-
-
 “Mobile gaming is growing up.” This is the congratulatory message the industry seems to repeat ad nauseum at conferences and expos. In many ways these pats on the back are right on the mark.
Many publishers are no longer reliant on investor dollars and are turning the corner towards profitability. Carriers are putting a much greater emphasis on quality instead of quantity. Big licensed titles and original IP are harmoniously sitting side-by-side on deck and in most publishers’ libraries.
Although the delineation might not be as clear as it was in the console videogame space, it seems that mobile games are going through a transition remarkably similar to what that industry experienced in the early 1990s – the transition from the 8-bit NES to the more powerful, 16-bit Sega Genesis and Super NES. That transition is most well known, probably rightfully so, for its technological leap. Games had simply never looked, sounded, or played better
But just as the games themselves matured, so too did the rest of the business. When the increasingly realistic (and gratuitous) levels of violence in console games caught the attention of Washington legislatures, the Interactive Digital Software Association (now known as the ESA) was formed, and in 1995 created the Entertainment Software Rating Board, or ESRB.
I bring up this history lesson that most of us probably already know, primarily to point out some parallels that do exist, and some that don’t. Technologically, mobile games are experiencing that same amount of maturation. It doesn’t come in leaps every 4-5 years like in the console world, but the games have slowly gotten themselves to a sophistication level on par with 16-bit titles nonetheless. Just a few years ago, “NES era” titles were the norm.
Yet one area that hasn’t kept pace is any kind of interest or desire to take greater responsibility for the content being created by this industry. By the time the Genesis was halfway through its lifespan developers and publishers recognized that the level of violence in some titles, cartoony as it is, simply isn’t intended for young gamers. In addition to being an act of genuine personal responsibility, the agreement to self-regulate and rate games via the ESRB served to prevent government regulation of the industry.
id Software’s Doom ignited a firestorm of controversy in 1993, but EA Mobile’s Doom RPG didn’t attract any negative attention towards its violence, despite essentially using the same sprite artwork and weaponry. Obviously this is partially because what was cutting-edge digital violence in 1993 is orders of magnitude less realistic and less extreme than what appears in high-end games today. But it’s still the same level of violence.
Is Doom’s violence simply less dangerous today than it was a decade ago? Is that why no one, including legislatures, seemed to mind that Doom RPG contained no rating of any kind, when in 1993 it was deemed inappropriate for anyone under the age of 17?
Next: Legislation
Pages:
1
2
|
