I could go on about the most recent controversy regarding Mass Effect – no, not the score Netjak gave it – but really, there's little point now. The fictitious story has been debunked so many times now that if I wrote on it, it'd be sloppy four hundred and forty-seconds. How about I just link right now to the Joystiq coverage of the controversy and move on with things? Sound good to folks?
Anyhow, a mythical game about an intergalactic sex romp aside, this entire scenario got me thinking about anti-video game crusaders. I can't be the only one to notice that they're a dime a dozen. Sure, Jack Thompson might be the only one people readily remember. However, he's hardly the only one – and any time video gaming comes up with any sort of controversy, you can be assured that one of these cretins will show their face, fanning the flames no matter how absurd their claims are. I figured it'd be worth looking into how we can pinpoint these anti-gaming crusaders, and what to expect from them.
First off, they need to stress their history of working with or advocating for children. Childhood psychology is a popular one, but even starting a parent-based group against "obscenity", "filth", or "peanuts in our schools" is sufficient for these purposes. Now, I'm not doubting whether or not these people care about kids. In their own way, I can guarantee that they do. In fact, I suspect they might care too much – they care so much about children that they hone in on a "threat" and attack it, without bothering to tell how much of a threat it is.
Along those lines, actual research on how much of a threat something might be is actually counter-intuitive for them. They will assert, vociferously and incessantly, about how damaging video games are to people, particularly youth. There's something very sinister about this – by simply repeating how bad games are, they hope to establish it as truth without having to back up their assertions. This is the critical point – if they can come off as authoritative and confident of their convictions, nobody will question them on this assertion. As such, trying to debate them is an uphill battle, as they have successfully defined the terms of the debate.
Mind you, every study on video gaming and its effect on the populace at large has come to no conclusions that state that video gaming causes a rise in anti-social behavior. This is why people pushing to restrict the video game industry are incredibly forceful in trying to push their belief as truth. Because if the actual truth were to come out, these controversies wouldn't come up. They'd be forced to admit that their theory, that video gaming is damaging to youth and consequently to society as a whole, has nothing to back it up. And to be honest, it is just as true now as it was when comic books, movies, television, or rock music were the bogeymen threatening the youth of the nation.
Of course, as the recent Mass Effect controversy proved, this attitude extends to the games themselves. It's enough to just hear a rumor about content in a game that might be objectionable. Like, say, that you can have anatomically-correct naked people in a version of The Sims that came straight from EA. In fact, for some reason it's considered more appropriate to protest a game if you've never played it – that you'd somehow sully your pristine soul if you were to actually put a potentially-objectionable game in front of you. Mind you, this is completely antithetical to the truth, but programs that feature such erroneous anti-gaming crusaders aren't interested in the truth. Sad thing is, many media outlets in general aren't interested in the truth in a given situation, but instead are more interested in presenting "both sides" in a debate no matter how wrong one might be.
The part about all this that makes me feel the least comfortable is that once you've established yourself as standing against video games, it doesn't matter how often you are shown to be wrong. The world will keep beating a path to your door to hear about what you think of the latest controversy. It's not whether or not you're right – it's whether or not you show yourself willing to "stand up" to the video game industry. To some extent, they've managed to win just by planting it in some heads that video gaming is something detrimental in general.
So what are we left with? Well, to some extent, what we've always done – show how wrong these people are. However, it has to go to a more basic level. When we deal with anti-gaming commentators, they set up right off the bat that video gaming is a worthless activity that just makes problems. We have to counter that right off the bat – point out that video gaming is no better or worse than any other leisure activity. From there, we use our experience with the games to show the truth. It's going to be a long while before the opponents of video gaming are put on the margins where they belong. But if we understand their tactics, we can keep them from being effective.
