Slashdot Mirror
Photo ID Required To Buy/Rent Games In Canada
securitas writes "Metro International newspapers Toronto edition reports that Canadian gamers must now provide photo identification to buy computer and video games. The restriction is part of the Retail Council of Canada's Commitment to Parents initiative, in cooperation with the Entertainment Software Association of Canada (ESAC) and the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB). The RCC says that it has the support of 90% of game retailers in the voluntary program. Read the RCC video game photo ID press release. There don't seem to be any guidelines for how the program will be implemented - whether it will be a simple flash of a photo ID card (which many teenagers don't have) or a more detailed user database, with its inherent privacy concerns. The Ontario government plans to come up with its own game ratings system after the Ontario Film Review Board gave Manhunt an 'R' rating. More coverage at the CBC and CTV before and after the official announcement."
I suppose this is good for people who have lost control of their kids (I'm not parent-bashing, there are ways to lose control that have little to do with parenting). Do parents really want this? I don't care much either way because my kids aren't allowed to buy video games without my permission. They still end up with a lot of the popular titles ,though ,like Halo, SIMS 2, etc. This has been more of a problem for me at the video store where there are some R and NC17 movies that I simply will not allow them to rent. I know kids end up seeing this stuff away from home at times, but I am not going to give them the message that I think it's okay. Same with video games, they know how I feel about sex & violence in video games, but they still get some of those. It's a hell of a balancing act.
http://www.busyweather.com/
This is worthless. There's no way you can just stop kids from buying games they want to play. Some obvious workarounds are ordering online and having a friend or relative buy the game.
...because now politicians and parents won't be able to pin the blame on video games the next time some brat does something stupid.
I really don't have an issue with age verification. Movie theaters require that, heck Blockbuster even cards occasionally. Now, if the purchaser's name and information are recorded, well...that is another story.
I didn't RTFA but I have experienced this showing of ID. My brother tried to purchase Thief (a mature game as I recall) and Radio Shack made him get someone with ID (he's 16) and so, his big brother Jess just happened to have his ID (my health card which also allowed me to vote just a few days earlier) and we bought the game.
They are simply enforcing an existing law.. why not?
Metro International newspapers Toronto edition reports that Canadian gamers must now provide photo identification to buy computer and video games.
More stupid regulation that can't be controlled or monitored. More excuses to steal from taxpayers. Bah -- it's uninforcable.
Oh wait...
FTA: "It's a voluntary program based on the ratings you already see on the game boxes."
Nevermind.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
As the article states, you already need photo ID for proof-of-age before buying cigerettes and booze...
:)
In terms of privacy I can't see this requirement for video games being any more intrusive than that.
Generally, people who have a problem with this also disagrees with video game ratings in general. I think that's the real problem we'll encounter in this discussion
The blurb didn't make this clear, but the article says that only games that are age-restricted will require ID. So kids without ID can still get sports games and games that are deemed OK for kids. I was worried there for a second... way to discriminate against a good chunk of your audience.
The RCC says that it has the support of 90% of game retailers in the voluntary program
Does this mean 10% WILL NOT ID? Well, if this is on a voluntary basis, then you (hopefullY) have those 10%. And those that won't ID will be rewarded by your business. That simple.
Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
I think this is mostly a bad idea. Seriously, if a kid can earn the money (at a job, not from allowance) for a game or movie, I figure they're mature enough to handle it. Restricting the rights of the mature to cater to the unwashed masses... Gotta love it. Of course, that would mean more work for parents, being... parents...
I think, as you said, a parent should be vigilant about what their child does, while realizing there's no way in hell you're gonna stop them. It builds values yet doesn't impose a overly restrictive leash. Of course, do what you will, but keeping kids in a little black box until they're 18 is a great way to not only piss them off, but keep them socially inept for a good long time.
Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
...here in Oregon. And I am 35 (though I look young)! Having played the game through (loved it), I have a hard time seeing what the problem is to demand age verification before selling this M rated game to folks - it is truly an adults-only game IMO.
Really, games aren't 'Pong' anymore.
/shouts for kids to get off his damn lawn.
If you're going to have cinema-realism in games, you're going to have to deal with the same cinema rating system.
Better that than to have the graphics dulled and content Barney-fied into safety.
There is really no difference between this, and a Blockbuster video account.
At the local Blockbuster, you have to show your membership card to rent a movie/game. If you're the primary card holder, they HAVE your ID on file, if you're not (e.g. it's your mom's), and you look like a minor, they'll ask you for ID before you can rent an R-Rated movie (happens this way at all the Blockbusters I've been to in Ontario, anyhow).
