Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Most Children Able To Buy M-Rated Games

Posted by simoniker on from the most-delighted dept.

Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to the FTC report on children buying potentially inappropriate adult-rated games. According to the survey, "69 percent of the teenage shoppers were able to buy M-rated games", but this figure is down from 85 percent in 2000 and 78 percent in 2001. However, only 27 percent of stores where the games were bought had "signs, posters, or other information to inform customers about the rating system or the seller's policy on rating enforcement", and only 24 percent asked the 13-to-16 year old child's age, in this "mystery shopper" study funded by The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

70 comments

  1. b00l5h33t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    69 percent of the teenage shoppers were able to buy

    Geeky teens don't do 69...

  2. Irrelevent by damiam · · Score: 1

    KaZaA, bittorrent, etc. don't check ID. If a (reasonably smart) kid can't get what they want one way, they'll get it another way.

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    1. Re:Irrelevent by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      yeah, "another way" being the kid's "rich kid friend" who's parents could care less if "johnny" watches skin flicks, while playing Demonic Blood Carnage v.2.0 and chatting with pedophiles about deviant acts.

  3. While I was in Babages by mhlandrydotnet · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ... the other day, what appeared to be a grandma was purchasing a game (sadly, I didn't see what the game was). The clerk asked who the game was for, and when the lady said it was for her grandson, the clerk then asked his age and said that the game she was buying was a violent game and they don't sell games like that to children. The grandma's response was: well, he had it before but it broke, so this is a replacement copy. I missed the rest of the conversation because it didn't seem too important at the time, but I think this incident brings up some serious questions.

    If the numbers are down, maybe kids are getting their unsuspecting (grand)parents to purchase the games for them?

    In the aforementioned case, who is responsible if this kid gets his/her hands on this game? The kid, the parent, the grandparent, or the clerk?

    What more can the clerk do? If the kid wants to get the game, he'll get the game. So how can this be the responsibility of the store?

    1. Re:While I was in Babages by evslin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Stores shouldn't hold any responsibility so long as they're not selling M-rated products directly to kids. All the products are labeled with ratings and reasons why they're rated as such, purchasing the product implies that you accept the rating and are willing to make sure your kid stays on the straight and narrow. It's sad because these same parents who let their kids' game consoles do the babysitting will be the ones at the PTA meetings screaming about how kids are out of control because of exposure to media.

    2. Re:While I was in Babages by macrom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's sad because these same parents who let their kids' game consoles do the babysitting will be the ones at the PTA meetings screaming about how kids are out of control because of exposure to media.

      Actually, it won't be that way because the parents that let consoles do the babysitting aren't interested enough in their children's lives to show up at a PTA meeting. Parents that care are the ones screaming about media exposure because they know that no one is standing up for the kids whose parents could care less.

    3. Re:While I was in Babages by kabocox · · Score: 1


      Actually, it won't be that way because the parents that let consoles do the babysitting aren't interested enough in their children's lives to show up at a PTA meeting. Parents that care are the ones screaming about media exposure because they know that no one is standing up for the kids whose parents could care less.

      I don't know about you, but I "frecking hate" being told what to do by those that have no authority over me what so ever. Hey, when I was a student I was fine with teachers, admin, and my parents telling me what to do. Now that I'm an "adult" I'm fine with government representives such as police, & DMV telling me generally what to do. Now for some other adult to come up with guidelines about what is or isn't appropriate for my children. I say "enough." Actually, I'd like less violence and more sex in our video games. It seems that the US is far more afraid of sex than violence. I have nothing against children learning through video games. I'd much rather them learn that way than physically.

    4. Re:While I was in Babages by mr_sas · · Score: 1

      if it's anything like fags, or other age restricted products here, once the clerk knew or suspected it was for a minor, then the clerk would be responsible.

    5. Re:While I was in Babages by jea6 · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying is that guidelines impose restrictions? On whom? Not you, you are an adult. Now, presumably, you as a parent will screen all materials your child has access to. Guidelines ASSIST in the screening process. You, as a parent, are the ultimate arbitreur of what if appropriate or objectionable for your kids to have access to.

      Some material is generally objectionable for children because children may not have the mental acuity and maturity to recognize appropriate behavior as potrayed in fiction. And unfortunately, too many parents pay no attention to what their kids are doing/watching/playing/eat.

      Heard of the child obesity problem in this country? Yeah, lots of careless parents sending their kids to school with Twinkies, Sprite, and Lunchables. Do you think those parents are screening what their kids have access to? No.

      So those guidelines aren't designed for those parents. They are designed for you, who will take the time to investigate who provides the ratings, whether you agree with their criteria, and whether your values concur with deeming content objectionable.

      So, instead of listening to every idiotic hoe-slappin gangsta rap album out there, you may determine that you can follow somebody else's guidelines. And, of course, make exceptions where warranted.

