On the Chinese Internet, “harmony” is a euphemism for censorship. Mafia games were “harmonized” over the Summer, for example, as they “embody antisocial behavior like killing, beating, looting and raping” and “gravely threaten and distort the social order and moral standards, easily putting young people under harmful influence” according to the Ministry of Culture.
Foreshadowing the government’s imminent policing of social games, Chinese netizens are now picking—not stealing—crops from their friends’ farms. Five Minutes, the developer of the smash hit Happy Farm (the first SNS farm game), confirmed that the terms had been voluntarily changed in an interview with BloggerInsight. This comes as the government is “considering specific social gaming laws and regulations, to be enacted as early as next year… to end the chaotic market conditions,” according to ChinaNews, which scooped the story on Wednesday last week.
A string of negative press has hit social games in China, which may signal a propaganda campaign by the government to besmirch social games. Many of the stories are fake, according to industry insiders. Just last month, a doctor’s fatal neglect of an infant in critical condition wasblamed on his play of Happy Farm while on duty, though further investigation concluded that he was on a QQ Chinese Chess Game. Happy Farm is also blamed for destroying jobs and relationships.
This is a classic case of attempting to do something about a problem by going after the symptoms instead of the cause. While there is something to be said for removing "stealing" from an online game and preventing "virtual vandalism", the point of the matter should be that these behaviors ought not to carry over into the real world so readily and easily. If these behaviors are so prevalent, removing the factors that lead to them existing in social games isn't going to disperse the mentality, only prevent its expression.
The real question here is why exactly are these online games bringing out these traits in people, and what does it say about a government when its chief reaction to an undesirable trait is to block the expression of it rather than acknowledge and confront it? There is an interesting analogy later on in the piece of social media games as being an addictive substance to be regulated ala cigarettes, and a digital space to be regulated similarly to casinos. It is odd that in the country which invented the term to 'brain-wash' there is little action being done to encourage people away from these addictive habits, but instead to regulate them firmly. Profit is tantalizing, but repressing desires through institutional restraints does not get to the core of the problem. In the United States, regulation on speed limits has proven to be a moot piece of legislation; where the average speed of most cars exceeds it by 5mph on any given trip.
It is also interesting that the article notes 'Chinese games are more competitive' by their very design. If one thing is certain, expecting a social game to be fun without any notion of competition is going to be a concept very hard to come by. The fact that this competition is expressed through in-game outlets such as vandalizing property and stealing doesn't speak so much of desire, but of what is considered an acceptable means of expressing it, serves as an interesting lens to what it means to compete in China.
Read the full article here.
0 comments:
Post a Comment