Unfettered Blather

I hate the term “Mature Content”. It implies a level of emotional sophistication, which may be true but most often “Mature Content” is usually applied to games that are anything but mature. Let’s face it, gratuituous tits and ass is something aimed at adolescent males who still have not quite figured out women. Sadly, I think every man has a teenage boy inside him until the day he dies. We grow up, we get careers, we have families, and yet we still want that inner child to come out and play. We love our locker room banter even though it’s no longer politically correct. Everyone knows that it goes on, but not in polite company.

Humans just don’t seem to care for nuance. I hear a lot of talk about shades of grey but everyone wants black or white. One extreme or the other. This is no different in our approach to sex. Sex is such a complex issue and yet in America we always take it to the extreme. Some groups want to ban any public discussion of sex or the slightest display of sexuality while some products can seem to sell themselves without shoving sex in our face. On one hand we have the image of the strong independent career woman and on the other we have advertisements that tell us bikini models will hang out with us if we drink the right kind of beer.

Games lack nuance as well, but I can forgive them to an extent since storytelling in videogames is still evolving. Technology advances continue to give storytellers new ways to involve the player, which means we continue to see new ways in which to involve players. Of course, when a game basically panders to the lowest common denominator we label it with “Mature” even if that game is something like Playboy: The Mansion or Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball. I guess it’s fine to warn that a game shouldn’t be played by children even if you can’t really wear your adult hat when playing a game. There is a certain irony in making a game that would appeal most to a 15 year old but have a rating that suggests they shouldn’t play it.

That’s not even the real issue though. What happens when a game does try to explore adult themes in a meaningful way? Why do we get so unnerved that someone may approach these themes in a negative way? Fable gave us the possibilities of marriage, divorce, and bi-sexual relationships. There was even a brothel in the Lost Chapters version. We also saw up close and personal the childhood tragedies of the protagonist rather than the usual abstract background story of flashbacks. If someone abuses their spouse in a game will it mean they will do it in real life or do they just have a sick sense of humor? I don’t much see the point of films like Saw or Hostel but that doesn’t mean there is necessarily something wrong with someone who does. I suppose someone could be a little too into them, but there are always signs that a person is unbalanced and their taste in movies or actions in a videogame alone is usually not enough.

Games are an interactive experience and I think developer intentions count for something. If developers give us an option to see a female character in a thong when it serves no purpose in the story then I think it says a lot about their intentions. If developers give us the choice between nurturing a relationship or descending into abuse, then I would wonder what their intentions are. In Fable, a happy spouse will reward the player with trinkets and the occassional useful item. Positive reinforcement for positive behavior. Scenarios like that are enough for me to give developers the benefit of the doubt.

Sadly, I don’t think we’ll ever see a “Sophmoric depiction of sexual themes” warning on ESRB ratings anytime soon. We want games to grow up but we don’t always give them enough credit for handling sexual themes and content in a mature manner. Instead we lump true mature content into the same category as adolescent fantasy. Sure, it’s a “Mature” rating either way, but at least acknowledge the difference between games that are truly exploring mature themes versus those that see their core demographic as man-children who dress up as comic book characters on days other than Halloween.

The common complaint about games and movies alike is that there is no quicker way to get an age restricted rating (Adults Only for games and NC-17 for movies in the US) than to have strong sexual content. On the other hand, no matter how bloody your game or movie is you’re unlikely to get that top rating. From a profitability standpoint, getting an “AO” or “NC-17″ is a deathblow. The argument goes “Why is sexual content more objectionable than violence?”

Actually, I have an easy answer for this even though the underlying issue is complex. Violence at its core can be quite simple. Themes of good versus evil do not have to be particularly difficult and are even portrayed in children’s films without much fuss. On the other hand, sex is almost always complicated. There is simply so much to it. To some extent I think we make it an overly complex issue, but I will acknowledge that sex is not an easy topic to tackle. Sex is an act that often makes people feel vulnerable. You are doing something with someone in a setting that is not usual. Nakedness often does not make people feel comfortable and physical intimacy is also a time of vulnerability. Violence, on the other hand, is a show of strength and is often straightforward even if the themes surrounding it are not.

In other words, violence is a lot easier to explain to children than sex. If a robber runs out of a bank and shoots someone in the face for no good reason it’s easy to explain away. “He’s a bad man and the police will catch him and lock him up.” If the robber is shot and killed in the pursuit, then it’s seen as justice. In all fairness though, I do believe there is a limit to how much violence a child should be exposed to. In the same vein, I don’t believe it is healthy to shield children from sex. We want children to have a healthy attitude towards violence. We want them to understand right and wrong and why our first reaction to conflict resolution should not be our fists. Sex might be more complicated, but by trying to hide it away when it’s so often in our face is simply going to confuse children and make them think something is fundamentally wrong with sex. People tend to take an all or nothing stance about any issue. I believe this issue deserves nuance. I’m not saying you let your kindergartner watch porn, but at the same time you shouldn’t be embarrassed when you walk past Victoria’s Secret in the mall.