      Just today, I was thinking to myself, "Does anybody really want their kids to use drugs at 13, have sex at 14?" Not me, I keep my kids away from self-proclaimed art that promotes and glorifies the objectification of sex and drugs. Not because I'm a prude (I might be) but because the cost-benefit analysis comes firmly on the side of "clean".

      So, no, I don't think Marilyn Qualye was the Anti-Christ and I don't think game ratings are the end of civilization. I think parents who don't know what their kids are up to are worse for this country than most other threats we face today. And I do play Quake and BF1942 but recoginze where kids might not understand "entertainment violence".

      Move along, folks. Nothing is being censored here.

      --

      sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
    6. Re:While I was in Babages by Jad+LaFields · · Score: 1

      That's why the clerk shouldn't have been asking questions.

      And yeah I know that a 'fag' is a cigarette in the UK (and elsewhere?), but man did that set off all the *warning!troll!* bells at first.

      --
      [SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
  4. Pardon me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention?" What does that have to do with M-rated video games and R-rated movies?

    Why not spend some time, I dunno, fighting drugs or something? I don't remember any legitimate research that conclusively proves any sort of link between juvenile delinquency and "Conker's Bad Fur Day."

    I think we can thank the FTC's public relations department for this whole thing. If Middle America wants to see its money spent on fuzzy fluff like this, they're welcome to it, but don't delude yourselves into thinking this is some sort of rational probe.

  5. This is a surprise? by Inoshiro · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We're not talking about a 5$ porn mag or a 10$ package of cigarrettes. We're talking about $30-$80 of video game. Now, maybe the laws are slightly different in the US, but in Canada, most places don't let people work a wage job legally until 16. So if you're under 16, and you walk into a video game store to buy Grand Theft Auto, where did you get that money from?

    That's right! The same people who should have educated that person (and possibly be supervising that person) on what is appropriate to buy. The manager of a local video game store once said to me that if a 5 year old walks in with 80$ to buy GTA: Vice City, he has no problem selling it to the kid because there's no where else that child would've gotten the money. Video game stores are not baby sitters. If the parent is with the kid, the will remind them that the title's M-rated, but they're not going to brow beat them or take away their right to raise their children any way they want to.

    Which is what this really is about. You can raise your child any way you want to, it just so happens that most people expect that they won't have to raise their children because they can use video games as babysitting tools; thus they give them money and send them off to the video game store without supervision. Whose fault is that? Not the video game store!

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:This is a surprise? by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      Didn't you cut the grass for your neighbour before being 16 or get a weekly allowance? A kid could easily get 80$ after a few weeks of saving. I bought with my own allowance and chores money around 8 games for my GameBoy between the age of 12 and 15.

      The reason why game stores here (I live in Canada too) are selling 16+ games to kids is the same as in the US : because they generally just don't care. Don't believe what a store clerks tells you, he's/she's just trying to look good.

    2. Re:This is a surprise? by DS-1107 · · Score: 1
      I saved, worked my way to games when I was 10-15, and then I became a pirate.

      ...anyway my parents had little control over the pillow money I saved, so even if only a few of the kids is like I was, the argument falls.

    3. Re:This is a surprise? by General+Sherman · · Score: 1

      But what about jewish kids? I can tell you that you get a LOT of money from your Bar (or Bat) Mitzfah.

      --
      - Sherman
    4. Re:This is a surprise? by GrimSean · · Score: 1
      That manager obviously never had an irate parent come in and yell at him. I personally will not sell GTA3 or GTA:VC to kids (or Dead or Alive Extreme Beach Volleyball for that matter), and I make sure that I inform parents what exactly they are buying. Of course, that can backfire too, as I've also had a mother freak on me saying "Don't you tell me how to raise my children! They understand the difference between a game and real life! It's just a game anyway!" (The kid started yelling at me too - I love that, I really do, getting told how to do my job by a kid less than half my age).

      Oh, and to the whole "there's nowhere else that child would've gotten the money" you obviously haven't run across the kids who would steal the money out of Mom or Dad's wallet (also been there).

      --
      I don't need to be made to look evil. I can do that on my own. - Christopher Walken
  6. so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't think there were any laws against selling M rated games to minors, like selling tickets to R-rated movies to kids. It's up to the stores and theaters to make their own policies with those things.

  7. This has gone too far... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 3, Funny

    When stores start to card EVERYONE who comes in to buy an M rated game. I'm almost 30, and I look like it. I got carded when I bought Operation Flashpoint Gold. For God's sake people, it's not like they're selling booze or guns. We're talking about VIDEOGAMES!!!!

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:This has gone too far... by realdpk · · Score: 1

      Hahah. Yeah. That's when I'd walk. There are plenty of local stores that sell video games, without hassling me.

