..." thematic is certainly a part of this game, and for this reason alone I will say, without hesitancy: DO NOT buy this game for your 4-year-old grandson/nephew/brother. Even then, given that this game deliberately attempts to soothe away the pangs of a guilty conscience in its portayal (simulation?) of murder, well, I'm not sure if anyone else should be playing it, either.

That being said, I await the judgment of those who have actually, you know, played the game.

U.S. Navy: Video Games are good for you

H/T to the NeoGAF forums

"Think interactive video games are a waste of time or more suited for children? Think again. Research by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) indicates that video games can help adults process information much faster and improve their abilities to reason and solve problems. Dr. Ray Perez, ONR program officer, discussed video game-induced “fluid intelligence” on the Jan 20 webcast."

Other notable excerpts:

"...Early indications suggest that cognitive improvements from video games can last up to two and half years, Perez said, but he admitted that so far the results have been relegated to observations and measurements in a controlled laboratory environment..."

“The major question is that once you’ve increased these perceptual abilities and cognitive abilities, do they transfer to everyday tasks,” he said, “and how long do they continue to influence the person working on these everyday tasks?”

For the record, this is hardly the only instance of the scientific method demonstrating the health benefits of video gaming; one such benefit that goes unmentioned in this particular study (and, thus, earns a peculiar mention here) is accentuated eyesight. Personally, I think my prolonged hours of video gaming have done wonders for my hand-eye coordination, though that's probably the only physical health benefit I derived from them. The intellectual and spiritual formation these games provided, however, was invaluable. The artistic imagery of some of the games also gave me a taste of the transcendent, instilling in me (during those precious formative teenage years, no less!) the idea that beauty was, in fact, NOT in the eye of the beholder. I learned a bit about storytelling and characterization, as well; as a budding English major at a major Catholic University, it is no exaggeration to say that I owe my interest in the subject at least partially to the video games I enjoyed well into my teenage years...and still enjoy, albeit with less frequency, to this day.

That being said, the social isolation and addictive potential of these same games also contributed at times to a kind of spiritual desolation; I will be the first to admit that I failed to employ moderation during my more "hardcore" gaming years, and no amount of acquired ocular aptitude can replace wasted time (not to mention neglected friendships, a deteriorating physique, and a regrettably over-extended introversion). Too much of a good thing is, well, too much of a good thing. Games became my god, and that was...well, not healthy at all.

I sincerely hope the Navy Officers in this study don't fall into the same trap I did. There's something about video games and an incarnational spirituality that really...doesn't quite mesh. They can't replace love of neighbor, even if they do teach the value of the practice of this or any other particular virtue. They can impart wisdom and knowledge, but they can't make you practice it. They can depict, and even bring to life, Christ on the cross, in a way peculiarly unique to the medium, no less. They can never, however, replace Him.

I'm a Survivor!

Just finished RE5 with my brother this morning. Not sure if I'm up for a full-fledged review, but as a gamer fairly new to the Resident Evil franchise, I will say I was very pleased with the entire package - the game isn't perfect, but there's nothing really glaringly WRONG with the game, either. It's violent, it's gory, but not in the way the Modern Warfare 2 is; there is no moral relativism-masquerading-as-narrative "depth" here. In fact, without spoiling anything, I dare say the story's themes fit quite well into a well-formed Catholic worldview. I was genuinely surprised by the characterization, too; it's as much of an action game as a horror game, meaning there's equal parts Indiana Jones as there is...well, "Resident Evil" (the movie, of course ;P). Actually, it's better than quite a few movie storylines in the recent past...including the most recent Indiana Jones movie.

It's not a game for the youngsters, and I'm not sure if the game holds up if you go it solo. Without spoiling the more important narrative details, though, I will say this: Resident Evil is a very impressive game. It's visually and aurally outstanding; the narrative is more compelling than most movies from the past year (seriously!), and Capcom managed to synthesize the best elements of a "scare-your-pants-off" atmosphere with action-oriented gameplay (it's not so much a Halo-esque "shooter" as a Devil May Cry "action game") that thrives on cooperation between players rather than competition. It's a little on the short side, and there's nothing truly "innovative" about the actual gameplay itself beyond the cooperative aspect, but it does everything you'd expect - and some things you wouldn't expect - more than adequately. Easily the biggest and best "surprise hit" for 2009.

Readers, please feel free to comment, especially RE: the story in the combox below. I would love to talk about the narrative, characters, etc. in greater depth than this intentionally spoiler-free blog post indicates. Just be careful with spoilers!