I think to some extent the critics of the ratings are right. We’re probably too sensitive to sexual content and not sensitive enough about violence. Quite honestly, if it’s not outright porn I don’t see the point of an “Adults Only” rating for a game. Even with the Hot Coffee fiasco from a couple of years back, we’re talking about a game called Grand Theft Auto which is already rated “Mature” due to sexual innuendo, violence, and language. This was never a game for children anyway and any parent who bought it for their kid was just not paying attention. As for kids getting the game? Let’s be honest here, parents were buying it for them. I just don’t know that many retailers that would go through the headache of selling this game to a minor and then dealing with the potential backlash from an angry parent and possibly even the local media. We should be taking parents to task for not taking a Mature rating seriously instead of over-compensating by upping the rating for games that really do have no place on a regular store’s shelves.

On the flip-side, violent games should not get a pass. A game that doesn’t show a lot of gore or blood can receive a “Teen” rating pretty easily. I think violence needs to be explored beyond graphic depiction though. While violence can be simple, it can also become quite complex and I think violent themes that go beyond mere good and evil need to be rated appropriately. Let’s take Oblivion as an example. Initially it received a “Teen” rating despite the violence in the game and how complex those violent acts could become. You could become an Assassin or a noble Knight. You could be a noble Knight and suddenly commit murder. You could be offered with a choice to commit murder and be convinced it somehow served the greater good. These are very adult themes in my opinion, complex choices that go beyond the usual battle of good versus evil. I wouldn’t call the storytelling in Oblivion “deep” by any means, but the choices it offered players in terms of the harm they could do went beyond simple black and white choices. An older game, Deus Ex, gave players the option of non-lethal force at the beginning of the game and as the plot unwound some players were dismayed to find out that they may have been killing the good guys all along. I don’t know I was convinced they were all that “good”, but it was thought provoking and entirely too difficult for a child to understand.

We need to be a lot less knee jerk about sex in games and demand a closer look at violence beyond how many internal organs are spilled in an evisceration. What I’m calling for is nuance in a ratings system that often looks for a simple way to apply their grade without bothering to delve into the real issues. I admit the ESRB has a tough job but they need to stick to their guns when they come under pressure, explain why they gave a rating, and quit giving a free pass to violent themes just because a game didn’t fill up three buckets of blood in the first act.

I always love the expression “The elephant in the room”. This usually refers to something everyone knows about, everyone sees, yet no one wants to talk about. Personally, I love to talk about the elephant in the room.

Most men look at, shall we say “romantic partners” in two lights. We love the sexy vixen in a one-night stand sort of way but most men aren’t looking for a long term relationship with that kind of woman. Then we have the good girl, the one who at least appears virtuous in public, who doesn’t play off her sexuality, and maybe demonstrates a skill other than being able to take off her clothes. Most men love the sexy vixen but want to end up with the good girl. Let’s be honest though, you could apply this to women as well with only minor alterations. We’re really not so different when talking about attraction. We might look for different qualities but both genders seeem to focus on different standards for long-term commitments versus an instant gratification relationship.

Maybe it’s just the games I’ve been playing lately, but it seems like I don’t get much of a choice anymore. I liked having a choice, but I wonder what the choice is for most gamers? Especially the male gamers. Sadly, the only option most women gamers get is a handsome but whiny pissant who is such an obvious projection of the developers that they might as well have just used their own picutre. Oops, except that would take away from the “handsome” most likely. (Disclaimer: I’m not exactly going to make the cover of GQ anytime soon myself). What we essentially have is “the good girl” and “the sexy vixen” and never much attempt to stray from that formula unless it is to aim somewhere in-between. Not exactly bold writing. On the other hand, I can live with it so long as my preferences are not assumed to be the sexy vixen. I’m not saying it never would be, but sometimes it just seems so out of place.

Personally, I think the more realistic approach is the girl next door. This might sound trite, and it probably is, but if the world is going to hell in a handbasket is it really going to be saved by a supermodel? One of the classic Campbellian themes is the everyman who ascends to be a hero. Maybe we feel more heroic if gorgeous women swoon and risk their lives in order to bear our children. In an age of strong women I actually would appreciate a useful partner though. Honestly, as much as everyone hates escort missions, what I do not need is a perpetual damsel in distress. At the very least, keep her locked in a tower until I can come rescue her. I’d rather be fighting alongside someone I can respect, someone I can count on, and someone who can challenge me to be a better person. Not mere eye candy or an arm decoration. Ok, fine, I’ll admit this may not be to everyone’s tastes, but again I’d like to see a choice.