      The only place I put up with that shit is the liquor store, because it's state-run here (WA state) and they're anal about it.

  8. Consumers and Industry need to grow up! by m2h · · Score: 1

    The rules applied to movies, magazines, or other mediums should also apply to to video games. I feel it is the moral responsibility of the store to enforce them. Then if the parent or gaurdian chooses to allow their child to have access to a product, that is ok. Kids will always find ways to get access to things to they are not suppose to have. That is what part of growing up is about. We all have flipped through pornagraphic material, or watched the lastest horror flick even though we were underage. It's about time people start growing up, taking responsibilty for the content our children can access, and not leave it up to a disfuctional government and law system to force feed us the exact same message but with a higher price on our freedoms as an individual.

    If we started to enforce these simple rules, that have been layed out for years before with other mediums, we'll also see a change in what is fashionable in the game industry as content. We'll see less violent and sexually explotive games. The industry will want to start producing more content for the larger market that spans children, teens, parents, etc.

    I'm getting so sick of this issue with video games and ratings. Grow up people. It's about time we start taking responsibilty for our children, and ourselves.

    --
    misundstood by most, hated by some, loved by few.
    1. Re:Consumers and Industry need to grow up! by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      I think your preaching to the choir man. I've always been opposed to ESRB ratings, because I knew the problem isn't the games, it's how parents raise their children (or lack thereof). Americans are good at scape goating. Society blames video game violence, for the troubles of youth only because parents don't want to discipline their children. Their too busy acting like children themselves.

      video games don't kill people, I DO! :P

    2. Re:Consumers and Industry need to grow up! by m2h · · Score: 1

      Parents can displine their children as much as they want. Only a few will actually listen. The majority get their influences from outside sources. I'm sorry to say but people are influence by the things we interact with Be it fiction or non-fiction, people, life experiences, and even omg video games!

      --
      misundstood by most, hated by some, loved by few.
    3. Re:Consumers and Industry need to grow up! by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      Your probably right about that. After all, I was raised during the nintendo era. My hero is Mario, and when I was young I always dreamed of being a plumber who shot fire from his hand, and ate "magic mushrooms" to grow bigger. No, I agree video games do influence. But I don't see alot of teens car jacking, and cop killing because they were playing GTA3/vice city. If kids become pyscho, its not because of the video games, its because they had something wrong with them in the first place. Also, the point is not for the parents to weakly say, "Please....stop....don't play those games." their job is to enforce rules, and prevent their children from getting the wrong material. So OMG (cause you know how clever that is...), parents do have a say in a childs life. If they are getting media that they shouldn't be, its probably from a friend, who's parents don't care what he gets into. But in the end, its still the friend's parent's fault for not filtering inappropriate media. The burden should not be held by the industry, or the stores selling the games, as one person put it, "The stores are not babysitters".

    4. Re:Consumers and Industry need to grow up! by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      The rules applied to movies, magazines, or other mediums should also apply to to video games.

      Let's see:
      magazines: Anything that isn't regulated by porn laws is up to the individual stores. An 8-year-old can easily buy High Times, Guns & Ammo, and Maxim.

      movies: Anything that isn't regulated by porn laws is up to the individual stores (or theaters). It's slightly harder for an 8-year-old to get into a PG-13 movie at the theater, but they can buy them, and R movies, quite easily.

      There aren't even any ratings on magazines, and they can be sold to anyone without regulation. Laws regarding movies vary from state to state, and even down to the local level, but in most areas there is no law against selling R rated movies to minors, or allowing them to see them in theaters. These are things completely controlled by store/theater policies, not by laws. Why should games be any different?

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    5. Re:Consumers and Industry need to grow up! by m2h · · Score: 1

      Well that's not the case in Canada. I don't know what the laws are. But I do know of my life time it was always a pain to buy certain magazines, even High Times is sometimes hard to buy if you are minor.

      As for movies if you are not off age based on the rating for the movie there is no way in hell you can get into seeing. I'm 25 now, and hell man I got carded for trying to House of 1000 Corpses.

      As for buying movies on the hand. Most stores don't care, unless it is porn.

      But to rent a movie on the other hand you must be of age, but usually only applies to movies that at least NC17 or higher rated.

      Different worlds we live in I guess. :P

      Doesn't mean you can't obtain such items, it's just not as easy.

      --
      misundstood by most, hated by some, loved by few.
  9. No, pardon me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, the war on drugs is a phony one too. If they want to see real dividends rather than a money pit, the government should start a war on tax cheats (20% of the pop.)

  10. don't look past the context by bigbigbison · · Score: 2, Informative

    While I am sure that Jack Thompson and the Lion and the Lamb group will latch onto this number, keep in mind that videogames were not the worst. According to the survey 81% were able to buy mature dvd's and 83% were able to buy mature music. Remember this, because I'm sure the anti-videogame zealots won't.

