|
On May 25 2011 14:58 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2011 12:11 JWD wrote:
I agree with OP for the simple reason that I am embarrassed to recommend SC2 streams to my friends because I know there's a substantial chance they'll flip on the program and hear gratuitous cursing or a second-grade-level joke.
God bless DJWheat, but the one day I tweeted to recommend TSL on my personal twitter he opened the broadcast with "What up bitches??" That is not the impression I wanted to give my friends of what the SC2 scene is like. I can understand(but I don't agree) parents trying to shelter their children from crude language. But protecting your friends? Has it come to the point in the US that even grown ups are chocked and offended by the occasional cuss word? Or are you and your friends really young?
I don't think you're quite understanding the point people are trying to make.
It's not necessarily that its the cussing and swear words the offend per say (although it would be in the case of children), but that if we want Starcraft to become something that is appealing to watch by a larger audience, than asking that the behaviour and language of the casters be a bit more tasteful isn't really that much.
I feel people claiming that the only reason they tune into watch is because of silly penis joke, or offensive jokes, or player bashing etc - is certainly not a good enough reason to work to phase it out. Certainly on the streams for the main-events (user streams should be able to do as they wish).
Or at least a warning as the OP calls for.
Tasteless and Artosis never need to swear during their broadcasts, and I'd more than happy to recommend people to watch them commentate. How is the generally considered best casting duo for Starcraft 2 not a good standard to set?
|
On May 25 2011 15:24 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2011 15:15 Angry_Fetus wrote:
This has definitely been said before, likely even in this thread, but it needs repeating. This game contains brutal violence, and the objective of the game is to slaughter your opponent. What goes through your head when you think mass killings are appropriate for your children to watch, yet hearing the f-bomb is intolerable? What sort of movies do you watch where you would think Starcraft is particularly violent in any sort of intensity? I don't honestly believe you (and all the others that bring up this point) actually think this game is that violent. I think it's a disingenuous argument. The violence in Starcraft although technically violent if played out in a movie is neither intense emotionally nor dramatically. The few biological beings that die are small and most of the killings are mechanical and all of them are fast. I've said it before and I'll say it again. A PG rated movie such as Prince Caspian with absolutely no blood is more intense and more potentially emotionally traumatizing than Starcraft. There are no close ups (I would call the deaths microscopic), no prolonged death scenes, no Saving Private Ryan scenes. There is competitive tension as in who will win in a hockey game. But there is no dramatic tension on whether the main character will survive all the explosions all around them. It's only violent in an abstract sense.
I actually have to disagree with you, obviously it's not as violent as an R-rated movie and there's no prolonged death scene but it's not as tame is you make it out to be either. There is some stuff in the game that I never even noticed playing on my own that I noticed almost immediately when I was watching competitive Starcraft 2.
A marauder getting sliced in half by a zealot with blood spraying out, a marine getting roasted and writhing in pain before falling charred, any bio unit spasming as they're melted by acid or burned by a Colossus fire, getting literally splattered over the landscape by siege tank fire... I really did not notice some of this stuff while playing but it became really apparent while spectating.
It's pretty deserving of its rating.
|
Canada11363 Posts
In truth, f-bombs are probably the biggest offender and realistically they aren't that frequent.
But from your writing I think you and I could agree that at the very least the op's point about placing some sort of rating on each tournament could beneficial? I was mostly annoyed at the internet freedom fighters taking the op to task for daring to frown on f-bombs and the like.
But let's take your example, that because it's rated a certain way, then we should pad the rating to it's full potential. Is that really necessary? Sexually suggestive, for instance. It's rated T, so I guess we ought to have implied sex and tastefully covered nudity? (And for those 18+ streams, we ought have full on nudity.) Admittedly, this might attract a certain crowd... Anyways, the point is just because it has a certain label, does it need to be amped up in all areas, or can the already rated content stand on it's own and that's good enough?
I like the idea of mainstream tournaments keeping it relatively clean (there'll be slip up, but no need to make a big deal of it), but keep streams to streamer discretion. But even were this not the case, I don't see why tournaments couldn't provide a little more information on what sort of content people will be viewing.
|
Prince Caspian - PG rated movie
PG - A PG-rated film may not be suitable for children. The MPAA says a PG-rated should be checked out by parents before allowing younger children to see the movie. There could be some profanity, some violence, or brief nudity, however there will not be any drug use in a PG film.
