ESRB: Change Needed

[gamefreaks365]

I just finished writing an editorial on how the ESRB has failed the needs of the gaming community. In my editorial, I discuss why I believe we should replace the ESRB with a government-run agency, in-charge of inspecting and rating games based on the basic principles of which ESRB stands for (but never really applied). I understand that some of you will disagree with my comments, for which I welcome your responses, but please understand, this is an opinion. If you expect me to respect yours, please respect mine. Here's the article:

gamefreaks365.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=116

I welcome your thoughts.

[benwayshouse]

Nicely written, though I for one, don't disagree with your ideas; my thoughts exactly. I think that the age level rating system, like that in Europe as you said, sounds like a much better idea. But, I think it isn't JUST the ESRB's fault; it's the parents fault for not taking the time to think about what their child may be doing and seem to think that it isn't that bad a game, when it really is. So, good article, I say again.

[Kevin-RN]

I dont see anything wrong with the ESRB. Some M games do have alot of stuff in them, but if they were Adult, no stores would carry them. M is already 17 or older. If your 17 and you still have to ask your parents to buy it, then something is wrong.

[Leverish]

I once lived in a ChannelOne school (A school that gets news in the morning.) and they had an article about this.

[benwayshouse]

Nintendo said:

I once lived in a ChannelOne school (A school that gets news in the morning.) and they had an article about this.

You lived in school?!! j/k Yeah, I do too. Minnesota passed a law saying that all stores won't allow kids to buy Mature Rated games unless they are accompanied by a parent/legal guardian. Which is a good idea, but seriously, parents need to be informed, which is what I have done for my parents in letting them know I want RE4 and reseached and typed up a report for them as to what is in the game necessarily.

[Leverish]

Symphonic said:

You lived in school?!! j/k Yeah, I do too. Minnesota passed a law saying that all stores won't allow kids to buy Mature Rated games unless they are accompanied by a parent/legal guardian. Which is a good idea, but seriously, parents need to be informed, which is what I have done for my parents in letting them know I want RE4 and reseached and typed up a report for them as to what is in the game necessarily.

3rd stall to the right in the boys' bathroom

[benwayshouse]

Nintendo said:

3rd stall to the right in the boys' bathroom

Heh, funny I needed a laugh right about now.

[Jason-RN]

I don't like the idea of having the government take over the ESRB, but I think you make a very good point: The Guy Game, BMX XXX and other game that uses nudity so much should get an AO rating. Then again, the difference between M and AO is only one year (17 and 18, respectively).

[Shiva64]

I don't agree.. sorry. Especially about the crap with the government taking over.. they've screwed up so many things.. so why? After all.. they're the ones saying that games are bad in the first place.. they're the ones that say crap like games are the cause for violence (I'VE EVEN HEARD THEM SAY CRAP ABOUT MARIO BEING BAD FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!), when it's really the people who play the games fault because they have a "mental issue" or because their family is too stupid to teach them what's right and what's wrong.

If you want an AO game.. then go look at Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude. That is a game that really deserves the AO rating. It has VERY suggestive materials.. <_<


GTA games don't need the AO rating. Simple as that. So what if you pickup hookers.. it's not like you're SEEING the action or anything. So what if you're blowing people's heads off.. or anything else.. IT'S A GAME FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE OUT THEIR FANTASIES WITHOUT ACTUALLY GETTING IN TROUBLE WITH THE LAW IN THE REAL WORLD!


If you're mature enough in the mind to handle that kind of stuff, instead of blabbering about it in public, or pulling a Columbine.. then anyone has any right to want and buy a game as they are now.

[Dan-RN]

Nintendo said:

I once lived in a ChannelOne school (A school that gets news in the morning.) and they had an article about this.

I saw that, and it was bias crap. They didn't understand the ratings system, simple as that. I signed up for the message boards and explained how crappy their little piece was, but I forgot to ever go and check back up on it.

As for the article, I completely disagree. The gaming industry needs to self-regulate. If we let the government take over, they'll just have more fuel on their video game hating fire. You'll be seeing more games given higher ratings when they barely deserve a T.

The ESRB system is flawed, that's for sure, but you can't just turn over a system like that to a bunch of non gamers and expect the results to work.

[Jehuty]

I will admit that ESRB doesn't do the best job. *Still wondering how ZOE2 got an M and Xenosaga ep I only got a T*

But yeah, they are for the most part not bad at the ratings. From what I am told, ESRB is shown the worst scene in the whole game and they judge it simply by that, I do believe that they could have actual testers who play through most of the game before giving their ratings would give a much more accurate rating.

Either way, the government does not need to be messing with rating systems. I mean, video games have been a major topic in courts lately, and for the most part it is because people think they they have the right to accuse a video game, even if it has NO relation whatsoever to the crime. This is where the whole thing begins.

Now trust me, I have played some pretty violent games. Heck, just about any gamer has. But none of that stuff really makes me want to go out into the street and kill everyone. You would have to be seriously insane to get the feeling to do something like that from a video game.

So really the government should stay out of this, I mean...would any sane person actually do something like that because of a game? I wouldn't think so.

[Richard-RN]

Though I certainly don't think the ESRB is the best at what they do (Super Smash Bros. Melee got a teen HOW?), I think a government-run agency would be much worse. The government is always trying to involve themselves more in people's everyday lives, and this would go a bit too far. I bet if they had an agency dedicated to this they would eventually start banning certain material from games all together, and that would scare me.

[5abbath]

good work *thumbs up*

[BRO_co03-RN]

Richard-RN said:

Though I certainly don't think the ESRB is the best at what they do (Super Smash Bros. Melee got a teen HOW?), I think a government-run agency would be much worse. The government is always trying to involve themselves more in people's everyday lives, and this would go a bit too far. I bet if they had an agency dedicated to this they would eventually start banning certain material from games all together, and that would scare me.

I agree with you too, Richard. While the ESRB could be revised, having the government run it would be bad. If the gov't took over the ESRB, it would restrict our free market economy.

[Pure_Evil]

I agree that the ESRB are messed up but the goverment would be worse. Besides its really the consumer's fault. Everybody does anything on there own risk.