    --
    http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
  11. Full time managers = part time nannies? by MMaestro · · Score: 1
    Anyone whos worked in retail, or simply listened to someone who worked in retail, knows that dealing with morons is a daily task. People are just getting lazier and stupider these days and this is reflecting on their children. This seems to be materializing in the form of ignorance.

    We all know the ESRB is doing its best to teach the public about their ratings, but quite frankly most people ignore them. Now whos job is it to tell a 9 year old kid who comes into a store with a hundred dollars to buy GTA:VC only to remark that he already has GTA3 when stated that he's too young for the game(s)? I donno about most people, but after seeing the same styled black and white labels on hundreds of different games, don't you think people would've caught on by now?

    1. Re:Full time managers = part time nannies? by AllUsernamesAreGone · · Score: 1

      So what if they do catch on, do they care? After all, if they stop their little Johnny from having it he'll complain that Timmy in school has it, and.. well, you can guess the complaints. Parents will give it to their kids because they don't care enough to say no, explain why and make sure their kid understands why they aren't being allowed to do it. So much easier and quieter just to give them the cash, boot them out to the shop and pretend that everything will be okay because everyone else does it.

      Hell in a handcart I tell you.

  12. Uhh by Kethinov · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one here who thinks that the whole rating system is retarded anyway? Kids are gonna grow up eventually. Just what practical purpose do we serve by censoring them to sex, drugs, and violence? It just encourages rebellious kids to go learn the hard way on their own. People don't like being censored. Especially kids.

    --
    You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    1. Re:Uhh by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      I agree with you that the rating system is lame, but not for the same reasons. First, I think its anemic, because few people take it seriously. Parents still buy blood bath 4, T&A raider, or jiggly fighter X for their ten year old. Parents, got their way, and got a rating system, but has it really worked? I think not. Second, people still complain about video game violence. Well, if we have a rating system, then in theory, violent/sexually explicit games should be taken out of the hands of the kids. This leaves, only adults to view the more explicit games, but that's not the case. Video games are still being censored for the kids. Well, I'm an adult now, and I want more gore fest. Let the kids play Mario Party, and I'll play Doom 3.

    2. Re:Uhh by Kethinov · · Score: 1

      Yeah, most definitely. It's not working. But do we need it at all? Are our kids really in need of this kind of protection in the first place? It's not working because no one takes it seriously.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    3. Re:Uhh by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      probably not, but its the PC thing to do. politicians and the like have to appear to care.

    4. Re:Uhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, when you have children of your own, bring them over to my house. I will gladly fuck whores in front of them and shoot them in the face with my pistol afterwards. Don't worry, I'm talking about murdering the whores, not your children. See? All good!

    5. Re:Uhh by Kethinov · · Score: 1

      I understand your argument, but there's a difference between sex, violence, and drugs in video games, on tv, and in books versus the kind of behavior you're talking about. One's fantasy, the other's not. Kids learn more at an early age. Best to teach morals as early as language.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
  13. The parents! by Pendersempai · · Score: 1

    Perhaps I'm hopelessly libertarian in these sentiments, but doesn't it seem cheaper, more effective, and much more efficient to allow parents to control what their children can access?

    Great, yes, put on the packaging that the game contains nudity/violence/swearing/whatever, but don't legally restrict anyone from buying it. The state can't insure that, for example, the kid doesn't sniff his new bottle of whiteout in his room -- at some point, we MUST fall back on parental oversight. Why don't we use it by default?

    1. Re:The parents! by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      cause that's hard to do. Actually spending time with your kids is hard work. And after working all day, who wants to spend time with them. Let alone tell them not to do bad things. Its so much easier to program your tv, vcr, dvd player, PS2, etc... to block explicit material from your kids. Which btw, assumes you know how to program the v-chip stuff, and that your kids don't know the override code (EG: PS2 has a general code to unlock the censoring).

    2. Re:The parents! by mahdi13 · · Score: 1

      The parents can't be there with thier 14 year old kids 24/7.
      I picked up GTA:Vice City and have been loving it, but there is no way I'd let anyone under 18 (even 21) play this game. It's not he violence, it's the sex/nudity and language that really gives it the "M" rating (Should of been an "A" IMO). If I saw a kid buying this game I would have to raise my voice to the seller about it.
      It's not about "If the kid is mature enough" it's about "If the kid is responsable enough". And I know that most kids High School and under are not.
      Would you buy porn for your 14 year old? If yes, I'm sorry, but that's just sick and unresponsable in itself...there should be laws against parents like that.

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
    3. Re:The parents! by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 1
      So on your moral compass having sex with a hooker is significantly worse than shooting someone in the face? You're an interesting character.