This initiative, which, IMO, is a good idea, just extends this principle to purchasing the games as well as renting them. It gives some power to the rating systems -- which most parents don't know exist. Now, parents will at least think that "oh, little Johnny needs an ID to buy this? Wonder why... oh, it's rated M, hmmmmmm." Mind you, just like movies, parents can choose to ignore the rating and buy the game for their kids anyhow.
Seems fair, power still lies with the parents to make the final call.
But Maaa! Everyone else has a
Why should one form of entertainment be different from another? If a state is going to place age restrictions on movies, they should do the same for games, music, concerts, theatres, sporting events....
I mean if something is too violent or sexual it is too violent or sexual, no matter the medium.
Not that I agree with that. Government has no place being a critic.
because it would look sort of silly asking a 30 year old to show you an ID to obtain a game. Shouldn't they do it like they way they do cigar purchases? if the selling thinks you're too young he asks for an id.
hit me with a clue bat if they already mentioned it in the article. I'm just following the long established slashdot tradition of mouthing off without reading first.
did you forget to take your meds?
When they are young, children will take up alot of ideals from their parents, who should always be there letting them know whats right. But by the time they are teens and have to deal with peer pressure in ernest, if the parents have done their job then they won't get out of hand and if they haven't done their job then its a bit too late to do anything about it, especially in that rebelious time.
This is just more of parents being lazy and letting someone else do the work for them.
--
Registered .sig quotient : 1337
>> Seriously, if a kid can earn the money (at a
>> job, not from allowance) for a game or movie,
>> I figure they're mature enough to handle it.
But is it up to you to decide that for my children? For someone elses children? If you decide it's appropriate for your kids, then go buy it for them/with them.
"Damn, I'm underage. I can't buy it at the store any longer, so where can I get it from? Of course, on a P2P network, and for free! And just think, I would have wasted all that money giving it to the game developers..."
Whatever happened to letting the parents decide how to raise their kids ??
A million monkeys and this is the best sig they could come up with...
This is a good thing--as long as it is limited to games which are rated mature. I'm tired of hearing about how kids are influenced by games to injure others. Of course, the parents should not buy/rent games like Manhunt for their children to play, but if a kid really wants to play the game, he/she can easily go to a friend's house who was able to get it and play it there. But, at least we're making it harder for them to do so.
Anyways, one of the first things a kid should know is the difference between right and wrong!!
I was at EB last weekend here in Calgary. Some kids were ahead of me pre-ordering a game who's title I can't recall. But as the reciept was being printed up, the cashier said "When you come to pick the game up, make sure you bring the reciept and some ID, or bring an adult with you".
I didn't really think about it until reading this story now. Can't say I remember ever hearing that before when in a store like EB.
whether it will be a simple flash of a photo ID card (which many teenagers don't have)
Can't say for the rest of the world, but in Canada most teenagers have either a school ID, a yearly bus card with photo (at least for the Montreal area) or a medicare card (sun card for Quebec).
Also, as mentionned in other comments, this should be considered a good thing since kids won't be able to buy games they shouldn't be playing. Sure it won't be easily enforceable but isn't it the same thing for other age restricted goods (cigarettes, alcohol and adult magazines)?
Finally, I really don't get the paranoïa about retailers building databases of customers. I don't see why they would use this as a way to get your customer info. Aside from the needs of a system (hardware and software) to collect this information, this would be limited to customers between the ages of 14 and 24 (considering not many people over the age of 24 look underage).
I think most people in the industry will see this as a step in the right direction. At the risk of sounding like a troll (which is NOT my intention), I'd say it's better then restricting the sales to an entire population. At least adults can make a choice to buy a product and even let their kids play if they judge the game appropriate.
If a teenager wants picture ID he can request a provincial ID card. In BC where I live this looks similair to the BC licences, which can be obatined even EASIER once you turn 16. As such, anyone without ID most likely is not 16. Thus must have a parent to buy with them. I was this age not so long ago and I agree with a system such as this.
To keep things in perspective, kids die of hunger all over the world and don't even know what video games are. Therefore, one should feel compelled to suck it up and carry around a piece of plastic in his wallet.
It's the same situation with MPAA ratings -- not legally imposed, but if they weren't there, the government would legally impose them.
Basically, "We must self-regulate, lest the government force regulation upon us."
"But is it up to you to decide that for my children?"
You might as well ask whether it's up to the store to decide that for my children, for your children and for everybody else's children. How do you reconcile the fact that these kids are allowed to roam around the mall unsupervised with the notion that they're not old enough to choose for themselves what games they want to play? Indeed, is it the stores responsibility not to sell a game to a kid whose parents didn't care enough to accompany them?
