Do you think there should be federal funding for videogames?

13 replies [Last post]
explicit_baron's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 5 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Aug 10 2010

This link is for a video regarding a debate on fox news regarding federal grants for game developers. http://kotaku.com/5804296/fox-news-debate-of-federal-funding-for-games-goes-about-like-youd-expect What do you guys think? It would be nice to know that some of the money that comes out of my paycheck is actually going to something I support unlike, the other stuff my money goes towards. I think it would support a growing industry that WILL create jobs because people like jobs in the fun and interesting enterainment industry especially, the videogame industry.

RPGeesus's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 years 16 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Sep 6 2010

No, because then the Government dictates what is in games even more than they already do.

MarioDragon's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 11 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Aug 2 2010

Absolutely not. If the government starts getting involved with more crap than it's already involved in, we start turning into socialists, and socialism does. not. work.

Besides, getting more people jobs in video games would just create more crappy ones that grandma's would buy for little Timmy's Wii. Why not spend money to fix roads and give more jobs there, or fix houses, build houses, and do it CORRECTLY, instead of spending it on a bunch of people sitting in front of a computer monitor making clever arrangements of pixels.

Razzler's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 years 6 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Sep 27 2010

Edutainment rarely works aside from the odd adventure game back in the 80's, so no federal funding shouldn't be wasted on game that might not be that good.

What I believe would work better is some sort of tax break for start up developers or easier access to funding for indy developers, which are fueling the rennaisance we are currently experiencing in gaming.

The argument that this will somehow make the government control more of the gaming industry is quite ridiculous, we don't live in communist/fascist nations and our culture doesn't mean that we are more submissive to authority. Hell, as it stands, there's nothing really stopping our governments from passing new legislation restricting the sale of videogames (California has tried to do this twice already), but they won't, since there's too much tax money at stake within the industry.

RPGeesus's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 years 16 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Sep 6 2010

@ Razzler

I wasn't trying to imply that government-funded video games would turn us all into Commies, I apologise. I was proposing, however, that given the chance to take more contral of something any government would try and change it to make them look good. Here in Australia, we already suffer that, what with the Government controlling the classification board. Because of that, we don't get Mortal Kombat, unless we get it from New Zealand.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that if a government puts in money to any project, they're going to want a specific return from it, and it could have negative effects. This is no different.

Razzler's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 years 6 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Sep 27 2010

That wasn't really targetted at you, but rather the argument in general. I do sympathize with the aussies, since the entire situation is ludicrous, however, I believe there are some pretty serious democratic faults in how laws are passed through the legal system and that most politicians want to introduce an 18+ rating for movies and games.

I understand the whole nanny state thing considering that the UK suffered under that regime when Tony Blair and the labour party were in power, but that does seem to be changing under a more conservative government.

As with socialism and communism, there isn't anything inherently wrong with them, it depends on who executes them and how they are handled as a result. Communism in its purest form actually sounds good on paper, it neutralises any imbalances of wealth, removes the class system and divide almost entirely, unemployment is a non-issue.

However, social and political issues are usually it's downfall, most countries that implemented it had governments that were manipulative and controlling, corporations will never embrace it as it would destroy their profits and they would see no benefit from it and technological advancement would be slowed due to a lack of competition.

RPGeesus's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 years 16 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Sep 6 2010

I agree with all you say, Razzler. And yes, Communism does work ... in theory. In practice, not so much.

MarioDragon's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 11 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Aug 2 2010

Communism/socialism isn't even a good idea. The only thing either of those has ever proved is that people will not work if they don't have to. It's also proven, time and time again, whenever implemented, it fails miserably, but for SOME REASON people keep voting in socialists in America *cough*obama*cough* to try to get this to work, but not to bring American politics into this thread (too late now eh?)

If everyone got everything absolutely NOTHING would advance, since no one would work because of 100% lack of motivation. Why invent unlimited underwater air if the government gets all the credit and every on the planet gets one of it even though you're the one that did all the work? Aasdglkj, I'm such a friggin Republican...