      And you're going to restrict a 19 year old from playing GTA? Hmm, they're old enough to go to war and shoot real people and sample hookers from around the world but simulating these acts is too much. I'm all for the ratings system so that parents can know what their children are doing but I also believe that there are some people under the age of 18, who are mature enough to handle the content of a game like GTA. It's something that can only be done on a case by case basis and that's why it has to be the parent's responsibility.

      I mean, you say that most kids in high school are not mature enough to handle a game like GTA - but you previously said you wouldn't let anyone under the age of 18 play the game. So you're saying that there are some kids, the minority, who can handle GTA but you still won't let them play? That seems quite unfair.

      I was around 15 when the whole stink was being made over Mortal Kombat and Night Trap and let me tell you, I was mature enough to play and enjoy Mortal Kombat. I was also mature enough to understand that Night Trap was not a good game and had no interest in playing it.

      --
      I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
    4. Re:The parents! by mahdi13 · · Score: 1

      Ah, the good 'ol 'Slashdot is only skin deep' defense...
      Completely ignoring the 14 year olds getting porn statement also. maybe if I put that in the beginning you would of finished reading before getting all steamed over sex > violence *sigh*
      In America, violence is an every day even that can not be escaped. News, TV, movies, games. But hardcore sex is not something everyone can handle. We already have an overpopulation problem and to think sex does not contribute to this problem? Not to mention a lack of sex education can result in disease, AIDS or parenthood. How many High School people do you know that are ready to raise a family? It takes a lot more discipline and respect to raise a family then "shooting someone in the face"
      And Mortal Kombat? Comon...that was a cartoon with bad blood effects, a joke. I've seen better and more gruesome on the Commodore PET. Anyone that blames that game for violence are the same people that think the WWF is real. And Night Trap was a B movie on the computer...more 'tongue in cheek' then anything. And B movies are fun, Evil Dead 2 and April Fools Day were both campy classics
      But don't let your kids watch "Faces of Death"...that will scar them for life =)

      And yes, those few 'kids' that are mature enough to handle playing GTA are treated unfair by the system...THAT is when the parent should be able to say yes or no. Don't just let them have things, know what your getting your kids and know if they can handle it...ignorance is no excuse

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
    5. Re:The parents! by damiam · · Score: 1
      It's not he violence, it's the sex/nudity and language that really gives it the "M" rating

      What? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've run through the entire Vice City storyline, and I've never seen any nudity and only occasionally heard some relatively mild language (certainly nothing that every 10-year-old in the country hasn't heard). If there was any reason that young kids shouldn't play this game, it'd be the violence.

      Would you buy porn for your 14 year old?

      I doubt I'd ever buy porn for anyone, because there's so much free stuff available. But, if I had a 14-year-old, I wouldn't have a problem with them looking at porn of their own accord. If you think seeing images of naked humans is going to cause irreperable harm to a child's psyche, I'd be interested to hear your logic.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    6. Re:The parents! by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      And yes, those few 'kids' that are mature enough to handle playing GTA are treated unfair by the system...THAT is when the parent should be able to say yes or no. Don't just let them have things, know what your getting your kids and know if they can handle it...ignorance is no excuse

      But you're making comparisons to porn here. In the US, it's illegal to give kids access to porn, even if you are their parent and believe they're mature enough to handle it.

      That's what's really twisted about the whole sex is worse than violence thing. People have sex at a fairly early age, in part because their parents are so up tight about it. On the other hand, people get all freaked out about violence but aren't willing to put the same restrictions on it.

      Personally, I feel that parents should be informed and then allowed to control access as they see fit. If the child turns into a whacko, hold the parents responsible, they had guidelines to follow, and chose to ignore them.

      Then again, I watched Faces of Death when I was ~13, and we watched Red Asphault in driver's ed when I was 15. I also played Doom when I was ~14. I never had problems in high school, graduated fairly high in my class, and hold down a good job. One of my neighbors wasn't allowed to play Doom, or watch R rated movies, which just meant that they did those things when their parents weren't around, mostly at other people's houses. I'm not sure if their parents' complete adherence to the ratings was more or less dangerous than observing what they were exposed to, because they really didn't bother to screen anything by any means other than the rating (though the ratings for video games weren't the same back then, they did exist).

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    7. Re:The parents! by mahdi13 · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've run through the entire Vice City storyline, and I've never seen any nudity and only occasionally heard some relatively mild language

      If you call "Fucker" "Shithead" "Cocksucker" and "Bitch" mild...
      You must of missed the "Movie Studio" missions with Candy Suxxx where the last mission is to modify a spot light to display a large pair of breasts on the side of a building...not to mention the cut scenes with vivid descriptions of sex and the act of, everything short of nudity and hardcore.

      But, if I had a 14-year-old, I wouldn't have a problem with them looking at porn of their own accord.

