The U.S. to Introduce an R&D Tax Credit... Excluding "Violent Video Games" Developers

[DJPlace]

No, this is A. for developers, not consumers and B. if said developer makes ANY "violent" game, that affects the entire developer, even if they also make non-violent games.

need to read post more when I'm not doing too much stuff at once.

 

[FAST6191]

I am curious now actually on how this might apply. The original example said EA but a lot of their companies are fairly well split up, though I am far too close to my boredom threshold right now to go wading through EA's finances again, if indeed it was a more viral taint from making games then that would have serious implications.

To that end I imagine the effects will be limited and that opens up all sorts of creative accounting avenues. "Why no Mr Tax Man our R&D department was developing the next Portal [points at demo], we just happened to lease the engine to the developer team of Murder Dead Space Marine Squad 5's developer. And loaned a bunch of our staff to them so they could get to grips with it."

 

[tbgtbg]

Any reduction in taxes is a good thing. But they shouldn't be using the tax code (or IRS, hi Obama!) to play favorites and go after things they don't like. Cut taxes for everyone, not just those you like.

 

[NakedFaerie]

That's mild/cartoon violence, I don't think it would be covered by the legislature. I assume that they mean "violence" of between T and A-O levels.

South Park is cartoon violence and that gets banned.

 

[Foxi4]

South Park is cartoon violence and that gets banned.

It gets banned for a variety of things including but not limited to foul language, explicit sexual themes, racism/sexism/intolerance themes, drug, tobacco and alcohol (ab)use references, mature humour, blood and gore - cartoon violence and comic mischief are the last things it has to worry about.

 

[hhs]

Threads like this remind me that a lot of users on here are libertarian 17 year olds.

"Cut all taxes, that'll fix everything!"
"Don't pick winners and losers!"

Every contracted job that does business with the private sector is picking winners and losers. You can't not pick winners and losers if you have any impact at all.

 

[NakedFaerie]

It gets banned for a variety of things including but not limited to foul language, explicit sexual themes, racism/sexism/intolerance themes, drug, tobacco and alcohol (ab)use references, mature humour, blood and gore - cartoon violence and comic mischief are the last things it has to worry about.

Think about it. ITS NOT REAL. ITS A CARTOON GAME. So there is no real good reason to ban and cut it up. Its all fake just like the TV show. Its not meant to be real in any way, its all made up. Aliens dont exist and if they did they dont anal probe you, its a made up thing so why ban and censor something thats fake to start with?
Thats like banning or censoring a Mario game because a flower shoots a ball of fire.

And what counts as a violent game? Space Invaders is violent as you kill pilots in the other ships. Mario is violent as there is a lot of death going on in that game. Fifa has a lot of physical violence against the other players, There are so many games that are violent but are classed as G. Super Smash Bro's Brawl is violent but rated for kids.

If they want to ban a game then ban the first ever rave and drug taking game. Pacman. Think about it, your a yellow guy running around a small dark room listening to repetitive music popping pills and seeing ghosts. And you wonder why there are raves and people taking so many pills. They saw it in a video game and copying it.

 

[Qtis]

Think about it. ITS NOT REAL. ITS A CARTOON GAME. So there is no real good reason to ban and cut it up. Its all fake just like the TV show. Its not meant to be real in any way, its all made up. Aliens dont exist and if they did they dont anal probe you, its a made up thing so why ban and censor something thats fake to start with?
Thats like banning or censoring a Mario game because a flower shoots a ball of fire.

And what counts as a violent game? Space Invaders is violent as you kill pilots in the other ships. Mario is violent as there is a lot of death going on in that game. Fifa has a lot of physical violence against the other players, There are so many games that are violent but are classed as G. Super Smash Bro's Brawl is violent but rated for kids.

If they want to ban a game then ban the first ever rave and drug taking game. Pacman. Think about it, your a yellow guy running around a small dark room listening to repetitive music popping pills and seeing ghosts. And you wonder why there are raves and people taking so many pills. They saw it in a video game and copying it.

Making something a cartoon or drawn doesn't automatically make something less violent or disturbing. A good example is the original Battle Royale manga. It's very clear why it is considered mature content and it could give nightmares to young readers.

 

[NakedFaerie]

Making something a cartoon or drawn doesn't automatically make something less violent or disturbing. A good example is the original Battle Royale manga. It's very clear why it is considered mature content and it could give nightmares to young readers.

