Feedback on Government Regulation of Games

Posted by Zonk on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @07:26AM from the woe-is-us dept.

Today, as we're reporting on the House investigation into Rockstar and the Illinois violent games law, Gamasutra is offering up industry responses to a question concerning the role that government should play in games. From the article: "Government legislation would be a disaster. The ESRB rating is a good enough system. I seriously doubt that the number of employees at retail stores selling 'Mature' games to minors is greater than the number of parents who let their children buy the game. If their parents won't let them play it, chances are they have a friend who has it and they play it at their friends' house. If parents want to censor their kids, they need to be the ones to do it; the government is not responsible for raising children. -Cari Begle, Stardock"

1 of 31 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:Like many other areas by Jakeypants · 2005-07-27 01:51 · Score: 3, Informative

"An M rated game about bashing someone with profane language and various racial/religous slurs is much different than an M rated game about bashing someone's head in with a claw hammer."

Amen. I went to see The Devil's Rejects last night, and all I could think during the scene where Otis rapes what's-her-name with a gun was "Hot Coffee is honestly supposed to be worse than this?"

I find myself in stark disagreement with most ratings. I firmly think that The Devil's Rejects, Sin City, and (not trying to start a flame war here) The Passion of the Christ should've all been rated NC-17 for their extreme content. Orgazmo, on the other hand, should not have received an NC-17 rating (if someone can explain to me why it did, please do). Since GTA's violence is comical and cartoony, and the sex is incredibly tame, I think an M rating suits it perfectly (even if the sex scenes had been part of the game's content).