Cooperation and Competition in Video Games

First off, a belated Merry Christmas to all readers of this blog. God bless each and every one of you!

Here's what my dad and I bought my younger brothers for Christmas:



I was under the impression that this game was just a "wii-make" of the Nintendo DS game of the same name from three years ago. Turns out I was wrong, and good thing, too: it's as if the game was designed with the Kirchoff clan in mind. It's more cooperative than competitive, which seems to be a rarity for video games these days outside of the shooter genre.

My brother Tim has introduced me to another cooperative game, Resident Evil 5. My aversion to blood, gore, and the like isn't preventing me from enjoying it, either. In fact, I feel like I'm playing some Indiana Jones spin-off more often than not - except for the blood and guts, of course. It may be worth re-examining the last blog post in light of this game, as well.

All that for later, though. The important thing: cooperative multiplayer gaming is AWESOME. Period. And as much as "playing a sport" could probably do this just as well, you can't play basketball outside when there's snow on the ground.

I'll (hopefully) post more detailed impressions of both of these games later (or, alternatively, another poster will!). For now, though, less typing, and more, you know, actual game-playing. Merry Christmas, everyone!

On Video Game Violence

Christmas break – a full month of it, no less – has arrived for this anxious seminarian! That means, among other things, actually attending to the duties of blogmaster for once – an obligation I’m actually quite happy to have, actually, as it will doubtlessly keep me busy amidst the tedium that haunts Christmas vacation. As I wrote on my facebook status this morning: “It’s amazing how the luxury of free time can make one feel so despondent.” Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, which means that we have to, you know, do stuff now and then. In the words of the late and Great John Paul II:

"Work is a good thing for man – a good thing for his humanity – because through work man not only transforms nature, adapting it to his own needs, but he also achieves fulfillment as a human being and indeed, in a sense, becomes ‘more a human being’."
Without turning this post into yet another episode of “Theology Amateur Hour,” let me just say that despite my numerous blog-vanishings, infrequent postings, and general ineptitude in maintaining this blog, I’m VERY thankful for the readership I have here, diminutive and infrequent as it may be. Blogging gives me a chance to do something, however menial, for the greater glory of God, and if any solitary reader gleans something worthwhile from what happens here, well, awesome!

*AHEM* Without further ado, then…

“Video game violence” has been something of a recurring theme here on CathVG throughout the duration of its existence, but it seems to me that the past few months in particular have brought the issue into a greater focus. This is evident both from my own individual postings and comments from this blog’s readership. My “review” of Soul Calibur IV, for example, defended the game’s violence as a sort of “icon” in which we one can see the “glory” of fighting – yes, even using lethal means, if necessary – for what the Psalmist calls “the cause of truth, goodness and right.”

Commenter j35u5fr34k expressed his reservation about anyone, let alone seminarians and priests, playing violent video games:

“You and these priests need to read what the Pope teaches about violence in video games. I also struggle with whether or not I should play video games that depict violence against humans. The Pope is outspoken against games that exhault violence.”

A fair point. Sadly, his and other commentators wishing to probe this issue further received no response from me, and thus any opportunity for intellectual and spiritual edification – the “fulfillment,” or at least a part of said fulfillment, that JPII talks about in the quote above – was ignored. No longer!

For me, the portrayal of “violence” in any given media context is justified based on, well, the context; the same applies for treatment of sexuality. I despise the brutality of movies like Watchmen; I likewise cringe at the gratuitous violence in games like Grand Theft Auto. At the same time, I’ve always been very sympathetic to those who claim that Halo and the like are basically this generation’s Cops and Robbers; a harmless role-playing/imaginative exercise. Everyone knows who the good guys and the bad guys are; the moral lines are drawn, and there’s no over-the-top brutality involved in anything that occurs in either situation.
Some games, however, not only blur the line between right and wrong, but seem to glorify in making the player feel as if they ARE engaging in actual acts of brutality. For an example of this peculiar game mechanic (I know of no better euphemism for this phenomenon), see the latest review of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 from none other than the National Catholic Register, a Catholic periodical worth reading if there ever was one. It mentions the problem with the now-infamous “Airport level” in the game, which, as the article describes, involves the player
“…A group of men enter an airport where civilians are peacefully waiting for their flights. The image on the screen is the perspective of your character, gun in hand.Calmly, slowly, methodically, the men walk through two entire levels of the airport mowing down civilians. They scream, run and drag their wounded bodies through smears of their own blood until someone, perhaps you, puts a bullet in their heads. Scores of unarmed people are mowed down. At the very end, your character is shot in the head, left staring lifelessly at the ceiling as blood pools around him.”

