Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What's So Wrong With the ESRB?

Posted by Zonk on from the huff-and-puff-and-blow-your-industry-in dept.

1up has an in-depth look at the Hot Coffee hoopla, and the resulting impact on the ESRB. From the article: "Hot Coffee's wake was also the tipping point for The National Institute for Media and the Family. Its strongly worded 10th Annual MediaWise Video and Computer Game Report Card awarded the ESRB an 'F' for ratings accuracy and a 'C+' for ratings education. More damning was the Report Card's statement: 'The so-called 'hot coffee' scandal does not simply reveal the bad faith of one of the industry's most prominent companies; it has shown once and for all that the present rating system is broken and can't be fixed.'"

85 comments

  1. How do the rate them? by tont0r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because no one really cared TOO much about what they said until the hot coffee mod slipped through the cracks. But this is what angers me. Hot Coffee had nothing to do with the ESRB. It was code that was hidden from the game. How was the ESRB supposed to rate the game down because of that? What groups like the National Institute for Media and the Family and Mrs. Clinton doesnt understand is that in order to find hidden content such as that, its not as simple as "put in the up up down down left right left right code" to unlock it. This feature was exploited by people who literally hacked the game to find it. Yes, Ill agree it should not have been there in the first place, but it is not the ESRB's fault it was hidden and they didnt find it. The ESRB plays the game and rates it on its content as well as how the game is described to them by the developer. They are not responsible hack every single game that comes across their table to find all hidden feature buried within the games source code.

    1. Re:How do the rate them? by imoou · · Score: 1

      I guess it's the same for Janet "Superbowl" Jackson, nobody could have known that this family-oriented event would contain nudity until she decided to "hack" the program.

      Should FCC fine Jackson or the TV network?

      --
      Uncensored Google results requested and delivered by email
    2. Re:How do the rate them? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      FCC is the government. In the government, the guy in charge takes responsibility. Therefore, it must fine itself. Its leader must commit ritual seppuku so his head can adorn the battlements.

    3. Re:How do the rate them? by XenoRyet · · Score: 1
      That's not even close to a good analogy. A good analogy would be if the Jackson boob was on the tape at the studio, but never broadcast. Then some guy broke in, stole the tape, and broadcast it on a different channel. (I understand this was a live event, so there was no "tape", but you can see the point.)

      People keep failing to recognize that just because something is in the code does not mean that it is in the final game. To access the content in question requires violating the EULA, there is no legal, legitimate way to access the content. This means it is not the responsibility of the ESRB.

      --
      If forums teach us anything, it is that logic and critical thinking should be required courses in the public schools.
    4. Re:How do the rate them? by snwcrash · · Score: 1
      In the government, the guy in charge takes responsibility.

      Maybe on pluto the guy in charge takes responsibility. Here on earth some unknown aide takes one for the team. He is then awarded by getting a job for a company loyal to party in control, probably a nice 6-figure job with a corner office.

      --
      Save a life, sign your organ donor card.
    5. Re:How do the rate them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But this is what angers me. Hot Coffee had nothing to do with the ESRB. It was code that was hidden from the game. How was the ESRB supposed to rate the game down because of that?

      When my brother was doing some home renovations, he found some old books and newspapers from thirty years ago sealed up in his walls. Does his house have to be rezoned as a public building (i.e. library) now?

    6. Re:How do the rate them? by RobinH · · Score: 1

      The GP's post was a good analogy, and I'm afraid that yours is not quite as good because when you bought the GTA game it came with the data; you didn't have to break into Rockstar's servers to steal it. There is no "hidden code" analogy for a TV because what you see is what you get.

      A better analogy would be finding that an R rated DVD had an NC-17 rated video buried on it in the special features but you couldn't access it through the menu system and could only access it if you ripped the DVD to your hard drive. But that, actually, would make it sound much more wrong, now, wouldn't it?

      So, let's agree that analogies are a bad thing to use here, and stick to the facts. The ESRB had no way to know about hot coffee because it can't be expected to run through the program with a debugger to find stuff like that. There is no rating agency that could ever find it.

      Then you have to wonder, is there a difference between a mod that lets the game get to a spot that was completely inaccessible, and a mod that just adds a brand new section to the game? I say that there is NO difference. Once you have to modify the code itself, then it's not Rockstar's responsibility anymore. It's no different that creating new skins for games either.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    7. Re:How do the rate them? by kahanamoku · · Score: 1

      No, but in Australia it can be heritage listed, and then he can never renovate again!