Can we go outside these boundaries though? Could we accept a female supporting character who is not just a good girl or a sexy vixen? Can this romantic partner be the hero of the story? Will she maintain sexual attractiveness if she appears stronger than the player? Maybe it’s too soon to challenge players to go outside these boundaries. Good girl, sexy vixen, or somewhere in between. Anything else and we’re talking about story-telling skills that the gaming market does not yet have in abundance.

I’m not saying there is anything wrong with the sexy vixen, it’s just that we’ve seen so much of her lately. Game publisher and developers alike have been blatantly pandering to their 13 year old male demographic. What we sometimes forget is how huge this demographic is since no matter how old we get men are always in touch with our inner 13 year old and sometimes we even let him out to play. I don’t think there is anything wrong with this necessarily, I think we’ve just been bombarded with these adolescent fantasies to the point where there is no longer a point.

In all fairness though, what I’m talking about applies to women as well. What do they really want in a long term romantic partners?

Hey, let’s face it, Conan is actually the male fantasy. We want to be all buff and scary looking, but women want the cute guy who could just as easily live next door. Granted, Brad Pitt with his shirt off is going to embarass most guys as well, but that’s not the point. Again, women aren’t usually given a choice.

Games as an interactive experience should be giving us options. Especially when sex is involved. I don’t expect much here, after all we don’t usually see many games where they give you a non-violent option to conflict resolution. If you’re going to introduce sex into the equation, even if we’re just talking innuendo, then I want a choice or at the very least I want someone believable. I want an approximation of a real world woman. I don’t mean this in a cruel way, but if I’m off saving the world I don’t want a bikini model for my sidekick.

If you could indulge me a moment, I’d like to kick off Sex Week with this YouTube video from Daniel Floyd who has some excellent information. Please clear off the next 9 minutes and 17 seconds of your day for his presentation.

All done? Good, we can resume. Mr. Floyd’s conclusion is that videogames need more sex. Not just more sex, but they need to handle sex in a more mature fashion. I disagree that we need more sex but I am fully onboard with the notion that sex is rarely handled in a mature fashion. At the same time, if gaming is an interactive medium, unlike movies which are merely observed, then we also have to resign ourselves to the fact that no matter how mature you handle sex someone is going to take the route of immaturity.

Let me just establish this right now. I don’t want to get into “What If” scenarios about how gamers will ultimately behave. I am only interested in the intentions of developers and the presentation of the subject matter. We all know that the gamer community is full of man children who will not be able to handle any sexual content in a mature fashion.

In general I don’t understand how we get so hung up on sex or the fascination with it. If you don’t have access to sex in some form then you’re clearly not trying. The insistence that we are constantly bombarded with sexual imagery, thought, and innuendo actually gets old after awhile. I really don’t enjoy having to swiftly change the channel because I’m not quite ready to have a birds and the bees talk with my 6 year old child. The idea that we need more sex in order to de-sensitize the masses is more likely to backfire then have the intended results that Mr. Floyd supports. As I start to see a slow shift in the public consciousness about who plays games I believe we can achieve the idea that videogames are not just for children without also causing a moral outrage. Ironically, I think the Wii will do more to advance the notion of games for adults then more mature content. Those that are familiar with the Wii library will notice a distinct lack of games rated “Mature”. Regardless, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a console that was able to pull in such a broad demographic despite an almost obnoxious focus on “family friendly” fare.

Aside from the perception of videogames as a child’s past time, I also don’t look for sex in my interactive experiences. I have read stories and seen movies where sex is an integral part of the plot. Sometimes it is handled maturely and sometimes I’m reading a Heinlein novel. Cheap shots aside, the voyeuristic qualities of observing sex whether reading a book or watching a movie, do not bother me as much so long as there is a purpose and the subject matter is handled at a higher level then a high school boy’s locker room discussion. While sex in videogames can be anywhere from merely implied to full-on virtual participation the very thought that my actions in the game could trigger a sexual encounter really does change everything. I have a personal moral code that I live by and even before I was a Fundamentalist Christian I didn’t make it my mission to hump every decent looking girl in sight. I’m not so old that I don’t remember hormones but I also remember having female friends who I had no sexual intentions towards. I don’t think you have to be religious to experience fidelity or emotional intimacy. See, I’m not demanding that games remove any depiction of pre-marital sex, but I do see some real pitfalls with having sex at all. I don’t see the point of interactive sex because while I feel like I have some involvement shooting a gun, driving a car, or having a conversation (or whatever approximation you can get from a dialogue tree) I don’t play games because I need something that gives me anything like a sexual experience. I can have sex in the real world and much prefer it!

