Downloadable Content and Piracy in Games

You like Steam. Admit it. The Valve game-downloading platform elates you and cuts out the middle-man in game purchasing. You can't get enough of it.

While nothing new (BUT WHAT IS NOWADAYS IN THE VIDEO GAME WORLD?), an examiner article cites that analysts predict that downloadable content will be the next wave in gaming.

Downloadable content has added value to many games, such as map packs for first person shooters, additional sections and areas of sandbox games and new hats for your custom fighter. Downloadable content as a stand-alone has also generated revenue for console makers, allowing them to rerelease old games for play on new systems, bringing updated versions of Street Fighter 2 or even entirely new games, like Megaman 9, to current-gen consoles.

However, one thing downloadable content adds is for publishers - protection from piracy. While many game manufacturers and console makers have continued in an escalating digital rights management (DRM) arms race with pirates who then work to crack whatever codes and encryption is put on discs and other games, companies like Valve have used the downloadable content model to protect or minimize damage from piracy.

An argument that frequently comes up in /v/ "piracy" threads is what would make it so that a pirate would stop "stealing" games. The answer to this is make the process neutral, enjoyable and simple. Going to a game store, like GameStop, involves a middle-man who frequently resells games from a business model that shortchanges both creator and buyer. Modding a system or cracking a CD allows a user to play a game for free. By forcing users to download content from the company, manufacturers create a loophole in the way games are purchased and consumed, one that forces a user to connect with the creators for validate and obtain new content as well as play games such as TF2 without the aid of "standalone" servers (as is popular... or rather, the only option for the pirating community).

DRM has been routinely considered a blow to the gaming community; it punishes only those who legally obtain copies of games by bogging down the title with extraneous software bordering on malware. However, if Steam is any indication, DRM can be more than just another speedbump for pirates to roll over.

Thanks, /v/. You're my only friend sometimes.

"RICK SANCHEZ HATES RAPELAY, WHY DON'T YOU?" was how a /v/, 4chan's Video Game board, started early evening tonight.

Thinking I was well past reporting based on "what was hot on /v/" with my old blog, it doesn't help when the rage-hordes happen to resonate with a note I just happened to have reported on. Well, I mean, when a group of screaming anonymous internet people happen to say what would be considered reasonable counter-arguments to the overwhelming hate this game is getting in press lately.

An early post in the thread (I'd link to it, but in any likelihood it'll be gone before you read this):

"I hate the public outrage over this game. It fucking comes out years in the past and nobody cares. Amazon carries it briefly and suddenly a wave of butthurt feminists catches on, causing other people to catch on. Murder is commonplace but rape causes a stir? I can cut off people's limbs while they cry until they bleed out. I put my dick in a woman who doesn't want it and suddenly there's a news story. The jackass has no experience in video games, so he still thinks that games are all for children. WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE'S MATURE THEMES IN VIDEO GAMES? Not to mention this game is impossible to buy without importing it from Japan, which a parent would need to be involved in.

What's next, a call to ban Custer's Revenge? That's a game about rape. Hell, it's even racist on top of that."

It's true. Video games have evolved well past being merely childrens' toys. This is as true now as it was when Mortal Kombat stopped being a news item and it took violent snuff fantasies being sold at stores like GameStop for people to even get more than half a rise out of extremity in video games. The medium has different demographics now, just as any film or brand of literature (or website, for that matter).

It doesn't help those outraged that the game is rated Adults Only and can only be made available through import.

I really hope Rick Sanchez is an epic troll of some form, because half of the content of the blog entry is not only filled with double standards for other graphic and adult themes in video games, but doesn't take the time to identify what "folger" content is. Maybe a hot-coffee mod for the game already laiden with sex?

edit: Hopefully my comment makes it to prime time on his blog-
This entry ignores several important things that need to be accounted for in video games:
1. The medium has moved past being for "children only." This isn't even just for extreme cases like "Manhunt" or "RapeLay," I mean both in content AND thematic nature. Games like Metal Gear Solid, Gears of War, or even these extreme cases are rated for Adults to play and for good reason.

2. The game is available only through import. You cannot find it sitting in the back of a GameStop or Best Buy. It is not going to magically jump into childrens' hands, nor is it even readily available without considerable searching on the part of the intended buyer (especially after its Amazon.com recall).

3. The game is fantasy. Games, by nature, are fantasy. Fantasy. Not real. As awesome as shooting people in the head with a sniper rifle is in any number of console and computer shooter titles, no reasonable person uses this as an excuse to buy a gun and go for an Ultra-Kill high score. The same is true of this game. While I'm sure some people have sexual "rape-fetishes" (you can google it. I will guarantee hits for it), no reasonable person acts out the fantasy in a fantasy setting and then says, "Wow, that was great. You know what would be better? If I went out on the street right now and raped the first girl I saw."

4. Placing any kind of ban or legislation against a GAME NOT EVEN READILY AVAILABLE ON US SOIL BECAUSE IT IS NOT MADE OR SOLD IN THE US is a tremendous double standard when the video games industry is already ripe with other "socially unacceptable" content that is not or is no longer questioned with more than passing concern.

Is showing a graphic depiction of some guy's head getting blown off repeatedly better than poorly rendered digital non-consensual sex? Probably not, when we take two seconds to consider neither is a desirable thing to do publicly but really no one else's business when acted out in a fantasy setting in the privacy of our homes.

More PR Struggle for Games Industry... also, btw, RE5 comes out tomorrow.