      At least the ESRB are semi consistant with their criteria for ratings... the Aussie censors change depending on the mood. I remember GTA3 and VC being blocked in Aus because it contained hookers... however SA came out with the hookers still intact! Make up your minds people!!!!

      --
      ----- Concentrate on promoting more than demoting.
    8. Re:How do the rate them? by XenoRyet · · Score: 1
      I'm going to stand by my analogy. GTA is not open source, Rockstar owns the code regardless of the fact that it resides on a physical disc that you own. By modifying it, you are breaking into Rockstar property, virtual property, but still property according to current laws.

      But you are right, analogies aren't terribly helpful here. And we basicaly agree on the facts, responsibility rests squarely with the modders, and not Rockstar or the ESRB.

      --
      If forums teach us anything, it is that logic and critical thinking should be required courses in the public schools.
    9. Re:How do the rate them? by arkanes · · Score: 1
      There's no EULA for video games (you didn't click I Agree, did you?) and therefore there it isn't illegal (not even under the DMCA) to modify (your saved game, on your hardware, not the actual game image itself) it, or even to tell other people how to do it. I still think it's stupid to put any blame at all on the ESRB over this. The content wasn't "in the game" in any reasonable sense. Futhermore, the actual hidden content shouldn't have raised the rating at all anyway.

      Rockstare was foolish for leaving the media in place (the game was probably stripped at the last minute), but the issue has been *vastly* overblown by people looking to cash in on any sort of controversy, even a manufactured one. I'd wager that a signifigant portion of the people who're upset about this whole thing aren't even aware of what the "hot coffee" content is. It's certainly not described in detail in any of these self serving press releases that get put out. I wonder how many people believe that it is actual pornographic content, as opposed to something rather less stimulating than in a typical PG movie.

    10. Re:How do the rate them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ESRB plays the game and rates it on its content as well as how the game is described to them by the developer.



      That's not correct at all. To be rated by the ESRB, the game manufacturer compiles a video of violent / sexual parts of the game and sends it to the ESRB to be rated. A game can be misrated when publishers omit relavent parts of the game from the submission (like the Hot Coffee scene). If that happens, the ESRB may change the rating and refuse to rate future games by the publisher (and, apparently, the world comes to an end).

    11. Re:How do the rate them? by Traiklin · · Score: 1

      actually, they ended up fining CBS for the little miss hap.

      which is stupid, if anyone should of been fined it should be Justin Timberlake, he's the one who removed that peice of janets clothing, he's the one who exposed her nipple to the US.

    12. Re:How do the rate them? by RobinH · · Score: 1

      You know what a good analogy would be? Some performance vehicles are delivered with deliberate crippling technology included to make them pass environmental regulations, and there are simple instructions online about how to modify the vehicle to get all the performance out of it. Sometimes it's as simple as removing a fuse or jumper from the fuse panel.

      We don't sue the car company for selling a car that can be modified to the point where it no longer meets environmental regulations - we charge the modder themselves if they're caught.

      That's a decent analogy.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    13. Re:How do the rate them? by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      The ESRB doesn't even play the game, usually. The developers send in video of what they consider to be reflective of what's in the game, and the ESRB rates accordingly. It's very trust-based.

    14. Re:How do the rate them? by knight37 · · Score: 1

      To improve their credibility, the ESRB should have told Take Two that it would no longer rate their games for a period of X years. That would have been a devastating blow to Take Two, but it might have saved the ratings board.

      --
      Knight37 - Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer
  2. I know I should pay more attention to the topic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But I'm sorry, I still can't take an ethics and censorship organisation whose acronym is pronouced 'nymph' seriously.

  3. Yeah, government regulation, that's what we need.. by jacoplane · · Score: 5, Informative

    Great, government regulation of video games. Just what the world needs. If there's anything that the Hot Coffee Mod fiasco has made clear, it's that the media and the public are doing a pretty good job at being a ESRB-watchdog. Rockstar has felt the results in its bottom line. What's the problem? More info:

    ESRB, Video game controversy, Family Entertainment Protection Act.

  4. A lot of failed logic. by OS24Ever · · Score: 3, Insightful
    From TFA:
    "They have tweaked things," said Olson, "but there is blatant pornography on the best-selling game of the year. That says that the ratings system didn't work."
    Do what? So apparently only minors are interested in pornography, and even though the core gamer market seems to be 18-34 year olds they wouldn't have bought the game had it had an MA rating?

