Parent Makes Gamer Son Promise To Obey Geneva Conventions In Video Game
from the parents-and-video-games dept
While we keep hearing politicians and "child safety" activists complaining about violent video games and their supposed impact on kids, many people push back by noting that it should be up to parents to decide how to handle their kids' association with video games -- and some take the issue seriously. A bunch of folks have been submitting the BoingBoing story of a father whose son wanted to play the popular video game Call of Duty. After learning about the game, and recognizing some advantages to the game -- historical realism, the ability to learn teamwork, etc. -- he decided that he would let his son play, on one condition. While playing the game, his son and his "teammates" had to all obey the rules of the Geneva Convention. In other words, he turned it into an educational opportunity as well. The players now need to read up and understand the Geneva Convention rules -- and then engage by them, thus also avoiding some of the more gratuitous violence. So, there's a creative solution that some politicians and activists would like to have taken out of the hands of parents.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: call of duty, geneva conventions, parenting, video games, violence
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Lose: not win.
(you twat)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
For a Grammar Nazi, you really are a moron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And he was correcting spelling, not grammar. So you lose. Or "loose", if you prefer...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I would like to extend an offer to visit my magnificent home in Stalingrad. I'm sure you would be well appreciated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it even possible to play deathmatch outside the geneva convention?
Having played a few of the Call of Duty series I don't think there is any means by which the games mechanics would allow you to act outside the Convention in the first place.
I agree with the (supposed) doctor that the guys parenting skills might be better spent convincing his morbidly obese 13 year old to get some exercise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On the other hands, it's at least a positive attempt to engage with the kid, while both trying to provide a positive educational aspect to his gaming and guiding the way he interacts with others. Makes a change from "I don't understand it so ban it/let the school handle it".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wouldn't this rule just make it so that the kids couldn't what? torture the enemies or something? no terrible chemical gas use, no biological warfare?
pretty sure they'd still get to tear up the Germans with their m-1's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
retard
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FMJ vs JHP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Huh?
If you want realisim,. make a game where you have to tend to wounded, which happens to most soldiers IRL.
Plus weapons and physics. I launched rockets at people hiding behind walls in COD and they don't die, I guess they dont make walls like that IRL.
Realism is when you go down, wounded and bleeding to death when getting capped in the legg from an MG-42 round,..None of this BS running around at 42% health after taking a rocket to the face.
But then,..no one would buy the game then,..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Huh?
You have a number of magazines and rounds per mag. When you reload you don't just refill your current and decrease your total, you drop whats left in your current mag and pop in a new one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Geneva Conventions
You want more realism ? No fun at all.
http://corry.ws/CorryBook-59.htm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
interesting interpretations of the geneva conventions
thankfully, helmets count as equipment.
my other favorite: you can't deliberately cause unnecessary pain and suffering. so your kills must be "clean", dispatching the enemy as quickly and painlessly as possible.
since most soldiers wear flak vests or body armor, aiming for the torso can mean that a direct hit will take hours for an enemy combatant to bleed out, or days to succumb to sepsis. this is especially true when using full metal jacketed or standard light armor piercing rounds. SLAP and some FMJ rounds can pass straight through the target rather than mushrooming inside the body the way that hollow points do.
therefore, the only humane place to shoot someone is in and unprotected area that will result in a fatality, i.e. the face.
the other translation of that requirement is the "double tap" or hitting the same target twice, as close to the same spot as possible in hopes of hitting a weak or compromised area of body armor. the idea being that hydrostatic shock will put the enemy combatant down quickly.
in close quarters, both translations are applied: i.e. two in the chest and one in the head. two in the [presumably armored] torso to halt forward advancement and buy time to line up the kill shot to the head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
it could be worse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I disagree
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So how often does THAT happen?
So give me a break, please. 90% of parents will be saying "Call of What?" and "Turn that damn thing down! I can't here my episode of Survivor and drink my beer in peace!"
There should be an exam to be a parent and until thee is, the government SHOULD force good parenting on people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A little too far
My only comment is that it is a little harsh to extend something from the real world into a virtual one thus tainting the purpose of the game - entertainment. There's a reason why the gap between education and gaming is so large, most of the times the games aren't fun. Most of that is because the education part is being rammed down throats rather than being a by-product of engaging content.
As someone who has played countless hours of killing pixels that kid already knows more about the Geneva Convention than me. I think it would have been better to pose the following scenario to the kid: "having read the Geneva Convention and talked about it, I (dad) think you should play Call of Duty by adhering to the GC, I want you to think about it and come back to me with your decision and why or why not you will play like that".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is just a new challenge
I can't see many choosing this option but it could be fun to try.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is just a new challenge
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not about whether the kid actually uses anything he learned about the Geneva Convention in-game; it's about actually learning about the Geneva Convention and possibly stimulating the kid to learn more about related subjects.
And, of course, the relevance to Techdirt is that this parent recognises that this technology is a form of entertainment, and rather than fearing it, he's turning it into a chance to educate his kid and take a more active role in the kid's life.
For those of us who believe in personal responsibility (especially with parenting) instead of government mandates, this parent is a prodigy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Geneva Convention in gaming
Talk about PEGGING! That is the sort of reasoning that may make governmental intervention necessary, though I sincerely hope not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Geneva Convention in gaming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Geneva Convention in gaming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
just for fun
[ link to this | view in chronology ]