Slashdot Mirror
New E3-Shown Games Push Sexual Envelope
Thanks to CNN Money for its article discussing the seamier side of E3's videogame selection, as it notes: "It's one thing to see Lara Croft's hot-shorts clad posterior while you play 'Tomb Raider.' It's another thing entirely to see the sagging, slightly lumpy and entirely unclothed buttocks of Larry Lovage streak across your screen." The article also discusses Singles, the Eidos U.S.-published title "best described as a naughty version of 'The Sims.'...[which] doesn't shy away from male or female full frontal nudity", noting that "the ESRB slapped 'Singles' with an AO rating", which is "essentially, an NC-17 or worse... Most retailers will not sell a game with that rating." Tom Marx of Eidos expresses his distress with this rating, arguing for an M rating instead, and noting as part of his argument: "I don't really think someone is going to get the same feeling of attraction in seeing a full frontal digital game character as they would from seeing that in an actor or actress."
The silly thing is that nobody other than the Americans gives a fuck. In England, "The Singles" is sitting on the shelves of all the game shops, record stores and supermarkets, and nobody bats an eyelid.
From what I understand, Larry Lovage is Larry Laffer's nephew, thus the different last name.
Who the hell is Larry Lovage? C'mon, folks, it's Larry Laffer.
Actually, what's interesting is that both Singles, Playboy Mansion, and the new Leisure Suit Larry sequel _ARE_ getting press coverage from major online sites. The new Larry was even in the "top 10" list of games IGN wanted to see at E3 (posted sometime last week, and which begins today). I've seen coverage of both on Gamespy and Gamespot, and I usually just browse through the front page to see what's new without actually looking in-depth.
The rating systems in the USA are embarassingly broken, and I think need to be re-evaluated.
Movies:
Violence - takes a lot to affect rating, a tiny amount can occur in G rated movies. PG if not gory, PG-13 if tiny amount of gore or lots of violence (e.g. Red Dawn), R if really gory. NC-17 is practically impossible without also having sex (take Passion of Christ, for instance)
Nudity - automatic PG-13, but takes a lot for more than R.
Sex (faked) - R unless excessive, then NC-17
Sex (real/graphical) - NC-17/AO
Drug Paraphenalia - automatic PG-13
Drug Use - PG-13 if brief or implied, usually R.
Games:
Violence - Teen start, can get very gory at M
Nudity - automatic M, AO if not brief.
Sex (faked) - adult situations (romance plots)=Teen, implied sex seems to pretty much get an M, more than brief=AO.
Sex (graphical) - AO
Drug Paraphenalia - nothing, as far as I can tell - at worst it would be Teen.
Drug Use - Teen if effects not shown, M if shown (Gothic is the only example I know of).
Basically, the ratings are fairly close except when it comes to nudity/sex, most likely because of the ESRB's horribly-proven-as-wrong preconception that gamers are all kids. I guess there's still the fear that kids might stumble across the game while playing on their parent's computer or something, but the parent should be responsible enough to either hide the CD or put a password on a user. I mean, seriously - parents could just as easily leave the gun cabinet unlocked or pornography out on the coffee table for their kids to view.
but correct me if I'm wrong
OK, you're wrong. It's more than a makeup mag. Pick up a copy sometime, and learn how to blow your boyfriend's mind with a toungue properly applied to the penis.
You think I'm flaming, but that's the type of article they have. Remember, women aren't visual, so their porn looks like the Bible - printed words on the page. Take a close look at the words...