    I'm 34, and a parent. I have the quaint idea that a parent should review the content of any thing before they let their children have it if they are so concerned about said content. I do believe the ratings in general, but for every example you can always find a 'but wait' example. For exmaple Fox and the Hound was rated G. However in the movie there is an extremely intense, somewhat violent fight with a monstrous scary bear that sends most >5 year olds running for the hills. Should I scream and gnash my teeth? Or should I just not put that movie in next time because it startled them...

    But what do I know, I'm part of the 80% of the US that is normal, it's the 20% that run the country that screw things up.
    --

    As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

    1. Re:A lot of failed logic. by Song+for+the+Deaf · · Score: 1
      I'm 34, and a parent. I have the quaint idea that a parent should review the content of any thing before they let their children have it if they are so concerned about said content

      C'mon maannnn, approaching it that way takes time. Effort. AKA giving a shit. Something most parents don't have or seem to want to give.

      Anybody else find it strange that some of the figures that champion this type of meaningless, unenforcable ratings bullshit, like Tipper Gore and Hillary Clinton, are career politicians who probably don't have time to be good parents? When politicians decide to project their guilt that they can't monitor their children's intake we end up with the PMRC and the ESRB.

      The new amendments to the constitution shouldn't be banning gay marriage, they should be along the lines of Those who have neither the will nor the time to do so shall not be allowed to raise children. That's "family values"- that would actually improve our lives.

    2. Re:A lot of failed logic. by westlake · · Score: 1
      I have the quaint idea that a parent should review the content of any thing before they let their children have it if they are so concerned about said content.

      How do you review content that isn't exposed to the player until someone outside the game exposes the hidden keys or codes that unlock it?

      The problem with Hot Coffee is that the mini-game arguably went beyond even the M rating on the box. It certainly did undermine trust in the voluntary rating system.

    3. Re:A lot of failed logic. by OS24Ever · · Score: 1

      The problem is that in my view of the world an R and a X rating and the M vs. 'Adults Only' doesn't mean jack shit. Both aren't appropriate 17 in most cases.

      The guys that did South Park proved without a doubt that in order to get an X rating you just need to show some natural, normal, god given human skin. But if you murder half a country in gory & grusome ways it's ok and it's only an R rating (Orgazmo vs. South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut)

      The top (or bottom depending on your view) of the ratings are flawed. For some dumb reason natural things such as sex, boobs, dicks, and the like are 'evil' yet you can run down the street chopping off heads with a chain saw and that's ok.

      That's what amazes me about the uproar over GTA in general. You're beating the shit out of people, stealing cars, and what not. No problem, but you do a pixelated sex scene that really is about as lame as they come considering the tech out there and the whole world is 'rabble rabble' about it.

      --

      As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

  5. Does it seem to anyone else.... by pjwalen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    that "The National Institute for Media and the Family" will continue to "fail" the ESRB until is has the kind of control over what people can and can't do inside of videos that THEY want, and not what the population as a whole wants? I don't disagree with ratings on video games, kids shouldn't play GTA (or the like), but I disagree with an independant board of people with very strong ideals, who don't necessarilly coincide with my own, having so much clout in what I do with my free time.

    1. Re:Does it seem to anyone else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until the ESRB starts actually using their "AO" rating, they deserve to have an "F" on every report card. I can't remember ever seeing an "AO" game, and yet a large collection of games (such as Grand Theft Auto) are clearly deserving of it. The ESRB consistantly rates everything as being "fine" when clearly not all video games should be played by all people. They deserve their "F" and will continue to deserve it until more games start getting "AO" ratings.

    2. Re:Does it seem to anyone else.... by pjwalen · · Score: 1

      I don't entirely disagree with you on this. Some games are simply meant for adults (AO). I see a flaw in the difference between the M rating (17+) and the AO (18+). This is an assinine difference. I would say either make AO 21+, or make M 18+. There doesn't need to be a differenciation between AO and M as they are defined now. Personally I think once you are an adult, it's your life. (at 18+).

