How the ESRB Rates Games

Ant writes "Joystiq mentioned a short Slate story on how the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) reviews and rates games. (Seen on Blue's News.)"

Comments

Too Busty receiving a higher rating?

[Zoidbergo]

Since when are bigger breasts considered to be offensive? Kids aren't supposed to know that some women have larger breasts than others? Are we really corrupting a kid's mind when he sees a sexy woman (not naked, not scantily clothed, just busty) in a game?

Re:Too Busty receiving a higher rating?

[vjmurphy]

"Except that most busty women in computer games are unnaturally busty, to the point of defying the laws of physics."

Is that before or after the character they are playing has jumped twenty feet in the air, spun around five times, pulled out a glowing sword of pure energy and impaled twelve robots in 3.2 seconds?

Defying physics is what games are all about.

Re:How the ESRB Rates Games

[krgallagher]

" Not based on content added/unlocked by modders of course!"

You know I do not understand how a game in which you intentionally break the law and murder people is rated "M", but as soon as you add siulated sex between consenting adults it is rated "A". Not to mention that from the clips I've seen it is poory simulated sex at that.

Re:short guide

[tomstdenis]

No violence, swearing: For all
Violence, no blood, no swearing: 12
Violence with blood & swearing: 15
Drive a car and possibly kill people: 16
Piss away your life in the military: 17 (with parents permission)
Extreme violence with blood & swearing: 18
Age you can drink at: 21
Boobies: OH MY GOD 25 AT LEAST WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN??????


Am I the only one who thinks it's odd we let them drive at 16 but they're not mature enough to see breasts yet?

Re:How the ESRB Rates Games

[pete6677]

It's the way the American system of moral values works, as explained in the South Park movie: there's nothing wrong with gratuitous violence just as long as there's no sex.

Typical Slashdot reaction. You should know better.

[WidescreenFreak]

Typical. You mention factual statements and you get nailed as flamebait because it goes against the liberal /. groupthink. You should know better than to insult two prominent libs here.

For those mods who clearly don't have a f*cking clue, Hillary (clearly not a conservative) is actively pursuing the current GTA3 situation and Tipper was one of the main activists who was responsible for the Senate hearings regarding language/violence/drugs in music several years back. I also need to remind the mods that the initial politician who raised a stink in order to impress his constituents is a democrat from California. So - karma be damned - will the GP and the idiot mod who nailed the parent with -1 Flamebait kindly get your heads out of your asses and tell me once again where conservatives are causing the problem with the GTA3 issue?

Whereas the republican side of the isle is known for their own bits of censorship, particularly where issues of morality come into play, the current GTA3 rigamarole has not been started and is not currently a molehill being made into a mountain by republicans or conservatives.

Now, if that moron John Ashcroft was still in office, then you liberal, knee-jerk reactionaries might have cause to bitch about conservatives. Ashcroft would have been on top of the sex issue like ... well, perhaps "on top of", "sex", and "Ashcroft" is not the best one-sentence combination to use, considering that he couldn't deal with a nude breast on a freakin' statue.