Furthermore, I don’t think we need sex to advance a story. Most classic stories are about conflict, and games just don’t have the story-telling chops to include sex in the same way that Shakespeare so often did. Most of our conflict revolves around violence or driving really fast. Even then, story in videogames is largely optional. You can have a game without a story and still enjoy yourself. I’m not saying that games shouldn’t have stories, but the overall lack of quality storytelling in games combined with the questionable necessity of story at all means that an increase of sexual content will merely be bungled and likely earn gamers increased ire from the public at large.

All that said, I would like to see sexual themes handled in a more mature matter. In the above video Mr. Floyd talks about intimacy. I like the thought of an actual relationship with another character. Something beyond mere physical attraction. In the Half-Life 2 and subsequent episodes there is a glimmer of this. Sadly, that is the most I’ve ever seen. Most relationships are horribly contrived and even attempts to develop true intimacy seem to head all too quickly to a bedroom encounter as some kind of culmination of a relationship. Intimacy is not sex, though sex can become a part of being intimate. I think the problem is that game developers are by and large a bunch of nerds. That may sound harsh but I feel like I’m in a good position to criticize. Having long been part of the software development industry and having known more than a few developers who decided for a career in games I think I can accurately state that they are not a group you’d quickly label “normal”. For the socially awkward who may get most of their notions of intimacy from what you see on primetime television they may only make the association that intimacy means you take off your clothes and lie down naked next to someone else. I would daresay that true intimacy involves more than mere physical contact.

My challenge to game studios (aside from doing something silly like hiring real writers) would be to make me care about my virtual romantic partner. One of my greatest annoyances with contemporary game story-telling is that the contrived relationships tend to be more of a burden than a benefit. I suppose this may again go hand-in-hand with how your average game developer may perceive an actual relationship. In truth, a real healthy relationship is one where everyone benefits in some way. I want to feel attached to my prospective mate, not wish to throw them in harm’s way.

I can remember many games where a partner, wingman, or squad mate was such an obvious help that I wanted to be at their side and would risk the success of the mission to help them. These were just comrades in arms, but it’s a good start on how you could take it a step further. The question I would ask the game industry is why can you make me feel genuine camaraderie with virtual buddies but somehow you cannot take that extra step and create convincing relationships? Does some kind of intimacy uncanny valley exist or does this just further expose how badly the videogame industry needs writers to tell compelling stories?

With the ham-fisted approach that most game studios take towards sex, would more really be better? Even if there is a consensus to handle sex in a more mature fashion I think history would show that most attempts would flop. Games would either not sell or generate too much controversy. Once any title gets the dreaded “Adults Only” rating that would be the end of the ball-game and Mr. Floyd’s gambit would fail. Instead, I would like to see story-tellers tackle this issue head-on and give us some real relationships for a change. Genuine friendships, true emotional attachment, and a motivation to do something for the other gender that goes deeper than seeing their naughty bits. Not only does this advance the hobby as something that goes beyond children but would appeal to both men and women. In the current world, we seem to target sex only to 13 year old boys. Surely we can do better.

Chances are you’ve seen this video on YouTube before. An ordinary British man singing opera and sounding like a complete professional. He’s nobody in particular, looks like a guy off the street, and furthermore is about the most uncomfortable person you’ll ever see facing a crowd. Once he starts singing though he is some sort of opera diety. As I’ve said, you’ve probably seen it.

Watch the female judge (Amanda Holden) in this video. They show her about three times and if you’re not paying attention to something you’ll miss that despite having pretty close to the same look on her face the entire time she is quite clearly having three different experiences throughout the piece.

Stage 1 - Stunned
She cannot believe this milquestoast off the street started belting out opera like he’s Pavoratti’s bastard-child. This guy is good!

Stage 2 - Waves of emotion
She is nearly overcome by how beautiful and passionate his singing in. You can see that she is barely containing the tears.

Stage 3 - Arousal
She is ready to bear his children. Her only saving grace is that as soon as he stops singing he goes back to being an introvert extraordinaire. He snaps back to normal faster than the singing frog from the old Warner Bros. cartoons.

Aside from the miraculous performance of the singer, this speaks volumes to me about the differences between men and women. I’m tempted to expound further, but if you don’t get the differences from watching the video and seeing Ms. Holden’s reactions then it’s probably beyond my ability to explain.