    3. Re:Does it seem to anyone else.... by demeteloaf · · Score: 1
      Unfortunatly, there are many stores that have decided just to slap a blanket policy on all video games and movies: If it's rated NC-17 or AO, it's not appropriate, and we're not stocking it. This leads to the M rating being basically: "Everything that's appropriate to sell, that's more voilent/innapropriate/whatever than a T rated game." And just from looking at the ratings, there is no difference between something like Prince of Persia, which in my mind was a somwhat tame fighting game that wouldn't even have gotten an R rating if it were a movie, and games like Manhunt and GTA.

      In my mind, that is the biggest problem, the disconnect between the MPAA, and ESRB: while i understand the argument that when people play a game they experiance it more than just passivly watching a movie, that shouldn't be the reason for such different standards between how movies are rated and how games are rated. R rated movies routinely have much worse content than M rated games, and yet everyone seems to focus on the games as the problem.

      In my mind, this disconnect is a problem, and there should be some sort of common standard that applies to both ratings systems.

      --
      If there's anything more important than my ego around, i want it caught and shot now.
    4. Re:Does it seem to anyone else.... by joystickgenie · · Score: 1

      There is a good reason for that actually.

      Ao = pornography. Or at least that is the way it is treated. If you get rated by the ESRB as an Ao title you can not sell your game. Retailers won't sell it at all. You will rely on internet sails as your only source of revenue.

      Also the ESRB is not free. Developers have to pay to get their games rated by them. Games that would get rated Ao (pornographic games) don't get rated because they don't feel like throwing away the money. It is the same way with movies. People who make pornographic movies don't bother to have the movie rated either. They know it.

      When you know that your product is not supposed to be available for mass audience there is no reason to take the steps to prove it.

    5. Re:Does it seem to anyone else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AO = R
      M = PG-13
      T = PG
      E = G

      There should be more AO titles out there, rating Grand Theft Auto "PG-13" is just silly.

    6. Re:Does it seem to anyone else.... by incubusnb · · Score: 1
      actually, i thin it would make more sense as such:

      AO = NC-17 M = R T = PG-13 E = G

      The problem is people like you equating M with PG-13, M IS R, but due to the assinine double standard that Games have been given by those who beleive that Gaming is JUST for kids, the rating system is assumed to have failed. Even is "hot Sex" was included in the final product, it is no worse(except in quality) than sex scenes in the vast majority of R rated movies.
      and with that, I think it should be noted that the Movie Ratings are "Voluntary", as in, the Movie Publisher can rate their movie whatever they want to. The ESRB Rating is forced on any game intended for sale on any medium outside of the Internet, the Developer cannot issue its own rating for the game and it cannot sell the game in 95% of retail outlets without a sanctified rating.

      --
      /. is overrun by bed-wetting elitist nerds
      let it be known, for anything other than servers, a *nix OS sucks
    7. Re:Does it seem to anyone else.... by sesshomaru · · Score: 1
      They are coming out with and E-10 rating now to cover the regular PG rating. (T was originally supposed to cover PG, but the same thing happened to movies when Gremlins made them invent the PG-13 rating.)

      Part of the problem is that when the rating system originally came out I think there were no console games that actually deserved an "M" rating. I don't think either the SegaCD game Night Trap or the original Mortal Kombat deserved it (I see as much cartoon blood on The Simpsons). They got it though, so you end up with an inflated view of ratings. (Some recent games are like this too, like The Typing of the Dead which I was comfortable giving to my 10 year old because I wanted her to learn typing and I played it and just though it was silly.)

      However, the rating system does seem to confuse the people who are the real problem, overprotective Moms and Dads.

      The best way to show the mendacity of this who thing is something I reference in my sig. It seems that almost every new horror or gory film that comes out gets an unrated "Director's Cut" that is sold in stores. The one that really got my goat was Doom, because I know if Doom III the game had been released unrated no stores would carry it, but I can pick up the unrated movie at Best Buy! I can also pick up really disturbing stuff like Audition in the same store!

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
  6. The system seems to be working by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Once the Hot Coffee content was discovered, the ESRB immediately launched an investigation, Vance explained. Concluding that the "bonus" content was a Rockstar creation, the ESRB revoked GTA: San Andreas' rating and demanded that Take-Two correct the content. "We acted swiftly, and decisively to fix the situation and make sure that consumers had correct ratings information once this non-playable content was unlocked," said Vance.

    The performance garnered the praise of Senator Clinton for "its quick and thorough investigation" and of Senator Lieberman for its demand for immediate corrective action, but it could not redeem the ESRB's damaged credibility.