My thing is pointed at Australia and the censoring of South Park. It recently got a R18+ rating so why doesn't it use it properly. If the game is not suitable for MA15+ then use the R18+ rating and let adults enjoy it like the rest of the world enjoys the games the way they were made.
And how is South Park which is a cartoon and NOT REAL worse and needs to be censored, how is that worse than SAW or Hostel which look very real and graphically more violent than anything you will see in South Park??
I think kids will have more nightmares after watching Saw than they will after playing the whole game of South Park.

 

[Mario92]

Making something a cartoon or drawn doesn't automatically make something less violent or disturbing. A good example is the original Battle Royale manga. It's very clear why it is considered mature content and it could give nightmares to young readers.

Actually you can make something even more violent and creepier when done with cartoonish style. Binding of Isaac is latest one coming to mind and some Daedalic stuff is pretty disturbing. For violence Hotline Miami really determined what is violence just being pixelated top-down game. Drilling someones head in that game just gives the chills!

 

[LoyalZero1]

So, they won't get off of their butts to create jobs for poor people, block the president at every turn and refuse to raise the minimum wage..... but they want to find the time to mess with violent video game makers? WTF is WRONG with people?

 

[MaxxJag]

That's mild/cartoon violence, I don't think it would be covered by the legislature. I assume that they mean "violence" of between T and A-O levels.

Unless quite specific, the law can mean whatever the lawyers want it to mean. So sure, for now it might mean bloody conflict, but later they might just start not giving money to anything with any kind of violence. That's the problem with certain laws. The idea is there, but without proper specifics, people will twist it any way they like. It's why lawyers get paid the big bucks, to find the loopholes.

 

[Foxi4]

Unless quite specific, the law can mean whatever the lawyers want it to mean. So sure, for now it might mean bloody conflict, but later they might just start not giving money to anything with any kind of violence. That's the problem with certain laws. The idea is there, but without proper specifics, people will twist it any way they like. It's why lawyers get paid the big bucks, to find the loopholes.

Pretty much, which is why I hope the definition is narrowed down in the final bill, that is, provided it goes through in the first place. All it takes is one * and one paragraph of an explaination.

 

[Wisenheimer]

 

[Foxi4]

A video-only or picture-only posts are frowned upon, Wisenheimer, especially if they have little to do with the topic at hand, which in this case is taxation of violent video games. Adding a comment of your own would be nice as to clarify what point you're making (unless you mean the whole "desensitizing" debacle which is total bollocks - "research shows" the exact opposite, really). I remember the Mass Effect debacle though, it was pretty funny, especially considering the fact that the sex in this game was anything but graphic and the player played no part in it, contrary to what the reporter's saying.

 

[Wisenheimer]

A video-only or picture-only posts are frowned upon, Wisenheimer, especially if they have little to do with the topic at hand, which in this case is taxation of violent video games. Adding a comment of your own would be nice as to clarify what point you're making (unless you mean the whole "desensitizing" debacle which is total bollocks - "research shows" the exact opposite, really). I remember the Mass Effect debacle though, it was pretty funny, especially considering the fact that the sex in this game was anything but graphic and the player played no part in it, contrary to what the reporter's saying.

I thought it spoke for itself. The perception of violence and sex in video games and their impact on society is often far-removed from the reality. For some reason, video games seem to be held to a different standard than a book or even a movie. Taken individually, nothing in the original Mass Effect was any worse than a PG-13 movie, and as a whole, at the worst it would warrant an R-rating. If you look at the reaction though, it was interesting to note that they played up the sex angle instead of the violence angle (which is interesting since there was little sexual content in the game while there was much graphic violence) and that the critics (other than that one lone professional game critic) of the game had never even played five minutes into it.

I do think that violence and sex in video games can be problematic, but I do not see strong evidence that video games, or media in general, directly causes a significant amount of violent behavior. Culture and expressions of culture have a symbiotic relationship.

Video games have become a form of popular media, just like movies. Contrary to the claims of the psychologist, it is not mostly young boys playing these games as half of gamers are older than 35. But video games get a lot of criticism from people who have spent little or no time playing them, which is fundamentally ignorant and unfair. I'm willing to bet the politician who proposed this law has little experience with interactive entertainment outside watching others experience it.

 

[Foxi4]

I thought it spoke for itself. The perception of violence and sex in video games and their impact on society is often far-removed from the reality. For some reason, video games seem to be held to a different standard than a book or even a movie. Taken individually, nothing in the original Mass Effect was any worse than a PG-13 movie, and as a whole, at the worst it would warrant an R-rating. If you look at the reaction though, it was interesting to note that they played up the sex angle instead of the violence angle (which is interesting since there was little sexual content in the game while there was much graphic violence) and that the critics (other than that one lone professional game critic) of the game had never even played five minutes into it.

