Slashdot Mirror
Rating Game Content Here and Abroad
Gamespy has a piece on the game content rating systems across the globe. The article discusses both the actual systems used and the history of the choices made to shape them. From the article: "But the question now is: are these ratings effective? Most gamers would certainly agree that the ratings are accurate, and the majority of retailers do have rules against the sale of mature-rated games to children ... but it's always disheartening to see a mother buying GTA for her 10-year-old saying 'he'll just play it at his friend's house anyway.'"
This idea is really starting to annoy me. Having worked in retail, I rarely had anyone purchase GTA for a minor. A simple phrase like "You do know that this game is rated M for extreme violence and sexual content?" worked just about every time. And the only times parents would buy the game for kids is with the line "We've talked about it, and I think he can handle it." I've never, in 3 years, heard "He'll just play it at a friend's."
While you may have not heard of it, I have seen it happen way too often.
I have a little brother (11), and even though my parents expressly forbid him to play any such games, he goes to a friends house to play them.
I'm not saying that that's an excuse for bad parenting - which is what buying it for kids in the first place is, but some people do obviously buy it for their kids without knowing what is in it.
The same soccer moms that eat every word Jack Thompson's ass spews out are the same ones saying "He'll just play it at a friend's house anyways."
Seriously, I once saw a 9 year old girl trying to get her mother to buy her GTA when I was buying a game, and I was disgusted.
The ratings are there for a reason. If the parents ignore the ratings, they should have no right to complain about their child.
However, if the child finds another way to obtain the game, the seller should be the one under fire, not the producer.
And this is coming from someone who hates most M rated games. I don't like them, but I'll be damned if someone else who is mature enough to play them is forbidden because some 5 year old shot someone after their mother bought GTA for them.
but it's always disheartening to see a mother buying GTA for her 10-year-old saying 'he'll just play it at his friend's house anyway.
You know what? That's not the game industry's problem. The ESRB does an excellent job of telling consumers what to expect from a game. If kids are still playing these games, it's the parents' fault. And TFA agrees:
It seems like no matter how many warnings you slap on the box, there will always be some parents willing to ignore them in order to appease their pleading youngsters. From that point on, the responsibility should lie solely with the parents who purchased the product -- and no amount of legislation upon the game industry can solve the social problem of poor parenting.
I recently went into a shop to purchase Knights of Honor and was absolutely disgusted to see a mother purchasing her son (around 7-8) 25 to Life. The employee informed her that it contained mature content and her response was, "So?". It's things like this that make me want to hold parents responsible when their child misbehaves. As much a child whining and screaming in public annoying me, I blame the parents for not doing anything about it. ShadowsHawk
It may be disheartening (for you), but that's the parents' perogative. If they want to buy it for their kids, at least they are making a choice in how to raise their children instead of requiring legislation to do it for them.
For the record, I don't necessarily advocate buying "M" games for children, but it shouldn't be anyone's choice except the parents. That's why a rating system that informs of content is a good thing, but actually enforcing age limits is on games is not.
Hey, when I was ten I went out hunting (on my own) with a REAL gun killing REAL animals and taking them home to eat. I also drove cars and motorbikes on some 'wasteland' near where I lived. I'd take that 'M' rating with a 'liberal' pinch of salt, especially as violent crime seems to be dropping as games sales increase.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
"'he'll just play it at his friend's house anyway.'"
How hard is it so tell the kid he is forbidden to play it, and to call and talk to that other mother? Freaking make a 5 minute phone call. Tell other parents about the game, tell them "it's your choice if your kid plays it but I don't want mind playing it".
The article is supposed to talk about the various rating systems out there but in the end it goes into details about the japanese system and describes the US system but when it comes to the rest of the world it's mostly done in two or three sentences. Almost as if they just knew something about the japanese system, wanted to write an article about rating systems and googled for five minutes for some rough information on the rest of the world and decided to describe the US system in detail as a filler (I thought "abroad" in this context means "non-US"?). I mean, hello, you have an entire article about the topic, why not go into details on the separate systems used in Europe or give examples of what games Singapore censores?
By the way, for a self-proclaimed major news site they take rather badly to a slashdotting.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I've seen many games that I would give M or above T. They are horribly inaccurate.
Rumors of rampant parental idiocy in our society are drastically overstated. People watch a little too much Jerry Springer or something. Basically when parents can be there, most of us sincerely try.
(If you want to get at the whole raft of problems people have raising their kids responsibly, try figuring out ways in which to encourage businesses to give their workers "flex time" arrangements. The real change people are perceiving is that both parents work now; that's what's changed in the last couple of generations. It's an economic thing. If our economic situation has changed enough that we all need full time jobs, we need to figure out ways to have parents around for the kids under those circumstances. That'll get at a ton of the anxieties people have about our society right now.)
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Yeah I have also worked in retail and have witnessed lots of interaction between parents and children. I have said to co-workers so many times,and them to me as well, "my kids will not act/behave like that and I will have 1000 times more control over them then that parent does right now". I understand that with more parents working and not being around the kids it's harder to raise them but making the most of the time that they do have together and giving them bounds is key. These parents that let their kids run around like little hellions in the stores and would sooner give into a purchase such as GTA then have them be upset for a little while are also the first ones that get in a big uproar when controversy arises around a title. "Well I can't believe that thats in this game thats just crazy!!!!" Yeah well the rating system is there to help you with proper choices for games for your kids! Not having my own kids yet, I am sure it's easier to say that the blame is to be placed on the parents of kids playing these games and not the developers. But I do believe that developers make certain games geared for certain gamers, and with the help of rating systems they try to get the games into the hands of that audience. Lets face it, most parents don't read reviews on a game before they purchase. It is the responsiblility for parents to regulate what their kids play, just as in TV viewing.
The article barely mentions the Finnish ratings.
Finland uses game ratings that are exactly the same as the ratings for movies, and are handled by the same review board. However, if you want a rating for a movie, you have to either let them review it, or you automatically get 18+ rating (which is, by the way, why the Star Wreck movie got 18+ - it costs nothing to report it, while a review needs a fee). However, games ratings only need a declaration from the importer and no review, so there's a little bit less bureaucracy and general idiocy involved. And if the game already has a PEGI rating, it must be used instead (except that, in order to conform to our age ratings, 12+ rating becomes 11+ and 16+ becomes 15+).
Before PEGI, the system worked surprisingly well and everyone used a lot of common sense to come up with the ratings. Nowadays, it works, too. Though there was at least a few cases where the importers might have needed to pay some more attention to the content (Myth III, a part of the legendary series of flowing rivers of blood and gigantic explosions, got 11+ rating and the importer also lied that the game was of "average difficulty" when most Myth II veterans got sweaty =)
As for how well it's observed I can't say...