    How is the ESRB's credibility damaged? They were presented with a fraudulent representation of a game's content, and then they revoked the rating when that became apparent. It seems to me that the system is working as well as anyone can reasonably expect it to, under the circumstances.

    1. Re:The system seems to be working by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Since that part of the game was not accessible without a cheat device, I don't see it as fraudulent.

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
    2. Re:The system seems to be working by TheSkyIsPurple · · Score: 1

      > How is the ESRB's credibility damaged? Step into the mind of someone not on Slashdot... Joe Consumer: The ESRB says this game isn't an Adults Only game, and they govern this stuff, so this is safe for me to get. The News: [Coffee Mod] Joe Consumer: WTF? The ESRB lied! They are supposed to protect me. It doesn't matter whether the ESRB was lied to or not... Joe Consumer isn't going to do the research into such a trivial venture. (If he was, we wouldn't need ESRB at all anyway) Even more practically though, if you assume that the mod was left in so that it could be found and activated later, you could argue that the ESRB just doesn't have enough teeth to scare developers into revealing everything in their games. (This isn't an uncommon belief, so it can't just be ignored when factoring credibilty over a large group) No teeth = no credibility

    3. Re:The system seems to be working by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 1
      if you assume that the mod was left in so that it could be found and activated later, you could argue that the ESRB just doesn't have enough teeth to scare developers into revealing everything in their games. (This isn't an uncommon belief, so it can't just be ignored when factoring credibilty over a large group) No teeth = no credibility
      I suppose someone has to be the first to test if the ESRB really does have teeth. Rockstar got a lot of bad publicity over this and had their rating revoked, which to me indicates that the system really does work (at least in this instance).
    4. Re:The system seems to be working by Physician · · Score: 0

      Is that Vance referring to "Lance Vance" of Vice City fame. Will he ever learn?

      --
      Does God treat us as servants or friends? Check my homepage.
  7. It ISN'T broken by improbable · · Score: 0, Redundant

    But what the whole thing should have shown was that the rating system ISN'T broken. When the ESRB found out about Hot Coffee, they changed the rating. What's really wrong is that kids can still get their hands on the game.

    When parents start getting responsible and watching what they are buying their children, the rating system will have much more of an effect.

  8. Should've had a warning label by Kawolski · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Game Experience May Change When Applying 3rd Party Hacks and Mods"

    1. Re:Should've had a warning label by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      UT2K4 has something very similar to this. "Online experience may vary" or some such disclaimer. XBOX-Live probably has a similar thing as well.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:Should've had a warning label by arkanes · · Score: 1

      Any game with an online component will have such a disclaimer. Obviously you can't blaime Eidos when an 11 year old korean girl teabags your corpse while painting you with a spray of giant dog testicles.

  9. Re:Yeah... by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

    I think it's funny that a game rated M for mature and is full of violence gets in trouble for some half finished sex minigames.

    While R rated movies are chock full of violence, gore, and nudity and everyone is alright.

    The M rating for games is the same fucking thing as the R rating for movies! I bet I could make a bunch of money suing Blockbuster for giving people under 17 access to R rated games.

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  10. I wonder by DarkNemesis618 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I wonder how much fault lies in the education factor today. So many parents are working leaving their kids home alone, or buying them whatever to make up for the fact that they're not there. They're so caught up in their work that they either don't care that their kids are playing M-rated games or don't even take notice. The rating system is there good or bad, and the mature rated games are mature, and are meant for people who fully understand right from wrong. You can't always blame the ESRB for this. It is also the parents' responsibility to monitor what their children play, or if they choose, not to monitor. I'm sure there's a website out there that reviews games to show how they got their rating for the parents to look at and decide if it's a game they want their children playing.

    As for the 'F', maybe they need to set stricter guidelines as to what qualifies for what rating. Put in guidelines like "if it has this, it must be rated M" etc.

    --
    What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?
  11. Really? An F and a C+ - over one game? by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, you have a game which is rated M, with the label:

    Contains sexual content, violence, drug use, heavy lifting, baby snatching, people getting their heads chopped off with katanas, swearing, bad language, improper use of commas, and buckets of blood.

    Then, some people discover a mode which has you voluntarily patch your own game with a non-company made or approved patch so you can see a fully clothed male and a barbie doll engaging in quasi sex acts.