So, erm, yeah, there goes the argument.
|
On May 25 2011 15:49 Vardant wrote:
Prince Caspian - PG rated movie
PG - A PG-rated film may not be suitable for children. The MPAA says a PG-rated should be checked out by parents before allowing younger children to see the movie. There could be some profanity, some violence, or brief nudity, however there will not be any drug use in a PG film.
So, erm, yeah, there goes the argument.
The argument goes nowhere. It goes beyond the rating. It's an emotional connection to events, individuals, it's intensity and violence that have emotional effects. I cannot seriously say I have an emotional connection with any of the marines that get splashed by banelings. It's a game, and it's cartoon violence. Children understand this because that's obviously what it is. They don't name every marine, tell his backstory, show clips from his life, his family and children....
You're missing the point.
|
On May 25 2011 15:49 Vardant wrote:
Prince Caspian - PG rated movie
PG - A PG-rated film may not be suitable for children. The MPAA says a PG-rated should be checked out by parents before allowing younger children to see the movie. There could be some profanity, some violence, or brief nudity, however there will not be any drug use in a PG film.
So, erm, yeah, there goes the argument.
All you did was interpret a statement somewhat lacking in detail to favor your position.
Anyway wasn't one of the arguments that kids already hear fuck and know about sex?
You can't have it both ways.
1) Culture differences: The people that are concerned about swearing 1. are in fact a minority of Americans and some Canadians (if this thread is any indication) plus the occasional Brit. But most SC leagues are meant to appeal to a global community and 2. thus this subsection is a very small community compared to the rest who find cursing not very offensive and often amusing (god bless Sweden). I get that some people are not happy about the cursing, but I don't get why this "lowest common denominator" should dictate the types of casts available in any format. America already has way too much protectionism in this theory and practice and I feel culturally we (as people not as SC2 community) should discourage this in favor of personal responsibility.
2. does not follow from 1. because the OP and many of us agreeing with him are not talking about the community as is, we are talking about the opportunities the community has to grow out of the gamer stereotype demographic.
"Personal responsibility" is a cop-out. And it's not even like anyone wants to set up standards, police casters, anything like that.
It's like no one can say they dislike anything about any aspect of the community without a bunch of people lining up to tell them why they are wrong and why they are inferior people for it. Even when the person dissenting (or whatever, that seems a bit strong) is as polite and mild-mannered as the OP.
You're a reactionary. This is how things are and they should stay that way because this way is better because [some kind of circular logic and unsupported assertions go here].
It's not an elitist attitude but more of a cliquish one; it doesn't really matter. The game is going to move more and more mainstream as it gains popularity whether you like it or not. If there's money to be made in it, that's inevitable.
|
On May 25 2011 15:46 Falling wrote:
In truth, f-bombs are probably the biggest offender and realistically they aren't that frequent.
But from your writing I think you and I could agree that at the very least the op's point about placing some sort of rating on each tournament could beneficial? I was mostly annoyed at the internet freedom fighters taking the op to task for daring to frown on f-bombs and the like.
But let's take your example, that because it's rated a certain way, then we should pad the rating to it's full potential. Is that really necessary? Sexually suggestive, for instance. It's rated T, so I guess we ought to have implied sex and tastefully covered nudity? (And for those 18+ streams, we ought have full on nudity.) Admittedly, this might attract a certain crowd... Anyways, the point is just because it has a certain label, does it need to be amped up in all areas, or can the already rated content stand on it's own and that's good enough?
I like the idea of mainstream tournaments keeping it relatively clean (there'll be slip up, but no need to make a big deal of it), but keep streams to streamer discretion. But even were this not the case, I don't see why tournaments couldn't provide a little more information on what sort of content people will be viewing.
I'm fine with a label, but I feel like that'd it should essentially be the same for every single one... I can't think of a single tournament that would fall below or go far above:
T(13+) - For violence, blood and gore, language and suggestive themes.
Some may be towards the lower end of the spectrum, but it'd all still end up with the same rating with perhaps the "language" note going to "mild language" for some. The F-bombs are always something spontaneous and generally hilarious(Strelok's NASL interview comes to mind), so you can't really factor those in, when they happen it won't be because it was planned and I wouldn't support penalizing it, so there's no point in making the distinction. Just slap the above rating on every event page.
Put it as a small image on the bottom of every tournament/event page if you'd like, just like most games have it now. I don't see a problem. As for the way that tournaments, leagues and events are casted, it should remain unchanged in my opinion as far as content moderation is concerned.
|
On May 25 2011 15:55 dOofuS wrote:
You're missing the point.