In a bout of responsible advertising, a British ad depicting a child holding a video game controller with the giant text "RISK AN EARLY DEATH, JUST DO NOTHING" was released by the Change4Life campaign.

The ad is one of many, both in print and other media, released by the group, including an television ad showing a child playing video games and getting fatter over the course of the ad.

According to a cnet article on the media blitz, major companies have said nothing on ad-attacks. Whether this means that they are not threatened, have not otherwise been affected, or simply agree with the ads is left unsaid.

The column also points out other attacks made against the games industry with little complaint from them.

This, of course, at a time when gaming is hitting its largest and widest audience in history thanks to the likes of non-gamers taking part in the gaming world (woo who, Wii and Brain Age). But Don Reisinger raises a great point, when will the video game industry start fighting back? Countless studies (JUST CHECK THIS BLOG ROFFLECOPTERS) show that video games aren't all bad news and obviously anything taken to excess will have a detrimental effect. Why should a mud-slinging campaign be allowed to fly when all it does is show the extreme (and not even an accurate portrayal of the extreme side of things, thanks MMORPGS) effects of prolonged, uninterrupted video game use? Why this when there are so many more harmful first-party pressures that can have detrimental effects on a child's life, do we need to first cast blame at what may even serve as an escape from these problems?

Also, in case you're still reading, Resident Evil 5 comes out tomorrow. I won't have a copy because I didn't pre-order the game, but I hope reviews point in either direction for quality- either that it's over the top awesome or a simple rehash of RE4 but in Africa and now you have some spicy ethnic chick as your partner. I'd hope for the former, as this past year and some months have suffered deeply from "Rehashing or Poor-quality Sequel-itis."

More violence, more problems

According to a joint U.S.-Dutch study, as reported in the Chicago Tribune, the more warnings and restrictions you put on a game's package, the more a minor is going to want to play it.

The study took 310 Dutch children aged 7-17 and handed them game descriptions with varying degrees of violence and the like in each summary. Participants were asked to rate how much they wanted to play the game and, as a result, the games with the most graphic content were rated highest.

The piece also cites a similar effect with television and movies.

The study should not be very surprising: sex and violence always sell! However, the study SHOULD be a good basis for how to advertise adult-themed games, cut down on all the factors that make it attractive. Or, at the very least, tone down the description of what less-than-wholesome activities you can do in-game.

With the constant legislative struggle with video games (and recent "can't not sell to minors, row row fight the power against what games can be sold in the U.S.") media string, studies like this really reinforce what everyone should already know- sex and violence sell, but if you don't want to sell them based on those merits... don't make them focal.

I'm not an advertising guy (at least not for video games), so I don't know how the video game industry and keeping kids safe from a controlled fantasy violent setting go hand-in-hand. I know showering blood and gore on the cover of your packaging is appealing, though, and not just to 7-17 year olds.

FritoLay, a-ok. RapeLay? Not so much.

That is the worst title I have ever written. I'm so sorry.

Anyway, Japanese dating sim "RapeLay," a game that promotes raping women, has come under some fire for its availability in the U.S!
According to the PC World article, New York City Councilwoman Christine Quinn is asking for U.S. retailers to ban sales of the game, which is not available in mainstream game retailers, such as GameStop.

I know back-to-back entries on basically the same thing are kind of tedious (and hey, I could even go so far as to merge them into one!), but games are fantasy. And the game is strictly targeted to adults. A kid would have to go quite out of his or her way to get his or her hands on this game. And guess what? Even if they did, it's still a game.

Can you really quantify whether rape is worse than murder? Yet, despite this, some of the most brutal murder, dismemberment and evisceration is available for viewing in video games aimed at a responsible, first-amendment protected adult audience. Unless Christine Quinn has a room filled with love pillows and has unlocked all of the possible endings for "Let's Meow Meow," she is not qualified to tell someone who has what is acceptable for him or her to play. It's a private safe area to do unspeakable things in. I would be drawn and quartered by PETA if I tried to capture animals in plastic balls to make them battle one another for sport and money.

Coincidentally, SomethingAwful totally panned RapeLay. Maybe if she was basing the ban on game quality she'd have an argument.

Can't stop your kid from Manhunting or doing some Grand Theft Auto

Want to stop your kids from buying violent video games? A California appeals court ruled that it's against the first and fourteenth amendments to prohibit the sales of violent video games to minors.

Although research has shown that watching violent acts leads to violent tendencies (don't ask me to look up the study, it's a basic thing in developmental psychology. I promise), which has been the backbone argument against letting kids play Mortal Kombat and GTA, it also does clearly inhibit letting youths make their own choices.

Yeah, that's really callous in one sense- let Johnny shoot his eye out to learn how not to play with shooty toys, but let's be real for a second: kids play war, kids play Cowboys and Indians (maybe. or maybe they play Space Marines and Aliens or something now), kids have pretty vivid imaginations (or at least I did, maybe kids don't have those anymore). Giving kids violent video games, or video games in general, allows kids to act out in a safe fantasy environment. Blocking kids from a safe fantasy environment to learn about violence (or merely see it acted out, as I don't learn much from watching Dante of Devil May Cry fame get impaled by demonic scythes and then punch a guy's head off) forces children to learn through real world experience only. Additionally, it's not that hard for parents to establish a safe environment for a child. They will learn about these things one way or another, be it through video games, television, newspapers, movies, other children, school, or a drive-by shooting on the block. The safety of the home and the educated gaze of a parent should (emphasis on should) be the best learning environment for a child. Learning fantasy from real? Just as important. Video games allow this.

But yeah, video games are ruining America or something. Whatever.