    So, because of this *one* mistake, the ESRB gets an F for accuracy? How about we take a look at the other 100 games released last year and see how "accurate" the ratings are. Did "Katamary Damacy" deserve a "E" for everyone? How about "Chessmaster 8000"? "Resident Evil 4" deserved the M rating I'm sure, and didn't need an AO rating. So right there we're at a score of around 80% for accuracy, which from school is at least a B.

    I'm guessing that the "The National Institute for Media and the Family" has an axe to grind - and looking at their review of Harvest Moon which rates the game's "Illegal/Harmful: Yellow" - I mean, it's a game about farming! Where's the "Illegal/Harmful" in the entire game!

    Anyway. Organization with an axe to grind about entertainment in general being unsafe for, well, just about everybody gives the ratings board they don't control an F. In other news, Republicans give Democrats an F for being patriotic, and Democrats give Bush an F for managing foreign conflicts.

    At least, that's my opinion after reading the articles. I could be wrong.

    --
    52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
  12. Some words I find unsuitable for children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Republican"
    "Democrat"
    "PMRC"
    "FCC"
    "Government Intervention"
    any organization with the word "Family" in its name
    "Pat Robertson"
    "Santorum"

    Can we get these topics banned from public airwaves?

  13. If I had a talk show... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...then the next Senator, lawyer, "family" institute, or pundit who talks about the "blatant pornography" in GTA:SA would be handed a PS2, a pre-recall copy of the game, and a memory card with a save game just prior to where the Hot Coffee content is supposed to be. I would then give them 1 hour to unlock this "blatant" pornography. I mean, it's right there, isn't it? The very next scene? Just waiting to devour our children's souls? Should be easy for them, right?

  14. *sigh* by SeekerDarksteel · · Score: 3, Informative

    "They have tweaked things," said Olson, "but there is blatant pornography on the best-selling game of the year. That says that the ratings system didn't work."

    But there's NOT. It is a FLAT OUT LIE That GTA:SA contained pornography. As soon as someone makes that claim everything else they say becomes null and void. They have proven that they are not qualified to speak about the subject. It is absolutely pointless to talk about anything else related to the subject until people actually know what the fuck they're talking about.

    --
    The laws of probability forbid it!
  15. What an extreme conclusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The so-called 'hot coffee' scandal does not simply reveal the bad faith of one of the industry's most prominent companies; it has shown once and for all that the present rating system is broken and can't be fixed.

    Because in fairy gumdrop land, there is a rating system that knows the function of every byte in compiled software.

    The present rating system is fine. It merely underscores a lack of understanding on the part of the public.

    1. Re:What an extreme conclusion by JustinKSU · · Score: 0

      Isn't it true that the coffee content could only be accessed if someone hacked into the software to expose the hidden libraries. It's one thing, if you could click up up down down... to get the content, but it doesn't seem fair to blame ESRB for not being psychic. The industry doesn't understand this.

      On the other hand how could you expect someone to view all the content in a Final Fantasy game with who knows how many hours of content to rate the content propperly. I think the software makers should be more responsible to code to a particular rating much like movie makers do. They should be fined if they don't meet the rating they certified it's product to. Just a thought.

  16. Not the ESRB's fault by aztektum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are a lot of outlets for parents to find out about the games they buy their kids. However, as usual, the media and "family values" groups are looking for sound bites and blaming the industry itself. Far more useful ones than a sticker/label on the box.

    There is no reasonable way the ESRB could have known that the "Hot Coffee" content was there. This is mostly Rockstar's fault for A) Lying about it in the first place B) Leaving it there to easily be uncovered.

    But most of all it's the fault of people who are out to help protect everyone else, for keeping this alive. FUCK OFF. I don't see things the same way you do and neither do millions of other people (if not billions), just fuck off, ok? Let people control themselves and stop trying to tell society how it needs to behave in order to appear, at best, that we are a civilized people.

    Millions die from cureable disease, hunger, and from having to drink from water sources tainted by billion dollar companies that spew shit all over us, how the hell can this be the most important thing that we should be worrying about?

    FUCK OFF.

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
    1. Re:Not the ESRB's fault by itscolduphere · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of outlets for parents to find out about the games they buy their kids. However, as usual, the media and "family values" groups are looking for sound bites and blaming the industry itself. Far more useful ones than a sticker/label on the box.

      Hell, the sticker/label on the box was pretty damn useful. I know for a fact it said "M," "Mature," and "17+." I do not know what specific content descriptors it contains, but I'd bet they make it clear that the game is quite simply not appropriate for most people under 17. How much more informative do you want the label to be?