Red_Baron2011's picture
User offline. Last seen 2 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Apr 4 2011

I also have to agree about no gov't funding for games. I didn't wanna get political but yeah i'm slightly conservative too and I agree with alot of what you're all saying but lemme also just interject that liberals CAN be a good thing I just think that alot of liberals recently have forgotten how to be liberal which is the real sad thing.

...And that's all I have to say about that.

Razzler's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 years 6 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Sep 27 2010

@MarioDragon

Communism doesn't function like that, you have to work in order to be entitled to free stuff (so long as you don't have any disabilities and aren't under working age), else nothing would be accomplished. As I said what screws it over is the people, since most want immediate gratification in this day and age and coupled with power struggles between the people and the government.

I would also argue that Socialism brings massive benefits to public services and that the Healthcare Bill is the single greatest political achievement in the US recently, as it will eventually destroy the monopoly that the pharmaceutical and insurance companies have over the system.

MarioDragon's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 11 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Aug 2 2010

Have you seen Canada? Compared to us, they have horrible healthcare, ALL because it's owned by the government/ People CONSTANTLY come down to America to get treatment when they have deathly illnesses like cancer, tumors, and whatever else because there's always a way too long waiting list. Same with Mexico, but they don't have much of a healthcare in the first place. Not even those two countries, every other socialistic country doesn't have nearly as good healthcare as America.

Am I saying if your kid has brain cancer should you have to pay for it even if you absolutely can't? No not really, there should be benefits for certain conditions, but this Healthcare Bill is a terrible long-run idea.

And since America has the policy that we have to help deathly ill people for free if they are not American citizens, we help them. Government owned healthcare would completely ruin this, and our health care, since all the good doctor's would quit, leaving us with crappy ones that don't give a crud about human beings because there's no reason to.

And yes Communism does work like that. As I said, the only thing Communism/Socialism prove is that people won't work if they don't have to, and I should add, if they have no motivation/reason to. Why else did America invent 90% of major technological advancements on the planet?

Also this is just a relatively broad generalization, too lazy to go into great detail just to be my point across, but we should really be messaging each other or starting a new thread or something if we want to get into American politics as I just completely derailed this thread...

RPGeesus's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 years 16 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Sep 6 2010

You know how they say friends shouldn't talk about religion or politics...

I do think that there should be a fine balance between what the Government has control over, and what they don't. Some things (roads, education) should have some input by governments, as having a purely capitalist world would completely destroy any chance for the poorer people in the community to have a decent standard of living by being too oppressive. On the other hand, having a purely government run society would be socialist, and we've seen that's not particularly great at working, and so you need the privately owned corporations to counterbalance. Read "Nineteen Eighty Four" to see what socialism can be like.

And don't worry about derailing the thread. I'm sure it happens with every topic in some way or other, thanks to the Internet and conversations no longer taking place over minutes, but rather days. In fact, I'm about to make a ranting forum in the Off Topic area, so that people can just rant all they want.

explicit_baron's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 5 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Aug 10 2010

I really didn't intend for this thread to go off the deep end into Politics, good to see some commitment though. :D

NightShroud's picture
User offline. Last seen 3 years 28 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: Aug 12 2010

@MarioDragon now that's just American arrogance there. The only thing that America's been advancing a lot in is warfare. Germany has the best engineering, Japan was/has major advancements in technology, Russia has a better space-program,... Don't get me wrong: America's been doing a lot for the world but you're overrating them. Also: communism isn't the same as socialism. Socialism provides needs for the lower to middle class to survive while the higher class (which don't always consist of the stronger ones) corrupt the government to do as they please. Communism pulls everyone and anything to the same level: a manager is the same as the worker and get paid the same and get the same food. But communism (and also socialism) lead to a stagnation of the advancement since (like you said) no one wants to work.

I think today's ways of ruling are getting outdated. Certainly here in Belgium where corruption and the cronyism are destroying the country as well as the socialism pulling in immigrants that won't work since they get social security from the government. The middle clas is getting ripped apart and it'll result in a poor and a rich side.