      And this coming from a guy that maintains porn gathering software =)
      I wouldn't say that hardcore "harm's a child" but it does leave the impression that this is OK to do. Sex is a great thing, but you need to know what your doing. With the risk of disease and teenage pregnancy they do need to be educated on 'safe sex'. Kids have enough problems today without having to raise a family...

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
  14. ugh. by h0mer · · Score: 1

    The replies I've read so far have made me sick. Of course video games should be subject to the restrictions of movies and music. So far the general sentiment has been "let the parents take care of it", which I agree with, but the ratings system is a nice backup.

    What's that you say? The kids will find a way to play it anyways? That's the way it should be. Every kid looks at a porno magazine or watches a bad movie etc. However, it shouldn't be right there for them to indulge. This is the same problem that casual piracy has run into, since p2p is a buffet of content. Notice how you probably didn't know the acronym "RIAA" before Napster and assorted clones showed up. Same thing here, if games are available to anyone, it will become a problem. And that requires legislation. Which will impede on my freedom most likely.

    Another thing to consider is the content of games. What was violent and inappropriate during the first video game violence craze, e.g. Mortal Kombat, is much less graphic than the current central title, Grand Theft Auto. I'm not sure if that makes a difference, but it should.

    Everyone says that video games are just as much of an artistic medium as anything else, so why shouldn't they be subject to the same restrictions?

    Oh, everyone is right about parents. They should do more.

    --


    I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
    1. Re:ugh. by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      The replies I've read so far have made me sick. Of course video games should be subject to the restrictions of movies and music. So far the general sentiment has been "let the parents take care of it", which I agree with, but the ratings system is a nice backup. ...
      Everyone says that video games are just as much of an artistic medium as anything else, so why shouldn't they be subject to the same restrictions?

      They already are. There are no restrictions on music or movies outside of obscenity and porn laws. Any restrictions you may have seen on these items are based on local law or policies by the store and/or theater. I've been carded at Wal-Mart for movies and games, but I've never been carded at a Sam Goody or EBGames or SunCoast (and SunCoast does sell some porn). I haven't been carded at a theater since about 6 months after Terminator 2 came out (my parents had to buy the tickets and walk me to the area where they take the tickets for that one).

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    2. Re:ugh. by spitzig · · Score: 1

      Kids watching porn or whatever doesn't bother me, either. If parents think kids need the world shielded from them, let the parents do the shielding. I see no reason to require some clerk selling software to do it.

  15. Overreacting by Sentry21 · · Score: 1

    Most M-rated games aren't really rated M for anything that bad. So you shoot a guy, whoopie-doo. You see that on the news every day. 99% of the time, the M-rated games aren't anything to worry about.

    When Grand Theft Auto: Vice City came out, however, the people at EB were asking everyone for ID - and if the parents WERE there, they would explain to the parent what the game is about - and most wouldn't buy it.

    Some parents did, however. I overheard one woman who bought it for her eight-year-old son. Her reasoning? 'He's going to play it anyway, he may as well play it at home where I can watch him.'

    --Dan

  16. Not all places by Jhonny · · Score: 1

    At our Local Wal-mart they have the same rules for M-Rated games as they do for R-rated movies. you have to be at least 17, I have seen kids try to buy them and they wont let them.

    --
    DUKEY!
    1. Re:Not all places by Zed2K · · Score: 1

      One more reason not to shop at walmart. I'm surprised they even sell R rated movies anymore.

    2. Re:Not all places by GrimSean · · Score: 1
      You know, usually I'm the first to start Wal-Mart bashing, but in this case I think they're on the right track. Why exactly do you think it's a bad thing to not sell M rated games to little kids? Would you prefer a store where children can by hardcore porn over somewhere where they check ID?

      I don't care for censorship, but I do believe in age-related restrictions.

      --
      I don't need to be made to look evil. I can do that on my own. - Christopher Walken
    3. Re:Not all places by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      Of course, we all know how good Wal-Mart is about actually doing these things
      Wal-Mart stops selling guns in California after nearly 500 violations of CA firearms laws

      I actually like Wal-Mart's system with games and movies even if it's only because they actually carry the stuff. I'm always a little leary about buying movies, music, and games at Wal-Mart after the early-to-mid-90s, when half of what you'd buy there would be censored and wouldn't have much of a label to let you know it. At least if they're checking IDs they're less likely to censor the content.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    4. Re:Not all places by Zed2K · · Score: 1

      I think stores should be able to sell what they want to who ever wants to buy it (as long as the product is legal). Why should the store be responsible for what the purchaser does with the product? They are just the middleman. I decide to give them money, they give me a product. It ends there.

      Its just one more example of parents not willing to be parents and wanting the gov't and industry to babysit their kids for them.

