Should DayZ Be Censored?

[3rdparty 229]

!!!!!! DO you know how censorship boards work????

Do you know what they essentially do?

They edit media! Thats what they do, they say if you want something to reach a certain audience, cut this this and this. That in my opinion, is not only arrogant, its completely disrespectful.

BBFC is directed, organised and led by a private corporation, not any democratic, and certainly not transparent body. Sure they have guidelines laid out, but guidelines can be completely obscure and meaningless when you get to the detail of content.

They are a non profit organisation, funded by a private profit based company, in the business of regulating media for... a media company!!!

Structure of BBFC funded by TMA

Dont gimme that "they're in it for us", media does not lead to morale or social degeneration, poor and harsh environments do. I refuse to believe anyone on this forum seriously think games and films can make you do violent things, and if you do and youve somehow found this game, your a fantastic mixture of naivety and luck.

This regulatory body holds an illusionary grip over so many media art forms over a pathetic excuse of avoiding social morale harm. Its a load of bullshit, and if ye think that having private control over a regulatory body like that, in the media industry isnt a base of extreme power, then ye are pretty naive yourself.

EDIT also on another note, this is starting to slip into censorship law which is what i wanted to avoid in ze OP, mostly because i know where this debate is going, and i dunno if ye noticed but i have a habit of getting easily riled up and agitated whence politics enters ze debate :S

Edited July 28, 2012 by 3rdParty

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

DayZ is a very emotionally fueled game because everyone has something to lose and there are no rules. I can, if i want to, ruin someone's weekend if i get the jump on him.

DayZ show a part of us that is usually not stimulated, it separate those who are ready to do anything to survive from those who believe there are unwritten rules that you should follow.

Yeah dayZ could end up falling under censorship, lets face it, what we are doing in this game is worse than in most fps games where we are just racking points. This game stimulate a part of the mind that is dangerous for society.

But i do not see it being censored just now. DayZ would have to include mechanics that are potentially disturbing and barbaric for this. Even if they are optional, some peoples will enjoy them and that's what will be in the spotlight.

In all cases, i welcome updates that make the game deeper and more emotionally charged.

Edited July 28, 2012 by Lady Kyrah

[Claytonaj 12]

i dunno if ye noticed but i have a habit of getting easily riled up and agitated whence politics enters ze debate :S

Yeah I got that... :lol:

I'm not willing to get so worked up, but I would stand my ground. I don't see where you got the link between the BBFC and TMA from (and you make it seem like TMA is a corporate monstrosity! They're an association that promotes the arts in the UK, and good luck to them!) The BBFC isn't a profit-driven organisation. I quote from the page you cited yourself:

"the BBFC’s income is derived solely from the fees it charges for its services, calculated by measuring the running time of films or DVD works submitted for classification. The BBFC is not organised for profit, and its fees are adjusted only as required to cover its costs. The tariff must be approved by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)." (the DCMS is an arm of UK government -- further evidence of democratic accountability for you.)

I do know what BBFC do. They establish and maintain, through public consultation, a set of clear and published guidelines. They then employ experts to examine new films/games, and to make recommendations -- based upon those codified guidelines -- to the film/game makers as to what rating they can expect their film/game to have in it's current state and why (going into minute detail). These recommendations act as suggestions as to what the makers could do to change, should they wish, their film/game in order to secure a lower rating. If they don't wish to, they can accept the higher rating, their film/game is published, and people will make up their own minds whether to watch/play it, or let their children watch/play it. If 'consumers' trust the BBFC, they might not let their children play a 15 or 18 rated game; if, like you, they distrust the censors, they could play the game themselves, or read a review, and make their own mind up. [Edit: many would just let their child play it, without a care for the content. I would generally make my own mind up, but as a rule of thumb without watching/playing a film myself, I would accept the BBFC rating.]

Just to clear this up: I do not believe that media alone makes people violent. You will never hear me say or imply that. I also do not believe that people are born violent or 'evil'. The reason people go on killing sprees, become paedophiles, rapists, Justin Bieber fans, is because of social conditioning. I (nor you) can not put my finger on a single cause of any instance of heinous behaviour, but only a myriad of potential contributory factors and influences. This includes but is in no way limited to films and games (it also includes television and literature) which, for example, can clearly reinforce/perpetuate sick fantasies in already unbalanced people (there's a recent high-profile case of this, I'm sure you know). I stress, this is not to attached blame to film/games, but rather to appreciate the potential for them to have an influence, however small or large (as ever, this comes back to individual context -- the 'dark side' of individual context, so to speak, in contrast to the context that you believe allows people/parents to make their own minds up).

I'll stop there, and make this my last post, if you don't want to continue this thread in this direction (though I'll happily read a response). I don't think we're about to agree! :) I've enjoyed hearing your thoughts on this.

