That's the question that Ubisoft developer Clint Hocking is asking. After complaints from the Canadian Teacher's Federation about Bully, he's offered to buy the leader of the Federation, Emily Noble, either a Wii or X-box 360 so that she can play the game. Hocking admits he hasn't played the game, but is hoping that the two of them can discover the game and be able to discuss it's merits and flaws in an enlightened atmosphere:
"Since I haven't even played Bully - and probably neither has Ms. Noble, President of the CTF, (nor probably have her counterparts in the coalition of teacher's unions in Canada, the United States, Britain, South Korea, Australia and the Caribbean who are mentioned in the article) I wonder if we even can contribute anything? Ought we enter into debate about public access to media that we have not even engaged ourselves? That seems unethical to me - especially given our roles. It is doubly unethical if Bully might in fact actively contribute to broader and deeper societal understanding of the very serious and real issues of bullying. While our teachers are certainly on the front lines of the battle against bullying - they are not the owners of the issue and they are not the only ones entitled to examine or discuss it."
I think this is definitely a good move (as long as Ms Noble accepts); a while ago N'gai Croal wrote an article after the whole Mass Effect/porno kerfuffle saying the video game industry must be more pro-active in defending itself and it's a positive sign that Clint has chose to be proactive about a game, he wasn't actually a developer for. I hope this will spur developers on and they won't simply let clueless politicians and self-imposed moral guardians say whatever they want. Bully may have flaws that would worry an educator or parent, but without actually playing the game, they will never know for sure.
Via Boing Boing
Original article at Click Nothing