Innocuous California Game Ratings Bill Passed

Thanks to GamePro for its article noting that a newly revised bill "that requires video game retailers to clearly display signs of the game ratings has been passed by the state senate in California." The bill, "now waiting to be signed by Governor Schwarzenegger", was originally paired with a more controversial bill which "called to define 'atrocious or cruel' video games as 'harmful matter to children'", but that pairing failed to advance, despite support from bill sponsor Leland Yee, leading to a straightforward "requirement to have game ratings clearly displayed, and also have information about the ratings system readily available to parents purchasing games."

Comments

Good news...

[dmayle]

I think we can definitely see this as good news. Anything that increases the amount of information to the end user is a good thing, as it allows for informed purchasing decisions, and anything that prevents consumers from getting what they want can generally be considered a bad thing.

This seems to give something to both camps. The educationally conservative will be able to avoid what they consider sensitive material, and the rest of us will be able to buy the next Grand Theft Auto game...

Re:Good news...

[black mariah]

Exactly. I welcome ANYTHING that will keep idiots off the ass of gamers. I like my GTA as much as the next guy, and I don't want some dipshit buying their 7 year old the game and then getting pissed because there are hookers and drugs. Stores should have been prominently displaying rating information for a long time. I generally don't like laws such as this, but it makes it so much better for those of us with at least half a brain to continue about our carnage without morons butting in.

Re:Good news...

[FlimFlamboyant]

On the surface, I suppose it seems harmless. I have no problem with game ratings, though I am leary of the government mandating such things. I am especially leary of the bill they tried to attach to it, which is a common tactic; pair a radical bill with a "reasonable" one that will make the governor/president look bad if he vetos it. Every "reasonable" step that the goverment takes under the guise of "protecting" our children advances their ultimate goal, which is to basically raise our children for us.

At this rate, it's only a matter of time before playing Doom 3 in front of your kids will be considered child abuse, and you'll have the DCFS busting down your door to take them away (I'm not advocating playing Doom 3 in front of your 6-yr-old, by the way).

Just remember, these bills may seem harmless right now by themselves, but eventually, they'll really start to add up.

Re:Sign, sign, everywhere a sign.

[ConceptJunkie]

Good luck is all I can say. You couldn't pay me to live in that kooky state. I heard the northern part is OK, but you're still subject to the nanny-state tyrrany. California seems to want to legislate things that can only work through the free market (like alternative fuel quotas), and they fail time and again. I could not deal with that smothering benevolence. Of course, it could be worse. At least California didn't put a poet in charge of Homeland Security like NJ.

Still, this particular piece of legislation seems like a good idea because it increases information without reducing access. I avoid these kinds of games myself. Mostly I have no interest in violent games, but I have to support other people who want to purchase them (reluctantly because I think some of these games are morally harmful, but it's a free country).

But it's not only about the kids. It's important for everyone to be informed.

Re:Ratings

[bodgit]

This is thing with these ratings ideas, you can slap warnings and ratings over games as much as you want, but it still doesn't stop shops like GAME selling them to kids, (and lets face it, the majority of places like this are staffed by kids that probably aren't old enough themselves to buy it either, let alone sell it).

But more importantly, it doesn't stop parents buying these 'unsuitable' games for their kids, I myself have also been in GAME, and witnessed parents buying games like Vice City, etc. for kids who are barely teenagers, just because the kids are tugging at their parents' arms screaming "I want! I want!", and the parents are just giving in to get a quiet time. I've never seen a parent examine the box, nor have I ever seen a sales representative inquire if the game is actually for the children and that it might not be suitable.

Re:Sign, sign, everywhere a sign.

[harrkev]

You can have California. I lived there for three months a few years ago. Yuck!

Informing the consumer is a good thing, but when EVERY SINGLE STORE IN EXISTENCE there has signs up warning about carcinogens, it looses its effetiveness. "Gee, we just purchased a bottle of typing correction fluid for the secretary. Now we need to add a carcinogen warning to our front door."

That law now requires every business to cry wolf, which means that you are more likely to ignore real threats.

BTW: Where I worked, alkaline AA batteries were considered hazardous waste, and could not be thrown in the trash can. I had to take them home to throw them away!

Re:It's a different world from where you come from

[tsm_sf]

As a smoking californian bar-goer(and I vote!), I have to say that pretty much everyone here recognizes that the ban on indoor smoking turned out to be a Good Thing. You smoke less, you don't smell like shit, you meet cute girls when you go outside. A welcome side effect has been the surge of open-air sections in bars.