The point is, that even a PG movie should be watched by parents first. But somehow in this case, it should be different, because with more ratings involved, this will help e-sports to grow.
It's ridiculous to be honest. If anything, more ratings will do more harm than good. Especially, if someone wants special ratings, that allow graphic violence, but don't allow anything else. This is not the case anywhere else. You get both or none, because it doesn't make much sense otherwise.
If you don't agree with the ratings and don't feel, that the graphical violence in Starcraft is to be concerned about, then you're obviously a minority and it should be your responsibility to screen the content before hand.
|
I seriously would be bothered more about the violence in the game than about the language of the casters, when I would watch SC2 with my kids.
But having lived in the US for a year, I realize it's just their way of seeing things. Violence and gore is OK, but don't let them see any breast (nipple gate much?). In Germany it's the other way around. Give us breasts, but please don't kill someone in a cruel fashion and being a child of my culture, I would rather have my sons hear a FUCK or some sexual innuendo, than having the caster describe in cruel detail what that roach acid is doing to that marine.
So give each caster a rating. Non of that movie rating nonsense, but a clear scale of how often and in how much detail a caster describes sex, violence and swear words. Each responsible parent can look a casters stats up when tuning into a cast and then decide whether to mute the sound or not.
|
If you don't agree with the ratings and don't feel, that the graphical violence in Starcraft is to be concerned about, then you're obviously a minority and it should be your responsibility to screen the content before hand.
If your majority remains the majority, it will be a sign of an opportunity missed for a great game.
|
Canada11363 Posts
On May 25 2011 15:49 Vardant wrote:
Prince Caspian - PG rated movie
PG - A PG-rated film may not be suitable for children. The MPAA says a PG-rated should be checked out by parents before allowing younger children to see the movie. There could be some profanity, some violence, or brief nudity, however there will not be any drug use in a PG film.
So, erm, yeah, there goes the argument.
As an aside, it's funny that they'll let all those other things into PG movies, but not drugs...
But no, my point stands. I'm challenging the notion that you think Starcraft is at all violent in the sense of intensity or emotionally traumatizing. Sufficiently young enough kids will find the T-rex's in Land Before Time (original) frightening and that's rated G.
But if you compare the emotional intensity of something like Prince Caspian to Starcraft. The only way I'd accept your counter-argument is if you truly believe 8 year olds should also not watch Prince Caspian or the Phantom Menace (also PG). If you can say that, then I'll concede that according to your standards, children should also not watch Starcraft tournaments.
But if you're of the "kid's have heard and probably said worse at public schools" school of thought then I call bullshit on your argument.
@Mord
Maybe I'm downplaying the violence contained within SC2. And you're right if you're paying attention, there are some more gruesome animations. However, I maintain that it's still not as emotionally trying as some big action PG film simply because it's so microscopic, there's no emotional investment as they function more as game pieces. I dunno, it just doesn't seem so in your face as any action movie I could think of.
|
On May 25 2011 15:56 Mordiford wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2011 15:46 Falling wrote:
In truth, f-bombs are probably the biggest offender and realistically they aren't that frequent.
But from your writing I think you and I could agree that at the very least the op's point about placing some sort of rating on each tournament could beneficial? I was mostly annoyed at the internet freedom fighters taking the op to task for daring to frown on f-bombs and the like.
But let's take your example, that because it's rated a certain way, then we should pad the rating to it's full potential. Is that really necessary? Sexually suggestive, for instance. It's rated T, so I guess we ought to have implied sex and tastefully covered nudity? (And for those 18+ streams, we ought have full on nudity.) Admittedly, this might attract a certain crowd... Anyways, the point is just because it has a certain label, does it need to be amped up in all areas, or can the already rated content stand on it's own and that's good enough?
I like the idea of mainstream tournaments keeping it relatively clean (there'll be slip up, but no need to make a big deal of it), but keep streams to streamer discretion. But even were this not the case, I don't see why tournaments couldn't provide a little more information on what sort of content people will be viewing. I'm fine with a label, but I feel like that'd it should essentially be the same for every single one... I can't think of a single tournament that would fall below or go far above: T(13+) - For violence, blood and gore, language and suggestive themes. Some may be towards the lower end of the spectrum, but it'd all still end up with the same rating with perhaps the "language" note going to "mild language" for some. The F-bombs are always something spontaneous and generally hilarious(Strelok's NASL interview comes to mind), so you can't really factor those in, when they happen it won't be because it was planned and I wouldn't support penalizing it, so there's no point in making the distinction. Just slap the above rating on every event page. Put it as a small image on the bottom of every tournament/event page if you'd like, just like most games have it now. I don't see a problem. As for the way that tournaments, leagues and events are casted, it should remain unchanged in my opinion as far as content moderation is concerned.