  17. parents by 1eyedhive · · Score: 1

    my parents kept the violent games from me until i was 10 (didn't have a console til then, even then it was a 2nd hand genesis), first 'violent' game = DOOM, i had played it many times before, am i a violent person... HELL NO! parenting really counts before age 10, it is the parent's responsibility, but frankly some of these M rated games are rated M for no reason. Duke Nukem: manhattan Project, rated M, WTF? i played the original at age 10, no problems there... oy. bought diablo II a few weeks ago M rated, for a pal who's 17 (i r 18, tho i look a hellova lot older), didn't get carded (said amigo was with me and even handed me the game and $$$ in front of said clueless walmart clerk (walmart = nototiously stingy on cardings) the ESRB ratings are bunk, IMO, they do NOT replace parental judgement.

    --
    Logistical Chaos Officer http://www.slagg.org - LAN Gaming in Sarasota FL,USA
    1. Re:parents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are 18, but you post like you are 12. Learn at least a hint of capitalization, spelling, and grammar. Then we'll listen to what you have to say.

  18. Let the parents decide. by Reapy · · Score: 1

    I think it should be up to the parents to decide what games are appropriate for their children, not a rating system. I grew up playing all sorts of games from an early age because my dad got all sorts of them. The only games he didn't let me play were the liesure suit larry ones (but I did get to play them when they came out in vga! :) ).

    Other then that, I played all sorts of violent games. Anyone remember manhunter, those awesome sierra adventure game? Those were bloody violent, let me tell you. I played doom, wolfstien, all those fps games. I played those incredibly violent flight sims where I'd send tons of ammuntion on ground targets and shoot down multitudes of human flown planes. I played the violent perfect general against my father, where we'd bombard towns with artillery and destroy tanks and transports full of infantry. Anyone play phantasmagoria?

    Ahh, about every game I can think of thats out there is violent. I don't see why GTA is worse then any others, as everyone likes to bring up. I guess everyone has trouble accepting it because its set in present times, and not a distant fantsy world?

    Well anyway, the point is, I grew up on violent video games, and my dad knew just what he was giving me to play, and in fact played a lot of them with me, or I would sit there watching him play. We grew up fine, in fact, that is probably the only thing I am comfortable talking to my father about, the violent video games we played and still do play.

    They brought my family closer together. Why don't the stores leave well enough alone, and let their parents restrict what their kids are playing. Violence in video games is not a bad thing at all, not by a long shot.

    1. Re:Let the parents decide. by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      GTA has hookers in it. Which automatically makes it fifty times worse than shooting people in the face.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    2. Re:Let the parents decide. by damiam · · Score: 1

      I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but in case you're not, I'd just like to point out that I played all the way through GTA3 and Vice City several times without ever realizing that you can pick up a hooker. It's really not an important part of the game.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    3. Re:Let the parents decide. by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      I was hopefully being sarcastic.

      But, seriously, that's all I hear about, the fact you can pick up hookers and kill them. Like that's somehow worse than running over a work crew or gunning down random passerbys.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  19. My take by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know what? Who cares? It's not against the law (yet; Lieberman can suck eggs) to sell ANY video game to a minor. They aren't cigarettes or firearms or booze. All this nonsensical "we sent a 15 year old to buy Quake and look! They sold it to him!" bullshit is completely irrelevant. The ESRB ratings are NOT legally enforced, so any retailer "caught" selling games to minors IS NOT DOING ANYTHING WRONG.

    I worked in that insane asylum known as retail for five years, and it always amazed me that a 16 year old was disallowed from purchasing a survival horror game like Resident Evil because of the content. I can understand double-checking with Mom and Dad before selling Postal 2 to an eight year old, but we were even told not to sell T-rated games (mild profanity, blood, mild violence; think Tony Hawk Pro Skater or Tekken) to 10 year olds. They told us the company would be fined and we would be fired if we were caught doing so, for an act that is NOT AGAINST THE LAW.

    1. Re:My take by Beeswarm · · Score: 1
      I thought the idea behind the ESRB ratings is so that the parents could make the decisions about what was too violent and sexy for their children. Why do the politicians try to put the responsibility on the the people who make and sell games?

      My parents would have been against the really violent games if they had been around when I was a child. I was about fifteen when Mortal Kombat came out, and I never played the Arcades much anyway. By the time the violent games reached the consoles, I was old enough to decide for myself, but I can imagine what it would have been like if my thirteen year old self could have brought home a copy of Grand Theft Auto 3. I would have my Playstation taken away for two weeks, my parents would confiscate the game, sold it, and kept the money.

      Why are so many parents so spineless that they expect the government to raise their kids for them? No wonder the new generation are just a bunch of spoiled rotten brats.

    2. Re:My take by Spleener12 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. These are company policies, not federal or state laws, at the moment. These companies are simply bending to the will of the whiny parents who are blaming all of society's ills on violent media.