The article then asks the question: “Is the cold-blooded massacre of innocent civilians really an experience on the emotional spectrum that we need not only witness, but simulate?” I would answer in the negative, as I hope ANYBODY would. The question is, what makes this game so morally objectionable in contrast to the other parts of the game? How is MW2 worse than Halo or another shooter? Is it because of the violence itself? The intensity of the depiction of the violence in question? Is it the act or object of the violence, in which the player is involved in such a powerful way?

I still need to sort out my thoughts on the matter a bit more, but my rudimentary knowledge of Catholic moral theology makes me think it’s a combination of the three. As per the catechism:

“1750 The morality of human acts depends on:
- the object chosen;
- the end in view or the intention;
- the circumstances of the action.”
See: http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a4.htm

Of course, there’s a such thing as an intrinsically evil act, too. Murder, needless to say, is such an action; is the virtual murder of civilians, then, tantamount to actual murder? It would seem so…moreover, does this carry into any act of murder in games? Is having a fragfest in Halo with friends also morally wrong (and, by extension, playing games like cops and robbers), too?
One of these things is not like the other. Trying to make a player feel accomplished for brutally killing civilians is certainly morally distinguishable from shooting a bald space marine who is also trying to kill you (lethal self-defense is also defended by Catholic doctrine). Yet, irrespective of how its depicted, it seems that there’s something wrong with killing people in any circumstance, regardless of how brutally its depicted. Is it really murder if it’s “just a game”? Where is the line drawn here?

Ok, enough of my ruminations. Readers, the ball is in your court. Fire away!

Our Sunday Visitor Headline: "How Video Games are Good for Kids"

As usual, I'm totally LTTP on this one, but this is too significant to ignore: The Catholic Newsweekly Our Sunday Visitor (a publication I would highly recommend, BTW, if only because of the spectacular writing of Russell Shaw) published an article earlier this month entitled "A Proposal: Computer Games can be Beneficial for Children." The editors pushed it the article to the front cover of the weekly edition, too, so anyone who has a subscription to the publication should have no trouble finding the article. The author, Eugene Gan, himself a professor at Franciscan University in Stuebenville, Ohio, chronicles the time he spent playing Lego Star Wars II with his son.

Some notable excerpts:

"We've all heard how sports help kids learn important life lessons, including perseverance, teamwork and all the rest. I propose -- and this may horrify some of you -- that computer games can play the same formative role."

...

"Talk about team play: It was in one such level in the computer game that I could hear myself coaching my son to persevere and not to give up so easily.

"Stick with it, son. You can do it."

But he was too quick to whine, "I can't do it," without really even trying. Aha, a life-lesson opportunity. I paused the game to talk about the importance of facing challenges, recovering from failure, and relating it to Our Lord's falls while carrying the cross on the Via Dolorosa. (That last one didn't seem as much a stretch at the time.)

The key is to look beyond the old perception of computer games as solely eye-hand-coordinated diversions for real opportunities to encourage more coordination through thinking and purposeful movement."

Feel free to read the whole thing here.

For my part, I was simply glad to read an article from the Catholic Press that didn't lambast video games as something inherently evil (which, sadly, has been the norm for the past decade or so, even though the U.S. media in general seemed all to eager to perpetuate this same viewpoint even now). This article, however, is actually the latest example of a growing trend in Catholic media outlets. No longer are video games to be ignored as worthless or, worse yet, derided as sinful mind-numbing, soul-stealing agents. The article leaves something to be desired (it leaves an open door to critics that claim the lessons learned from video games are also just as easily learned from sports, clubs, and other activities, which really just reflects an ignorance of video games as both a communications and artistic medium), I'm glad that prominent Catholic publications, both web-based and printed periodicals, are beginning to discover video games as something worthy of accolades rather than something to be dismissed with derision. Kudos to Eugene Gan and OSV for running this piece!

Looks Like I'm Not the Only Catholic Who Enjoys Video Games...

Brian Saint-Paul has written a quaint little piece over at Inside Catholic today regarding the new Pew research study which aparently found that 97 percent of American kids play video games. Being a gamer himself, Brian Saint-Paul does not use this study as an excuse to lambast the video game medium and the people who enjoy and utilize it, but actually thinks the findings of the study could be a good thing.

I guess I'm just glad that Catholics are on the forefront of the video game defense force these days. Video game "legislation" is a popular pandering point for politicians of many persuasions - everyone from Hillary Clinton to Sam Brownback seems to think it's a good idea. In Britian, it's not at all uncommon to see the Daily Mail publish asinine articles attacking the video game medium for causing virtually every societal ailment. The Fox News Mass Effect fiasco demonstrates that American news networks are equally nefarious in their treatment of the medium.