Your T-13 label is essentially the same thing that is on the box of SC2. And what does every online game have as a disclaimer? Something along the lines of "experience online may not reflect the rating of this game." This carries over to any cast of the game.
I think any parent that feels protective need to use the basic rating guideline of SC2 as a starting point and find themselves what is appropriate for their children and not act entitled to special treatment when they are very marginal % of people watching game commentators and casts.
|
Firstly i want to say that i understand you are not trying to censor per se, but realize that in many countries just slapping a label on would be considered sensoring.
I have been reading most of this thread (got to page 10), and i agree with a lot of the posters. One being that it is true that this is mainly a problem in the US and nowhere else. Two is that casters all have their own personas, ive even heard fuck and shit from Artosis during GSL casts.
I believe though that one thing you have to realize is that as gamers we have grown up all of our lives saying these words. Especially "rape/d" In gaming that word has absolutely nothing to do with the physical act. Gaming in itself is a very niche market and now we add RTS which is much more niche. Just something i was thinking about while reading through this thread.
Edit: Just to be clear because i know somebody will bring this up. I am not saying that big time tournaments shouldn't censor the language some, but i think even Tastosis should be allowed to curse from time to time as it is just a general thing in the gaming community.
|
On May 25 2011 16:07 Vardant wrote:The point is, that even a PG movie should be watched by parents first. But somehow in this case, it should be different, because with more ratings involved, this will help e-sports to grow. It's ridiculous to be honest. If anything, more ratings will do more harm than good. Especially, if someone wants special ratings, that allow graphic violence, but don't allow anything else. This is not the case anywhere else. You get both or none, because it doesn't make much sense otherwise. If you don't agree with the ratings and don't feel, that the graphical violence in Starcraft is to be concerned about, then you're obviously a minority and it should be your responsibility to screen the content before hand.
You're basing your argument entirely on the fact that MPAA's site says PG movies should be screened by parents. I do not know a single soul that believes this, PG is generally accepted as clean viewing. Obviously it varies from household to household, but this just goes to prove the point further. The rating works. No two people share the same moral values, but at least when they understand the ratings, they can make judgement calls about what movies are appropriate based on them. This could easily translate over to Starcraft 2 tournament commentary.
I am personally of the opinion however, that a rating system is unnecessary, and that casters should simply be like Tastosis, who even though they are not regulated at all by GOM on their language and content of their cast, they keep it clean because they genuinely care about the mass appeal of the sport they love.
|
On May 25 2011 15:36 dOofuS wrote:To all the people who keep raising the "STARCRAFT 2 HAS KILLING AND GUNZ IN IT WAI U CARE BOUT SWARZ?" argument.... Perhaps you didn't have the time or patience to read through Falling's post, which is pretty spot on in my opinion. So, I've highlighted it for you. Show nested quote +On May 25 2011 12:58 Falling wrote:I don't get why people are so against providing more information. At the bare minimum, the op is looking for a label on the cast essentially describing the language content to be expected. aka information. Not censoring your precious swear words. Heaven's knows why it's so important to retain 'fuck' and 'rape' in a cast. But you do, and the op wants to know if that's the case in each tournament. Information. Sure it's rated Teen. And people are going to have different standards with issues of swearing, violence, sex, and disturbing content. That's why I find the MPAA ratings on movies incredibly useless and tend to check imdb to see specifically what it's rated for. Because I consider some things more disturbing then others. And apparently the op does so as well. I don't really understand the violence apologists as they seem to think SC2 is somehow incredibly violent- everything is so small and most is mechanical. As far as intense violence, a PG movie like Prince Caspian is more violent. The point is, when one watches a SC tournament, one reasonably expects very miniature amounts of violence of very little emotional intensity (no close-ups, dieing scenes, no Saving Private Ryan moments), but one does not necessarily expect to be greeted by f-bombs and players 'getting raped'.So the op wishes to be informed ahead of time. Information. What do you have against it? As a complete aside and nothing to do with this particular thread, but: On May 25 2011 01:04 warsinger wrote:
but I'd like to hear what the always level-headed and polite TL community has to say on the issue. I'm no longer convinced this is the case. They're out there I'm sure, but sometimes I feel like they've been drowned out. If you have the time, I would recommend catching up on Falling's posts (they start in the middle of page 16). He is putting into words what I've struggled to convey, thank you (Falling) for your insights. I think some of the poster's in this forum just don't care whether Starcraft 2 (or esports) becomes mainstream or not outside of Korea. I feel like we need a Martin Luther King Jr. to spring up and give us all a motivational speech about the potential this game and community has to achieve great things for esports as a whole, but I think many still see this as something that will never be watched anywhere but the internet, in solitude or close company, never to be accepted by the masses. I will not believe this. Edit: Reading back, I find my last paragraph validated by posts like these... Show nested quote +On May 25 2011 15:06 ShooTouts wrote:
SC2 is never going to go mainstream like it is in Korea. The internet/video game crowd is always going to be who watches SC2 but thats still millions of potential viewers. Overall in this market I don't see how "cleaning up" is going to attract more viewers even though I cant even think of any casters that even cuss/ say offensive things that much.