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
I'm sure that many of you out there share this experience, when I was a freshman at college the biggest whores were the chicks who were kept on a short leash when they were young.
Parents who are too domineering will create children who cut loose as soon as they are out of their parents' sight.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
As the article states, you already need photo ID for proof-of-age before buying cigerettes and booze...
we all know how effective this is
"goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
It's "required" yet it's a "voluntary program." What am I missing here?
A couple of books by Dave Grossman contributed heavily to my opinion. I'd suggest reading Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill and On Killing as excellent works on the cost of violence to society.
Disallowing R-rated content to those that can prove they are of an age where they can likely handle it is fine by me. Don't ban the stuff. But the effect these violence simulators can have on a developing mind can be enormous. So taking steps to keep it out of their hands is a step in the right direction. Change will not happen overnight, but we need to do what we can.
--sugarman--
...such as the bible.
it's full of incredibly violent, gory stories and pornography. many people have committed heinous crimes, driven by what they read in the bible.
i say we start there.
But is it up to you to decide that for my children? For someone elses children?
Why not? At what point do we finally realize that just because two people know how to fuck without protection that they have any idea how to raise a child? It's the parents who have been whining for years that violence and sex causes people to go insane and kill and rape...this is a fair solution. Parents, like everyone else, seem to want it both ways...police our children and protect them from all that is dark in the world, but don't tell us how to raise them!
Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
http://www.workorspoon.com
Having just got to University here in the UK I can agree with this. Essentially, half the kids here have never had a chance to do what they want before -- the amount of drinking is insane, coupled with sex etc etc. having had a relatively balanced time before now, the change hasnt really made a difference and I know what im doing with money, food, washing etc. (i've made all the mistakes before when it didnt matter so much -- particuarly with money). Half the people here are gonna have a real kick when the first of the big bills start coming (accomodation, tuition etc) not having got to the point of parenting yet (thank god) it seems like a hell of a balancing act, jsut remember you cant shield them from school just try to make sure you let them have the necessary freedom/knowledge before it comes from less trustworthy sources at school
But the stores aren't deciding whether it's good for your children. They're ensuring that YOU have to.
They are deciding not to sell the game to your children on the assumption that the parents don't approve of it. In other words, they are acting on behalf of the parents on the assumption that the parents do not approve of it. That why I ask whether it's up to them to make that decision (or, like 10% of the stores, make the opposite decision). If the parents won't do anything about it, then why should the stores?
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
You must be American.. anyway, living in Canada I don't really understand where you are getting the evidence to support what you are saying. If anything us Canadians have more civil liberties then our neighbors to the south.. I personally don't feel the RCMP breathing down my neck.. then again we don't have a department of homeland secScarity...
The Good Life
This should keep those kids from buying their violent video games!
Hell, I'm 23 and -I- don't even have a picture ID. And what is this going to solve, anyway? You think some kid who wants to buy the new GTA is going to go "Aww shucks! I can't buy violent video games anymore! I guess I'll go play stickball with my friends..."? Right. <sarcasm>Because we all know his parents didn't buy him a DVD burner last xmas...and there's no way he has usenet access.....</sarcasm>
What kid is going to be all broken up about not being able to spend money on something they're now forced to get for free?
I nominate this idiotic initiative as the scapegoat, for when all the game companies come looking for the money lost to the steep increase in piracy.
People would rather force kids to STEAL video games, than to trust that they know right from wrong on their own? Granted, some don't. Some adults don't either. Crazy is crazy, and stupid is stupid, no matter what age you are.
</rant>
(Oh yeah, and this is assuming the kids don't just order the game online...)
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
Renting a game costs, what, $5? I don't think many 13 year olds would have trouble rustling up this much cash.
They should be glad over in Canada. Australia outright banned Manhunt (and even the new Leisure Suit Larry remake!), so even adults don't get to see it.
I don't even see why such an intuitive system is considered "news", let alone "stuff that matters."
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
"Seriously, if a kid can earn the money (at a job, not from allowance) for a game or movie, I figure they're mature enough to handle it."
change game or movie to alcohol and cigarettes and you have a very different statement. if canada wants to do this, there will always be ways for the kids to get the games anyways (same with alcohol and cigarettes) so it doesnt really matter that much. also, as i heard this on the radio this morning, what they said then was that it was a VOLUNTARY thing. even the article says that only 90% of the retailers are participating.
most likely there will be small video game shops that will make alot of money off of this.
net change to society = 0
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
It's not the assumption that parents DO not approve of it, it's the assumption that parents MAY not approve of it so why take the chance?