Kudos to InsideCatholic. It's nice to see that SOMEBODY gets it...

On Temperance, Prudence and Purchasing Video Games

As a Catholic and as a gamer, I recognize that there’s a fine line between gaming for the glory of God and glorifying games INSTEAD of God. The cardinal virtue of temperance is absolutely essential in order to distinguish between the two. Scripture tells us that “for everything there is a season, and a time and a manner for everything under heaven” (Ecclesiastes 3:1-2). Catholic gamers would do well to remember that only a portion and not the entirety of their God-given existence is to be spent here on earth, let alone playing video games.

In the decision to purchase a video game, though, the virtue of prudence must be exercised, as well. Ever since video game violence first became a nationwide controversy in the ‘90s, there’s been no shortage of media coverage – including the Catholic media – regarding unsavory video game content, and while I personally believe that extolling the evils of violence in video games has became something of a tired refrain and easy scapegoat these days, I’m glad that, at least, there’s some attention to the issue now. But there’s no amount of media coverage or preventive legislation that can replace good parenting, and the complete lack of prudence on the part of some parents disturbs me greatly.

I’ll never forget the time I saw a youngster (I’d guess that he was, oh, maybe7 or 8 years old?) in a game store petitioning his mother to purchase the kid-friendly Gamecube game Luigi’s Mansion, which not only carries “E for Everyone” ESRB rating, but was available for a very inexpensive $20. The mother, however, had her eyes on the even cheaper item on an adjacent shelf: Turok, an “M for Mature” rated game featuring violence, foul language (as advertised on the box!) was available for a measly $10. The mother, seizing the opportunity to save $$$$, replied to her child in turn. “Honey, how about this one instead?” The child shrugged his shoulders and acquiesced. He went home that day with a game someone of his age should never play.

The obvious lack of prudence on the mother’ s part notwithstanding, it’s worth mentioning that Turok is a very low-quality game irrespective of the level of objectionable content. I would never recommend the game to even the most hardcore FPS (that’s “first-person shooter”, for those unacquainted with video game lingo) fanatic – the game is just completely intolerable, featuring slipshod controls, bad graphics, and tepid, repetitive gameplay. I do, think, however, that despite the game’s objectionable content (which renders it unsuitable for consumption for the younger set), there’s nothing in the game, morally speaking, that would make it unsuitable for a more mature crowd.

Part of the reason I started this blog to begin with was a perceived need for more information on this subject. Despite ESRB ratings, most parents I know are woefully ignorant of the content in videogames, and seeing as prudential judgment implies an informed conscience, the lack of knowledge (and in some cases, a lack of scruples, as the aforementioned story demonstrates) on the part of many parents about videogames as a whole is simply not acceptable. If my knowledge of the medium and its various minutiae can aid in abetting this problem, I will gladly share it.

I realize that what presents a temptation to sin for one may not present such a temptation for another – people of various ages and temperaments can digest various forms of media while others can’t, and such situations call for the discerning Christian to utilize prudential judgment. But for children who are unable to make such judgments, parental guidance is an absolute necessity; try as I might to lend my association with this medium to those who need it, I cannot be a substitute for a parent, who knows their child better than I ever could. So, for any parent reading this: know what game your child is buying/playing. Not everything is ok for a kid to play.

There are even some games that, dare I say it, NO ONE should play. Some games (like some movies and books) simply aren’t worth your time, and it’s actually not too hard to know a game falls into this category.

For example, just a few days ago, new information was released about the upcoming action game, Bayonetta. Now, the game’s premise is dodgy enough: playing as a witch who is quite literally hell-bent on killing angels certainly can’t be very wholesome, regardless of the merits of the gameplay, but tack on some posts from the link from the forum above, and…well, see for yourself:

“Bayonetta's outfit isn't actually leather despite the stitching you see in the CG art - It's magical hair that covers her entire body, and it's used in her attacks. The most powerful ones render her almost completely nude.”

“A fine mist covers the ground during the miniboss battle, designed to create a "holy atmosphere". The battle ends with an onscreen button prompt, which summons a giant hair dragon who bites the angel miniboss in half.”

I shiver at the thought of some parent(s) buying this game for their 8-year-old when it’s released sometime in the coming year. In the modern American lexicon, prudential judgment sometimes goes by another name: common sense. I pray that parents (particularly those of the Catholic variety) start employing it more frequently.