Its up to the individual events to decide what kind of show they want to run and if you dont like it dont watch it. Its as simple as that.
The argument goes both ways. The Starcraft violence is mild. So is swearing in casts. I haven't yet seen "FUCKING SHIT YOU CUNTS DID YOU SEE THEM MOTHERFUCKING RAPLEINGS TEAR INTO THAT MARINES ASSHOLE LIKE I DID TO YO MAMMAS PUSSY?" Really, how often do casters swear anyway? It's rarely noticeable, never excessive, and always appropriate for the moment if it happens.
As for the accessibility being affected by the oh so gratuitous swearing, I'd put that more to the ingrained "nerd culture" in it, as much as I hate the term. The most obvious examples would be Tastosis, but old videogame comparisons and jokes are almost universal in casting.
Starcraft will appeal to gamers, but few others. This is not a bad thing. It's a very, very large demographic.
eSports is expanding, but it's still nowhere near the prevalence of physical sports, because a large amount of people still have skewed perspectives of it, mostly due to age.
Eventually, if everything goes well, it'll eventually have the airtime we desire. That time's not now. It's going to take a long, long time for western societies to jump on the bandwagon, why start regulating it for the end goal now, who see no appeal as is, and risk alienating our current audience?
|
On May 25 2011 16:09 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2011 15:49 Vardant wrote:
Prince Caspian - PG rated movie
PG - A PG-rated film may not be suitable for children. The MPAA says a PG-rated should be checked out by parents before allowing younger children to see the movie. There could be some profanity, some violence, or brief nudity, however there will not be any drug use in a PG film.
So, erm, yeah, there goes the argument. As an aside, it's funny that they'll let all those other things into PG movies, but not drugs... But no, my point stands. I'm challenging the notion that you think Starcraft is at all violent in the sense of intensity or emotionally traumatizing. Sufficiently young enough kids will find the T-rex's in Land Before Time (original) frightening and that's rated G. But if you compare the emotional intensity of something like Prince Caspian to Starcraft. The only way I'd accept your counter-argument is if you truly believe 8 year olds should also not watch Prince Caspian or the Phantom Menace (also PG). If you can say that, then I'll concede that according to your standards, children should also not watch Starcraft tournaments. But if you're of the "kid's have heard and probably said worse at public schools" school of thought then I call bullshit on your argument. @Mord Maybe I'm downplaying the violence contained within SC2. And you're right if you're paying attention, there are some more gruesome animations. However, I maintain that it's still not as emotionally trying as some big action PG film simply because it's so microscopic, there's no emotional investment as they function more as game pieces. I dunno, it just doesn't seem so in your face as any action movie I could think of.
In terms of the emotional connection to random marines as opposed to fleshed out characters I suppose... but that's not really the point, visually the violence and gore is present. The rating is there, so we have an existing label, if you disagree with the rating of the game, that's one thing but I think it's appropriate. I also thing pretty much all casts are age appropriate in regards to the game.
But like I said in an earlier post, if you want a simple tag at the bottom... I'd be fine with that, but it would pretty much be the same for every event.
On May 25 2011 16:16 setzer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2011 15:56 Mordiford wrote:On May 25 2011 15:46 Falling wrote:
In truth, f-bombs are probably the biggest offender and realistically they aren't that frequent.
But from your writing I think you and I could agree that at the very least the op's point about placing some sort of rating on each tournament could beneficial? I was mostly annoyed at the internet freedom fighters taking the op to task for daring to frown on f-bombs and the like.