  20. Work for what you want by UltimaL337Star · · Score: 0

    Newspapers are everywhere, and radios are too and news and talk shows are on 24/7. And what do they news flash all day? Stealin, Murder, Rape. We don't have a rating system for these REAL LIFE things because in real life you can't base your parenting skills on a freakin black letter, just see for youself or press the damn power button.

    1. Re:Work for what you want by Spleener12 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I remember hearing somewhere that kids surveyed said that they were affected more by the news reports of real-life violence (ie the war in Iraq, 9-11) than they were by fictional violenct. Why? BECAUSE MOST KIDS AREN'T DUMBASSES. THEY KNOW THAT THE VIOLENCE IN MOVIES AND VIDEO GAMES ISN'T REAL.

  21. Ratings are *how* parents control access by Colazar · · Score: 1
    I don't understand most of the comments here. How is it that parental control and involvement are good, and the Rating System is bad? Without the rating system, how is a non-gaming parent supposed to know why a game might be inappropriate?

    I expect movie theatres to enforce their posted age restrictions, and stores to enforce their posted age restrictions. If I think that they are being overly strict, then hell, I'll buy my son the ticket, or the game, or the book, or whatever. But then it's my decision.

    And yes, of course a smart or resourceful kid will get around the restriction. (I know I did.) What does that have to do with anything? If I find out about it, I'll punish him. (As much for going around me as anything else.)

    BTW, I think that a good, functional rating system is the only way that we get to have the full spectrum of games available to everyone. Stop enforcing that "M" is for adults only, and then you've just given the restrictive right more ammunition to just ban such things outright "for the good of the children".

    --
    He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
    1. Re:Ratings are *how* parents control access by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      The rating system is bad because it is not being enforced. Parents asked for a rating system, but do not take advantage of it. If I (the parent) buy my kid T&A raider for my 7 year old, knowing full well that it is M, and I listen to my kid over the store clerk, then what is the point of having a rating sytem? Also, in some cases, a game's rating is much higher than it should be.

      At the same time, parents still complain about kids getting violent games, and video games being too violent. Well, the times have changed, it is no longer 1980, and video games are no longer just for kids. We have a broad spectrum of video games for a broad spectrum of people. Just like some people like Barney, and others like Jenna Jameson.

      So, what's the point of a rating system, if people still complain about kids getting the wrong games, and talking about the negative effects of video game violence. It is the parents responsibility first and foremost to guide their children, not the store clerks. While they should obviously stop younger kids from getting the more violent games, I know that a 15 year old is intelligent enough to dissern between mortal kombat violence and real violence. Finally, for those of you who think that parents can't watch their kids 24/7...just remember, they have to sleep sometime.

    2. Re:Ratings are *how* parents control access by Spleener12 · · Score: 1
      BTW, I think that a good, functional rating system is the only way that we get to have the full spectrum of games available to everyone.

      Exactly. I recall that before the movie ratings system was introduced, there were horribly strict regulations on what a movie could have, content-wise. Among other things, husbands and wives were not allowed to sleep in the same bed. It's implied that members of the opposite gender who weren't married couldn't either. Then the ratings system was introduced, and people could put things that weren't okay for a five-year old to see in their movies because everyone was warned beforehand.

      Videogames did the same thing, pre-ESRB. Nintendo was incredibly strict as to what was acceptable content in their games (they still are, to a lesser extent.) Sega did their own ratings system, so they allowed a lot more through. Then Mortal Kombat happened, which caused the ESRB, and now we have the situation we have now, with Lieberman bitching all the way. Reguardless of how asinine it might be sometimes, the ratings system is still a necessary (and helpful) thing.

    3. Re:Ratings are *how* parents control access by spitzig · · Score: 1

      I think the rating system is bad because it's too simplistic. I don't know the specifics, but it's obviously something like X amount of sex/violence=>M-Rating. So, (some) parents just let others decide what is an appropriate amount for their kids.

      I've seen nothing saying that video games are causally related to long term aggression or violence. Or, the "objectification of women"(for the rare sex stuff). Not that I think it's neccessarily bad to be treated as a sex object. I wouldn't mind it occasionally.

      I think parental involvement and control are fine, but I don't think requiring a clerk to control what someone sees is good.

  22. "Children" and violence by Cinncinattus · · Score: 1

    Not to go against the "pop" pychology vein here, but has it occured to anyone that if you cannot tell fantasy from reality your probably already crazy!! I mean call me strange, no really do, but does it seem a little weird to anyone else that; Person A shoots Person B, so instead of punishing Person A, as the law and commonsense call for, we look for any and all means to alleviate their guilt. Actions, not motivations matter. Did A actually shoot B? Yes? Then bring on the lethal injection! Or life imprisonment, depends on how you feel I guess...