First, this isn't exactly new. Not in Ontario.
I personally believe that it is better to expose kids to the world and teach them why things is wrong. Shielding someone from something only creates ignorance.
This is the way I was raised, I was able to watch what I wanted and play what I wanted. My mother made sure however, that I knew the difference between video and real life. She's also extremely non violent (she personally can not stand violent movies), she has passed on these views to me. As a result, I play a range of violent games, and watch violent movies yet I am a non violent person.
I believe shielding from reality to be a conservative view (as opposed to the liberal value of teaching). Walking into a religious or conservative home, often I find that the children are not allowed to watch R movies or violent games. From experience, I find that conservatives would rather stop someone from doing something through ignorance rather than to show them and show them why they shouldn't.
I think the game rating should be used as a parental tool, but should not be enforced. But i also think that parents should always be teaching showing their children right from wrong. Its when this doesn't happen, the parents aren't there to guide them enough, that the enforced ratings become necessary.
The government should not have to be parents to our children, however the lack of parenting in society is forcing it to.
None of what i have said is universally true. These are my findings. Dont get mad because your a good parent and your son is a psycho. There are exceptions to everything.
Some parents may not approve of their kids eating junk food, drinking pop and reading Harry Potter novels. should we restrict this stuff also. I say no. If the parents don't want there kids eating junk food and drinking pop or reading Harry Potter novels then they can take them away from their child. Same thing should apply with violent video games.
If that is the case then why don't we just remove the age requirements for buying alcohol and cigarettes, driving, voting, and gambling? Surely if a kid is old enough to earn enough for a fifth then it is their right to purchase it. Age requirements are put on stuff like this because kids need to grow up some before they can do some things. I know there is no way I would let a kid of mine play GTA before they were at least 16. So the stores may as well err on the side of caution.
"If that is the case then why don't we just remove the age requirements for buying alcohol and cigarettes, driving, voting, and gambling?"
How about the fact that violent video games are nothing at all like alcohol (which gets you drunk), cigarettes (which cause cancer), driving (which can have people killed), voting (where kids become tools for their parents political preferences) or gambling (which can make people poor)? I could make the same ridiculous comparison about anything else that is ever sold to kids, since there are always parents that do not approve of something their kids have access to.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
It's almost the same F'in thing. only two differences:
Now the parents can be involed
Now the parents can't blame the store. (some a'holes were doing that.)
The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
That's all it is, a "rule" made up by the motion picture industry. It is NOT a law! It has no legal authority behind it. It is basically discrimination against an entire segment of our society. A store may post a sign saying "We have the right to refuse service to anyone", but that means on an individual basis, not all members of a group of people. You can't say, "We refuse to sell to blacks", etc. That is illegal. So, why do we permit the wholesale discrimination against children in this damn country...or world for that matter? It is their money to spend as they see fit, especially if they worked for it, and paid TAXES for it...of course they still can't vote or anything. I get so sick of hearing all these damn minorities , and women (who make up 51% of the population and are therefore not a minority) bitching about how they have no rights, when in fact they have more rights than any child will ever have! Children are pretty much the only group in society that have basically no rights whatsoever! Of course, they can commit a crime and be charged as an adult because they are competent enough to know what they are doing. Oh, and by the way I am an adult myself, not some kid bitching about it. And I don't care if you mod me down on this either.
The parents can always confiscate the game should the kids disobey and buy a naughty game. Losing $50 sure would teach them to disobey their parents.
I do think there is a serious freedom issue because the rating system is seriously undemocratic. Personally, I would rate the South Park Movie PG-13 and most of the Disney cartoons as PG-13. What matters most to me is gratuitous violence, particularly when done by the protagonist (the good guy). Sex and naughtly language don't matter much unless it's violent (ie., rape). To get a G rating the movie/show would have to be like Seseme Street or Dragon Tales. Dragonball Z would get an R rating in my book.
I just don't trust a bunch of appointed people to come up with a fair rating, and I understand that my definition of fair is mutually exclusive with some other people's definition of fair.
Maybe this will give kids one more reason to pirate games. Unless the government wants pirate sites to ID kids.
This is an excellent way for you to tezch your children to do things on the sly, get them involved in software piracy (war3z d00d!) and get them breaking the law as well as disobeying you.
At the end of the day where are they going to play the games anyway? At home or at a friend's house. If the child is young enough you have control over that and if the child is old enough for goodness sake teach them to think for themselves and stop sending out the message that its okay for 25 year old to have the same level of maturity as 12 year olds a generation or two ago.