But let's take your example, that because it's rated a certain way, then we should pad the rating to it's full potential. Is that really necessary? Sexually suggestive, for instance. It's rated T, so I guess we ought to have implied sex and tastefully covered nudity? (And for those 18+ streams, we ought have full on nudity.) Admittedly, this might attract a certain crowd... Anyways, the point is just because it has a certain label, does it need to be amped up in all areas, or can the already rated content stand on it's own and that's good enough?
I like the idea of mainstream tournaments keeping it relatively clean (there'll be slip up, but no need to make a big deal of it), but keep streams to streamer discretion. But even were this not the case, I don't see why tournaments couldn't provide a little more information on what sort of content people will be viewing. I'm fine with a label, but I feel like that'd it should essentially be the same for every single one... I can't think of a single tournament that would fall below or go far above: T(13+) - For violence, blood and gore, language and suggestive themes. Some may be towards the lower end of the spectrum, but it'd all still end up with the same rating with perhaps the "language" note going to "mild language" for some. The F-bombs are always something spontaneous and generally hilarious(Strelok's NASL interview comes to mind), so you can't really factor those in, when they happen it won't be because it was planned and I wouldn't support penalizing it, so there's no point in making the distinction. Just slap the above rating on every event page. Put it as a small image on the bottom of every tournament/event page if you'd like, just like most games have it now. I don't see a problem. As for the way that tournaments, leagues and events are casted, it should remain unchanged in my opinion as far as content moderation is concerned. Your T-13 label is essentially the same thing that is on the box of SC2. And what does every online game have as a disclaimer? Something along the lines of "experience online may not reflect the rating of this game." This carries over to any cast of the game. I think any parent that feels protective need to use the basic rating guideline of SC2 as a starting point and find themselves what is appropriate for their children and not act entitled to special treatment when they are very marginal % of people watching game commentators and casts.
This is pretty much what I've been saying... That said, if people want an extra label, just put the SC2 rating at the bottom of the tournament page and I'd have no problem with that.
Parent should expect the content of a cast, to reflect the base-line rating of the game, no tournament really exceeds that.
|
There are 20+ people in this thread who'd like to see some label or warning on the streams. Why don't you spend 30 minutes to set up a page where you can slap whatever ratings on whichever stream you see fit? Bam! Problem solved. Promote it on the community sites and concerned parents who make an wffort will find it in no time.
It's a simple thing to do, why do you expect others to do it for you?
edit: Or just make a running thread here on TL.
|
NASL, IPL, GSL, MLG and other large prize pool professional style events should keep the casting clean. SotG is great and should be left to operate on JPs standards.
|
My personal honest opinion is that there is no issue at all with the content. So your kids hear the F-word on TV, who cares? They will hear it somewhere eventually, if you have a problem with your kids using it it's up to YOUR parenting to teach them not to. Shielding them from the word is futile.
As for sexual references, I would assume that if the kids are old enough to understand them, it's not a bad thing. There are probably a fine line here though and I wouldn't be surprised if the line is crossed hardcore sometimes by some casters which would definitely be a bad thing.
Overall though, teach your kids not to swear and you won't have a problem with them hearing swearwords.
To go from a completely different direction, if you're so uptight about your kids upbringing, why are you letting them watch SC2? It's a very violent game, I'd think it was more important to you that your children aren't watching marines shoot other marines than having a caster use the f-word when something really exciting happens.
|
On May 25 2011 16:41 Longshank wrote:
There are 20+ people in this thread who'd like to see some label or warning on the streams. Why don't you spend 30 minutes to set up a page where you can slap whatever ratings on whichever stream you see fit? Bam! Problem solved. Promote it on the community sites and concerned parents who make an wffort will find it in no time.
It's a simple thing to do, why do you expect others to do it for you?
edit: Or just make a running thread here on TL.
The community can report on past content, but you can't expect the community to know in advance, what a tournament will allow in terms of content. Even someone like IPL, as professional as their broadcasts are, can't control the commentary of the casters, specifically for live broadcasts.
There's really no way to rate it, unless the caster(s) themselves clearly define their personal 'rating'.
So the point is, the casting community as a whole, if it wants to continue to progress the industry that provides for them, should consider for themselves whether to adopt these standards. The two most successful casters (Tasteless and Artosis) are just as clean or cleaner than most casters, and I don't think that's a coincidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
