I think it’s only fair that the developer of GoreBox was invited to a Senate hearing next week about the game’s supposed role in the fatal Tacloban school shooting. 

But questions should not come with the assumption that violent video games cause violent acts. 

There is a wealth of scientific literature online that already says that this isn’t the case, although, in my review, there are also a few that say that the effect isn’t completely zero. 

If the conversation progresses, these studies should be reviewed with diligence so we can avoid hasty pronouncements for a blanket ban on violent video games, as Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla has done, inviting furious online protestations from the Filipino gaming community. 

A blanket ban would be a blunt policy response to a problem that appears to be much more complex.

An entire generation of Filipinos grew up on violent games such as Mortal Kombat, Counter-Strike, and Grand Theft Auto without school shootings becoming a recurring phenomenon. That’s inconclusive proof that games do not carry influence. But it does suggest that violence in games is insufficient to explain why such attacks are emerging only now.

School shootings are a horrible new phenomenon for the Philippines, as is the detected presence of extremist groomers targeting Filipino children online. Perhaps Remulla’s ire should be on the fact that we already had prior knowledge of these groups, and the Tacloban shooters were able to slip through. 

The police already said that they have cyber patrollers looking out for these, and are working with international partners. With these shooters escaping detection, the question is, was our monitoring capacity lacking? 

Violent games, meanwhile, have been around for decades, and they haven’t been a clear predictor for violent actions.

Still, I think it’s fair to invite the GoreBox developer to the hearing. GoreBox is such a niche title that we will only benefit from hearing about the game from the developer himself, German national Felix Filip. 

The game has already been tagged in incidents elsewhere in the world, including Singapore, where a 14-year-old was caught recreating ISIS attacks not just in GoreBox but also Roblox; and in Moscow, where a 15-year-old recreated a 2011 terror attack in Norway before he eventually stabbed a 10-year-old child. 

The dynamics between the game and the audience may not be the same as your typical Grand Theft Auto and Counter-Strike title, and that is something to look at. 

The concern isn’t necessarily what happens inside the game. The concern is that some games create communities — through Discord servers, user-generated content, or multiplayer spaces — where vulnerable young people can be approached by extremist actors.

The Global Network on Extremist and Technology (GNET) itself clearly warns about assigning blame on the game and its content, and instead invites scrutiny towards the online communities where players converse and interact about their gaming activities. 

GNET said, “In light of meta-analyses that “do not appear to support substantive long-term links between aggressive game content and youth aggression, we should view the crucial digital element of this attack’s context through the attacker’s behaviours in the group chat and his use of the gaming space, rather than attaching them to the game itself.”

The biggest priority, it said, is to address “underlying ideological, social and personal drives” rather than just a ban.

The ire from gamers also stems from the fact the developer is seemingly being blamed while the question of how the kids were able to access the game in spite of the game already being rated 18+ isn’t being brought up.

Parents have the responsibility of knowing what games their kids are playing, and that their kids aren’t overriding age-gating mechanisms on game platforms such as Steam and Play Store in this case. Those platforms, on the other hand, need to ensure that their mechanisms are effective. 

Does this uproar over violent game bans mean that it’s time for the country to have a ratings or content review board for video games?

In the 90s, Mortal Kombat’s violent content eventually led to Senate hearings in the US that led to the creation of the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), providing guidance for parents. It’s merely guidance though, as the US Supreme Court in 2011 determined that video games are art, and it would be unconstitutional to prevent people from purchasing them, no matter the age. 

Australia, on the other hand, has a stricter stance, with numerous game bans over the years including Manhunt, Mortal Kombat, and a mod that unlocked sexual content in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. These bans are reviewed and decided by its own ratings board, which puts a game under the “Refused Classification” category when it determines that a game is too much. 

(Not so fun fact: the Marcos Sr. administration banned games in 1981, and forced gamers to turn over their consoles, with parents and educators believing these games were destroying the country’s moral fiber. )

But wouldn’t having our own ratings board be redundant, and a waste of resources? And given the history of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB), wouldn’t it be prone to censorship? 

And ultimately, such discussions would again be missing the point — that there is a network of online actors actively seeking vulnerable young people across many online platforms.

Because look, non-violent games like Roblox and even Minecraft, have been used to radicalize the youth. What GoreBox and those two games have in common is that they allow players to create their own user-generated content, and they have online components outside the game where they can be influenced by malign individuals. 

If lawmakers walk away from these hearings believing that banning a violent game solves the problem, they’ll have addressed the easiest target but not the most important one. The harder question is how extremist networks are finding Filipino children in the first place, and why our institutions aren’t stopping them before they do. – Rappler.com