Slashdot Mirror
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.)"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
...If the game industry did the honourable thing and gave a fair share of their profits to the hard-working, democratically elected politicians. In fact, not only would this not be a problem, but if they all did a quick whip-around, they could out-bribe Wal-Mart and get legislation in place to force those shelves to be full of AO-rated violent sex-fests. Heck, get EA Montreal to send down some of that primo mary jane they've been bogarting and Bam! - a new war is started in some piss-pot hellhole and EA has exclusive rights to all games based on the conflict.
Or, alternatively, someone could actually use their fucking mind in all of this and get a decent, well-enforced rating system in place so the vile opportunists that are advancing on this industry will get nothing out of their perverted actions.
This comment was formatted for readability, but I forgot the line break tags
In defense of the ESRB it should be pointed out that the violence and criminal activity in GTA is quite cartoonish and stylized, and given the overall feel of the game (the exaggerated car crashes, the tounge-in-cheek storylines, the the fact that the main character cannot die, hijacking firetrucks and earning money by putting out burning cars and pedestrians, skydiving out of moving jetliners, etc), not meant to be taken seriously, and thus, cannot be seen as detrimental to sensitive minds.
Sex, on the other hand, even cartoonish, unrealistic sex, is, for whatever reason, still sex, and remains a hot-button (giggle) issue.
This is a general theme in human culture. Stylized violence has always been more mainstream than sex (check out old Samurai movies and TV shows - lots of violence, not much sex; Indian action movies - lots of gunfights and fistfights, no sex; cowboy movies, the Iliad, Norse sagas, violence yes, sex, hardly... the list goes on and on).
I'll allow the following snippet from The Simpsons to answer this question...
Marge answers the door early in the morning. It's Maude and Helen, recruiting Marge to protest with them against David.
Helen: You've got to lead our protest against this abomination! [shows newspaper article]
Marge: Mm, but that's Michelangelo's David. It's a masterpiece.
Helen: [gasp] It's filth! It graphically portrays parts of the human body, which, practical as they may be, are evil.
Marge: But I like that statue.
Helen: [gasp] I told you she was soft on full frontal nudity! Come on, girls...
-- Itchy and Scratchy and Marge
Go, and never darken my towels again! -- Rufus
Anyone know what the various Barbie video games have been rated?
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
I suddenly thought of that scene when reading this article.
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
Is there perhaps a (B) rating for Bukkake?
How about (IB) for "inadvertent bukkake"? -- that is, stuff that looks pornographic, but is innocent?
I just wish someone big (e.g. Rockstar Games) would go unrated on their next big hit, thereby making the ESRB superfluous. They'd have to decide to either be cowed or be irrelevant.
If a kid has access to a computer, he's got access to porn. ESRB ratings don't help one bit.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
Adults Only, the rating which GTA:SA would get if those sex scenes were let in, is only set at 18. The only problem is that if the game were to get an AO rating, Sony most likely wouldn't allow it to be pressed onto PS2 discs, although it is possible they would allow it for a high profile game such as GTA:SA. It just opens up the floodgates for pornographic content, something they have been trying to avoid.
Also, not all countries have 21 as the drinking age, that seems to be something silly that the US has as a consequence of both its puritan roots and prohibition. http://www.google.com/search?q=drinking+ages
And even in the US, I believe the age that is required to purchase pornography is 18, not 25. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Personally, I think children should be mature enough to see breasts when they're less than a month old. Its often their primary source of nutrition, after all. If they were mature enough to handle it then, why aren't they mature enough to handle it as a teenager? And honestly, everyone has breasts. Some are larger than others...
Then I realized it was just another mindless henai game. Blech. I guess I should have expected as much.
If only 18 games have been rated AO, that must mean that the vast majority of the hentai games made are never submitted. Which makes sense.
Ultimately, I think the AO designation isn't so scary in that sex is going to corrupt my children more than games where you can kill cops, it's that the game is likely to just be just plain bad, with `have sex!' being the attaction, and actual gameplay being an afterthought. (Though LSL:MCL isn't a great game, it's somewhat entertaining. Which is unusual for it's rating.)
Oh, now I get it. The latest Leisure Suit Larry must have two versions -- the standard `M' rated version, and the `Uncut and Uncensored' version, which is rated `AO' and probably removes the [censored] marks from the `M' version. Not sure why seeing Larry's schlong makes it adults only, but that's the ratings for you. [I must have seen the `M' version, though I've heard there's a patch for that ...]
I recall pulling out Virtual Valerie 2 at parties for shock value, but back then it was novel. Now it's just boring.
As for `Hot coffee', it actually fits into the GTA game. Yes, it's really poorly simulated sex (I've seen the movie of it) but it does make sense that the hero of the game might have a girlfriend, and might get to have sex with her. (It would make more sense if he at least pulled his pants down, however.)
It's pretty sad that this `easter egg' (one that can't even be accessed without jumping through some serious hoops) has upset all these people so much, so much more than things like getting points for beating a hooker and taking your money back after paying her ...
How can sex be more offensive than violence?
Take a short course on the history of western religion:
Priest1: Hey Priest2, where's all the loot we're supposed get just for telling all these fools we know who God is?
Priest2: All the fools are across the street at the Priestesses church.
Priest1: Why would a common man want to go to a church with beautiful young women who offer to bring them to a state of bliss for a small tithe?
Priest2: You don't get out much, do you?
Priest1: I've got it - Women are evil. Since women mean sex, sex is evil. Nakedness is evil. Anything that has to do with the natural beauty of a woman is evil. Now, go kill the Priestess and bring the fools over here!
