Sunday, January 28, 2007
The Slamdance Aftermath
The New York Times has an outstanding article about the controversy surrounding this year's Slamdance and independent games. Entitled, "Video Game Tests the Limits. The Limits Win," it is full of some fascinating quotes by those involved.
Me? I'm optimistic. First off, this controversy has resulted in some of the most intense publicity independent games - specifically more serious or artistic games - has ever received. And probably some of the more significant publicity Slamdance has gained in recent years.
I mean... The New York Freaking Times! And many other mainstream, traditional press channels have also picked up the story.
Is this a good thing? I think so. It's making people stop, think, and consider.
Utah's HB 50, the resurrected bill to stick videogame violence in the anti-pornography "Materials Harmful to Minors" law, failed to pass committee on Friday. It was blocked by a vote of 7-2. This compares starkly with it's previous incarnation from last year, when it passed through committee and enjoyed nearly unanimous support in the Utah House of Representatives. While I've no doubt that the failure of similar laws in a couple more states since then were a more significant factor, the bill was reviews just as the press and even the sponsoring representative brought up the topic of Slamdance's indie game festival controversy.
The issue of games as a protected form of artistic expression is starting to be taken seriously. As are indie games. It's not something that's going to happen overnight, or without more pain and a lot more discussion. But it smells a little bit like progress to me.
I think it's safe to predict that 2007 is going to be a very interesting year for indie games.
Labels: Indie Evangelism
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 11:52 PM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
It's worth noting that the Utah legislators mixed up Bully and SCMRPG.
I wouldn't be too quick to give them credit, though they certainly seem to show more self restraint than most.
I wouldn't be too quick to give them credit, though they certainly seem to show more self restraint than most.
Yes, I saw that. Ol' Wacky Jacky Thompson has got to be giggling with glee, seeing how well his propoganda has taken root.
I'm hesitant to give my local legislators too much credit, either. I think it might have been more due to a combination of A.G. Mark Shurtleff's vocal concerns, and some self-preservation instincts kicking in as they sense a shift in the wind. Maybe.
Even Wyatt seems to be distancing himself a bit from the bill. He even admitted to it being of dubious constitutionality, more of a "message" bill than an actual enforceable bit of legislation, and has publicly made a statement support for Shurtleff, even as the bill's drafter, Jack Thompson, is throwing a temper tantrum and recommending Shurtleff's impeachment.
Of course, the committee is pushing for some kind of pro-active resolution on Tuesday. I guess is that they are afraid of being perceived as weak on family values and want to take SOME kind of trophy to show their constituents.
I'm hesitant to give my local legislators too much credit, either. I think it might have been more due to a combination of A.G. Mark Shurtleff's vocal concerns, and some self-preservation instincts kicking in as they sense a shift in the wind. Maybe.
Even Wyatt seems to be distancing himself a bit from the bill. He even admitted to it being of dubious constitutionality, more of a "message" bill than an actual enforceable bit of legislation, and has publicly made a statement support for Shurtleff, even as the bill's drafter, Jack Thompson, is throwing a temper tantrum and recommending Shurtleff's impeachment.
Of course, the committee is pushing for some kind of pro-active resolution on Tuesday. I guess is that they are afraid of being perceived as weak on family values and want to take SOME kind of trophy to show their constituents.
I find it really annoying that all the lawmakers are focusing in on Bully as the evil game of the year. Have any of them actually looked at it? It's about a person standing up to bullies (usually by outwitting them, not just shooting them) and protecting the weak! What possible better message could it send? It's as far from Columbine as you can get.
Of course, the war on violent video games is, like many other "war on $x" campaigns, not about the games. It's another chance for grandstanding politicians to record another vote for protecting us from the evils of $x, and channel a little money to their buddies in the anti-$x industry.
Hmm, I sound a little cynical today. ;)
Post a Comment
Of course, the war on violent video games is, like many other "war on $x" campaigns, not about the games. It's another chance for grandstanding politicians to record another vote for protecting us from the evils of $x, and channel a little money to their buddies in the anti-$x industry.
Hmm, I sound a little cynical today. ;)
Links to this post:
<< Home