I do think that violence and sex in video games can be problematic, but I do not see strong evidence that video games, or media in general, directly causes a significant amount of violent behavior. Culture and expressions of culture have a symbiotic relationship.

Video games have become a form of popular media, just like movies. Contrary to the claims of the psychologist, it is not mostly young boys playing these games as half of gamers are older than 35. But video games get a lot of criticism from people who have spent little or no time playing them, which is fundamentally ignorant and unfair. I'm willing to bet the politician who proposed this law has little experience with interactive entertainment outside watching others experience it.

The thing with violent video games is that chances are most TV shows and movies kids watch these days are probably substantially more graphic than 9 out of 10 video games anyways. I assume that the counter-argument here is that with other media, the viewer is just a viewer wheras in video games the player is the active participant of the action on-screen, but I don't know what kind of an impact that has.

Long story short, video games won't turn anybody psycho, but they can be a trigger for those who are already unstable for whatever reason... however considering the fact that absolutely anything could be a trigger in those cases, that's hardly an argument.

As for the age group argument, you are absolutely right. Most surveys I've seen clearly show that adult games are, bizzarely enough, mostly played by adults. According to ESA, 32% of gamers are under 18, 32% are between 18 and 35 and the remaining 36% are 35+, completely destroying the "young adolescent male" argument.

 

[Wisenheimer]

The thing with violent video games is that chances are most TV shows and movies kids watch these days are probably substantially more graphic than 9 out of 10 video games anyways. I assume that the counter-argument here is that with other media, the viewer is just a viewer wheras in video games the player is the active participant of the action on-screen, but I don't know what kind of an impact that has.

Long story short, video games won't turn anybody psycho, but they can be a trigger for those who are already unstable for whatever reason... however considering the fact that absolutely anything could be a trigger in those cases, that's hardly an argument.

As for the age group argument, you are absolutely right. Most surveys I've seen clearly show that adult games are, bizzarely enough, mostly played by adults.

The scientific data is mixed and unclear. Suffice it to say, I do not think we have even a basic understanding of how violent media, especially video games affects humans both on a individual psychological level and on a sociological level. Politicians especially though, like to leap to conclusions and take up causes like this. It is easier to blame something like violent video games which might have an effect on things like violent crime rate rather than tackle issues like poverty, social mobility, education, and other fundamental social conditions that we know have a strong impact on violence.

 

[Foxi4]

The scientific data is mixed and unclear. Suffice it to say, I do not think we have even a basic understanding of how violent media, especially video games affects humans both on a individual psychological level and on a sociological level. Politicians especially though, like to leap to conclusions and take up causes like this. It is easier to blame something like violent video games which might have an effect on things like violent crime rate rather than tackle issues like poverty, social mobility, education, and other fundamental social conditions that we know have a strong impact on violence.

It's pretty easy to understand why this happens. The video game industry is the scapegoat in these kinds of cases for two main reasons - firstly because as a civilization we've always put the blame on what we "didn't know", whatever the problem was (we've gone through the periods of burning books, condemning television, Rock & Roll, Metal, Hip Hop, now it's time for video games) and secondly because it's a gold mine. Passing legislature that trips an industry the public opinion is already unsure of is extremely easy, and with such legislature comes lobbying of the industry in order to overturn it. The actual concerns about the "impact" this medium may have take the back seat when human nature and money come into play.

 

[Wisenheimer]

It's pretty easy to understand why this happens. The video game industry is the scapegoat in these kinds of cases for two main reasons - firstly because as a civilization we've always put the blame on what we "didn't know", whatever the problem was (we've gone through the periods of burning books, condemning television, Rock & Roll, Metal, Hip Hop, now it's time for video games) and secondly because it's a gold mine. Passing legislature that trips an industry the public opinion is already unsure of is extremely easy, and with such legislature comes lobbying of the industry in order to overturn it. The actual concerns about the "impact" this medium may have takes the back seat when human nature and money come into play.

I agree, for the most part. I am really dismayed that so many video game developers pander to the lowest common denominator by making video games that are basically mass shooting simulators. In a few hours of Call of Duty you can literally simulate killing more people by your own hand than died in the entire two month long Battle of Falluja. But, you can see the same trend in Hollywood blockbusters and they rarely face as much scrutiny.

Does it desensitize people to violence? Quite possibly. Does it desensitize people to violence more than growing up in an actual urban warzone, like Detroit or the flatlands of Oakland? Absolutely not! People laughed at midnight basketball, but it probably did a lot more to fight violence than the ESRB.