I do need to qualify this. I am not a parent at present, and do not know how good a parent I'll make if I ever become one.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
bwd234, i totally agree with you man and i'm a 22 yo adult. Freedom of speech applies to everybody redardless of their age or whether they are a an adult or a minor. I believe it is up to the parents and only the parents to decide what entertainment material is or isn't appropriate for their children Period.
After all, ever since 9/11 I have to show a photo ID to rent a movie at Blockbuster. Never really undetstood that myself. Do they think terrorists are out renting movies and not returning them?
And frankly, I was a pain in the ass to all the kids who wanted to rent the M rated games. When it came down to it, I read up on not only the BBV rules, but also the rules regarding R rated movies and so on and so forth. I would tell kids flat out that they could not rent Conkers Bad Fur Day, or some other M rated games. When they were barely high enough to see over the counter. The argument that a kid who is old enough to work is old enough to be able to buy/rent a video game/movie is bull. I used to love the parents that would send their kids in with a note saying that they could rent a game/movie. Even though the kid was 14 and the movie was plainly rated R, or an M rated game. I would still refuse the kids and then, when their parents came in to rant and rave? I would say to them very calmly and plainly. "Sir/Ma'am, you can not send your child to the beer store with a note to buy you beer, nor can you send one with a note to buy you smokes. As far as I'm concerned, both the law and store policy does not allow me to rent/sell this game to a minor. Should you wish to do so you are more than welcome, but I will /not/ loose my job or face possible criminal sanctions just so your child can watch a movie or game. Do you /know/ what's in these games? There is (death/dismemberment/language/furry p0rn/you name it) in this movie or game. So frankly, it is up to you."
It might have been petty? But it was all true. I could loose my job, I could face sanctions/fines for renting an r rated movie to a minor.
So, frankly? this is a good thing.
A /. analogy to this situation would be user access level. Should users have root access by default?
People criticize windows because by default users have root access so they can do anything they want at any time, even if it is stupid (ie. click "Yes" for your daily weather).
The preferred situation is limiting access by default, and somebody responsible like sysadmin increases the users rights. The stores are limiting by default the rights, but it is very little inconvenience for the parents to approve of the child getting access. The parent can go with the child to purchase or purchase the item themselves.
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
Isn't it funny how it's always the other people who are unable to stop themselves before anything actually happens? It's always about those other more weak-minded individuals, but never really about ourselves.
All your story shows is that you're able to associate related stimuli. You see yourself in the driver's seet and you associate it with your experiences as a GTA player.
There are times when I've felt like driving a monster truck over the cars in front of me... surely those Monster Truck rallies should be made off-limits to impressionable children.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
a simple flash of a photo ID card (which many teenagers don't have)
... which is issued to you by the provincial governments at birth, and sports you picture and birthdate! need more official photo ID?
Anyway, these kids usually also have a school ID with picture and all, don't they ?
Strange.
Up here in the colder reaches of North America we have free health care provided by the state. To benefit from this you need your medicare card
or a more detailed user database, with its inherent privacy concerns
Why the database ? Asking for ID to buy/rent a game is no different from asking for ID to get movie tickets or beer. Do movie theatres and convenience shops maintain databases of what movies you see and what brand of beer you buy most often ?
Practical issues put aside, I don't see why this is a problem. Kids are, well, kids. As a society we have a right, and an obligation, to make some decisions about what is acceptable or not for the majority of them. If you want to make a different one for your kids as an individual, go ahead and do it ! go and buy/rent them the game.
I live in Halifax, our local EB ID's kids all the time. Now most games they just don't bother, however if a title comes along with a particularly high rating they ID.
Its not to trample your rights, or to parent the kids. Its simply a courtasy to the parents. I'm a very involved parent. I enjoy a close relationship with all my kids. I view these rating systems as a way of actually talking with them. (Imagine that) If they want to go to a R rated movie, or get a game like Soldier of Fortune we usually get it. I tell him WHY the bloody thing is rated like that and WHY the folks at the store check for ID's.
Kids will get these games regardless of any rating system or parental involvement. The rating system is just another opportunity for parents to be involved with their kids.
I am Canadian. I will be affected by this law. And quite frankly, I dont see it being a problem.
You have to get your wallet out anyway to pay for the game. If they want to look at my ID when I buy the game, big deal.
I might give a crap if I were 17 or did not have ID handy. But I am not.
I see no problem with keeping mature themed games out of the hands of younger children. And the 17 year olds who want these games can cannot get them are resourceful. You not supposed to be able to get ciggarettes or booze at that age, yet they manage. I dont see games being a bigger problem.
END COMMUNICATION