Priest2: Sorry Priest1, but violence is evil.
Priest1: Well, since we're just making up as we go along, we'll ignore violence for now, but sex is still evil.
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
I think it is perfectly reasonable and possibly good that marriage and being able to marry comes before being able to buy lots of porn, or especially video games that let you run down/shoot, have sex with, and kill prostitutes.
Having sex within the context of a relationship with another human being should be more acessible than fantasy material about violence and sex at the same time.
I don't believe in censoring absurd the whole sex and violence thing, but I think it is perfectly reasonable to distinguish between different types of sex and sex appeal and different kinds of violence.
Nothing is perfect but goddamnit, I would much rather have 16 year olds thinking about marriage than thinking about how to sleep with the prostitute, shoot her in the head and get their money back.
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?
hehe that's nothing. In Canada, Age of Consent is 16.
To go watch an "R"estricted film, you must be 18+ years of age.
Therefore, if you are 16 years old, you can legally have sex, just not watch it. If you were tape yourself having sex, you could goto jail and be labeled a sex-offender.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
Assuming you meant "accepted"...I don't think so. I recall reading a good number of social science surveys that have shown that while our culture have grown more liberal as to individual freedom, it has grown more conservative as far as moral values, possibly a backlash from the 60's and 70's era of hedonism. So culturally we are more likely to allow you to do things of which we are more likely to morally disapprove.
Weird, huh?
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
So if Rockstar is responsible for content they removed which got revealed later (If you can't access it legally it's been removed from the game pretty much), why arn't they recalling all Disney DVDs like the adventurers which contain 1 cel which is pornogrphic.
Surely if they're going to flip out about a game made for mature people (18+ in the UK) seeing some woman on a poster with her tits out is MUCH worse because it's labeled PG. Little kids will never notice it just as most people would never have known of the mod if all this press didn't come out about it.
I finished GTA:SA last night and all I can think is "So the corrupt politicans want to hide the story of a corrupt cop getting his ass handed to him" when it comes to all this pointless censorship.
I like muppets.
if you take a step further by allowing corporations and businesses to censor certain products
It isn't something you "allow". The Constitution doesn't give you the right to *force* others to sell things they don't want to sell. If that bothers you then you can always start your own business to sell these things (and perhaps make a mint in the process).
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
The logic behind that is that watching sex inspires sexual thought. Watching violence (typically) does not inspire violent thought.
I was quoted out of context in my autobiography...
With respect to the overall topic, your statement is fair. I still consider that to be the same lines as the democrat from California -- Yees, I believe. "Let's make it look like I'm offended so that I can curry favor with the constituents."
/.
Still doesn't change the fact that the inital GTA stink was started by not one but two democrats and that the GGP is a knee-jerk reactionary who looks for any excuse (informed or otherwise) to slam conservatives.
Oh, well. Another day on
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Right on. If you feel that way, you shouldn't shop there. Personally I'd rather pay higher prices at Target than Wal-Mart because a) the Targets in my area are well maintained, not dirty pits like the local Wal-Marts; b) Target pays health benefits, so I don't have to subsize worker visits to the ER with my tax dollars; c) Target has much cooler ads and merchandise, and you can occaisionally find something there that wasn't manufactured in China. I know, it's rare, but it happens.
Dude, I think I can see my house from here.
I can't believe how stupid and hypocritical many North Americans (most notibly the US) is when it comes to violence and sex. Now, both violence and sex are important parts of life and exposing anyone to violence and sex at any age isn't bad; but the portrail of this sex and violence may be a bad influence. What it all comes down to is the context in which the content is presented in.
Now, in my opinion, most violent videogames and movies are fine for teenagers to play; provided that the violence is not too graphic and you (as a parent) understand how your child reacts to this violence. If parents in North America weren't so uptight you could have the same (basic) mind-set about sex; these Japaneese 'Dating' games from what I have seen are not too graphic and, as long as your child can keep their hands out of their pants while playing there isn't any real problem.
One thing that I will say that many people will disagree with is that both Violence and Sex when taken too far (in graphicness or portrail) is not only negative for children but for anyone who is exposed to it. I personally don't think that anyone has a right to draw a line where a portrail is appropriate, but I do think that game developers should be careful not to go overboard; in particular, with how graphics and physics are improving in a handful of years we could have developers producing 'physical deformations' at a reasonably realistic level which could be damaging to everyone.
I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to live in a society where people are becoming 'shell-shocked' from playing Doom.
This argument ignores the social taboo element. Throughout history a single parent has had less capability to support and raise a child than a couple.
As a result children born 'out of wedlock' are much more likely to end up living off the resources of the community as a whole.
I can easily envision a strong social pressure against pregnancy without some form of social attachement because of this. Sex makes babies, and contarceptives have only just recently become an effective tactic, so that means pressure against sex.
This is probably a lesser factor, but marriage to daughters was also one of many tools used by families to cement trade negotiations, and relations between communities. A daughter with children was much less valuable in this respect, so a taboo against sex helps to keep control.
Finally, through most of history marriage was something that happened to children just coming out of marriage. Contrast this to today, when marriage is something many people only begin to consider in their late 20's to early 30's. The taboo against sex was really menat to keep teenagers just discovering raging hormones from sleeping with everything that moved.....
Just talking, too busy tonight to pull up any supporting docummentation for any of this. I just wanted to point out that most of the taboos enforced by religion simply enforce social morals that made sense to communities long before religion codified it.
- sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
Interestingly the average age of first intercourse in Canada is 17 while in the states it's 15.
:P
We reserve the right to be more reserved