Edited July 29, 2012 by Claytonaj

[3rdparty 229]

Yeah I got that... :lol:

I'm not willing to get so worked up, but I would stand my ground. I don't see where you got the link between the BBFC and TMA from (and you make it seem like TMA is a corporate monstrosity! They're an association that promotes the arts in the UK, and good luck to them!) The BBFC isn't a profit-driven organisation. I quote from the page you cited yourself:

"the BBFC’s income is derived solely from the fees it charges for its services, calculated by measuring the running time of films or DVD works submitted for classification. The BBFC is not organised for profit, and its fees are adjusted only as required to cover its costs. The tariff must be approved by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)." (the DCMS is an arm of UK government -- further evidence of democratic accountability for you.)

I do know what BBFC do. They establish and maintain, through public consultation, a set of clear and published guidelines. They then employ experts to examine new films/games, and to make recommendations -- based upon those codified guidelines -- to the film/game makers as to what rating they can expect their film/game to have in it's current state and why (going into minute detail). These recommendations act as suggestions as to what the makers could do to change, should they wish, their film/game in order to secure a lower rating. If they don't wish to, they can accept the higher rating, their film/game is published, and people will make up their own minds whether to watch/play it, or let their children watch/play it. If 'consumers' trust the BBFC, they might not let their children play a 15 or 18 rated game; if, like you, they distrust the censors, they could play the game themselves, or read a review, and make their own mind up. [Edit: many would just let their child play it, without a care for the content. I would generally make my own mind up, but as a rule of thumb without watching/playing a film myself, I would accept the BBFC rating.]

Just to clear this up: I do not believe that media alone makes people violent. You will never hear me say or imply that. I also do not believe that people are born violent or 'evil'. The reason people go on killing sprees, become paedophiles, rapists, Justin Bieber fans, is because of social conditioning. I (nor you) can not put my finger on a single cause of any instance of heinous behaviour, but only a myriad of potential contributory factors and influences. This includes but is in no way limited to films and games (it also includes television and literature) which, for example, can clearly reinforce/perpetuate sick fantasies in already unbalanced people (there's a recent high-profile case of this, I'm sure you know). I stress, this is not to attached blame to film/games, but rather to appreciate the potential for them to have an influence, however small or large (as ever, this comes back to individual context -- the 'dark side' of individual context, so to speak, in contrast to the context that you believe allows people/parents to make their own minds up).

I'll stop there, and make this my last post, if you don't want to continue this thread in this direction (though I'll happily read a response). I don't think we're about to agree! :) I've enjoyed hearing your thoughts on this.

grrr XD

First of all the page, is directly off the web page ye linked

Secondly that quote does highlight their "financial structure"

but not their "organisational structure"

"The BBFC has one President and two Vice Presidents. They are designated with statutory responsibility for the classification of video/DVDs under the Video Recordings Act 1984. The President and Vice Presidents are consulted in the case of difficult or controversial works that raise particular questions of policy. They are appointed by the Council of Management."

TMA is a private company, in my opinion, ANY private company that operates in the realm of public awareness (yes i mean all privatization) will always be flawed due the mentality of self economy promotes "gain wealth, forgetting all but self", it will always conflict with profit incentive. (again this is where the debate must go and this reeealllly isnt the place for it)

The mixture of a paranoid industry driven by profiteering, and a "consumer" audience diversified with opinion, has led to the formation of such "boards"

and "commities" which only exist because of this bizarre foundation laying of economic principles and cultural perspectives, no they are not "profitting" in the the sense of physical money, THEY are profitting from a psychological hole thats left in this social paradigm, its an area that can be exploited because of the terminology and issues that can incited to provoke justification for their existence.

I would say an analogy would be the Tea Party in america, or possibly even the NRA.

EDIT: actually i dunno why there is a link to TMA in there (brb :S)

this is better: http://www.sbbfc.co.uk/structure

an organisation doesnt have to accumulate money, or take "bribes"/incentives to have a basis of control, they just have to be in a position where there is a void.

and in the specifics of BBFC. They are an independent "regulatory" body who were not appointed democratically, and wield way too much control over an issue nowhere near fully appreciated or understood.

Edited July 29, 2012 by 3rdParty

[ollox 38]

No one ever killed, raped or committed any other crime because of a computer game, film or book (in fact they have but ironically it's those who think media should be censored that do the killing). Anyone who disagrees is dishonest and unwilling to take responsibility for their actions or their children's behaviour. Yes a psychopath might copy a film, like the Colorado shooter who said he was the Joker, but to state that the film is responsible for generating psychopathic tendencies is absurd. Crazy people do crazy things, with or without inspiration.

Age restrictions are bullshit in all situations and we all know it. There's no sudden imbuing of wisdom upon witnessing your 18th solar orbit. The idea that a government body thinks it can determine what is acceptable for everyone to see is not only insulting but sickeningly despotic.

Issues like cannibalism, suicide, rape, genocide and sexuality are fucking important (maybe not cannibalism so much) and should be addressed not hidden away. Thinking about this is actually getting me really pissed off.