      You'd have to be a pretty sheltered 17-year-old for the "Hot Coffee" mod to do any real damage. If the child in question is under 17 and the parent is all pissed off, then they probably should never have bought their kid an M-rated game in the first place, or allowed it to be bought for them. I mean, how can anybody do the whole "protect the children" dance when the software in question, based on the rating given by the ESRB (marketing by Rockstar aside), was never meant for children. The ESRB did their job perfectly in this case, period.

      "Hot Coffee" mod or no, GTA is not porn, and should not be treated as such (which an AO rating would've done). It is no worse than many R-rated movies. The end.

  17. Let me get this straight by Jtheletter · · Score: 1
    So ONE game from ONE company having hidden content proves that the industry as a whole which produces scores, if not hundreds, of titles per year has failed the ratings system? Uhuh. [sarcasm] I heard this one time that a kid totally saw an animated boobie in the movie Cool World(PG13) that his older brother rented for him. Oh noes! All of Hollywood has deceived us! [/sarcasm]

    The ESRB rating system is only as useful as the store clerks that enforce it and the parents that bother to educate themselves about it. The industry as a whole has made a good faith effort to make this work. To codemn an entire industry for the isolated acts of a single company that skirted the rules is rediculous.

    --
    -- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
  18. Hot coffee by ebrandsberg · · Score: 4, Informative

    Personally, as someone who works in the computer sector, hot coffee realistically was perfectly fine, and should NOT have impacted their ESRB. If so, then everybody should be charged with public nudity, because if someone were to come by and rip your clothes off, you would be naked, and that is NOT acceptable. This is exactly the same thing. Yes, the programmers as a gag threw this in. Yes, they left the code in, but disabled it. Yes, someone figured out how to enable it. It is standard practice NOT to gut code when a feature is not desired, but to simply disable the feature to prevent side effects in otherwise tested code. As a result it made it easy to reveal, but it is NOT the fault of the developer for it being released. If modifying code to reveal something unintended should be put on the ESRB labels, then every ESRB label should have "warning: ESRB rating can change if code is modifed", much like online ESRB labels warn about changing ratings for online play.

    1. Re:Hot coffee by drachenstern · · Score: 1

      so where do i get a job implementing "pornographic" features for future video games, and then get to test it with those features enabled, before the boss decides it's gotta go?

      i'm pretty sure it's not in kansas . . . (or about 1000 miles around there either)

      --
      2^3 * 31 * 647
  19. System isn't broken by Sierpinski · · Score: 1

    The ratings system isn't broken.

    While I don't have a problem with adult content in games, I think they should (in general) be honest about the content of their games. I won't get into whether or not Rockstar should have reported the code (playable or not, blah blah) but if the game companies are honest and forthcoming about the content of their games, then the current ESRB ratings system should work just fine.

    People are blowing the whole thing out proportion by questioning the system based on one event of one company. Give it a chance to work for a couple years (or 5, or 10) and see how it goes after that. This is the whole FCC/Janet Jackson overreaction all over again. Guess what folks, women have breasts, its called anatomy. Educate the children instead of sheltering them from nudity, so they're not fanatics and obsessing about breasts when they're adolescents. Damn.

    --
    And they said zombies weren't real!
    1. Re:System isn't broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Ratings system IS broken, but not it the way that people think. The problem with the Ratings system is not that it is too weak, but that it is TOO HARSH, especially with regards to Rated "M" and Rated "T" games.

      "Cops & Robbers," or "Cowboys and Indians" are typical child's games, but every game with cops, robbers, or cowboys will immediately get a "T" or "M" for subject matter. A good example is "Sid Meier's Pirates," which is essentially a collection of rhythm mingames & is suitable for the family. Yeah, the game does have pirates in it, but that is evident from the cover. Any violence that the game does have is highly stylized, separate from what the game's player is actually doing, and easily distinguised from reality. Yet, the game is ratied "T," the same rating as a WW2 shooter where the player spends the entire game behind the trigger of a gun. A garden variety beat-em-up like Devil May Cry, which is low on the purely objectionable content and which would be rated PG-13 as a movie, gets the same "M" rating as muder simulator Manhunt.

      It is no wonder that family lobbying groups are PO'ed at the ESRB. Games that are probably ok for pre-Teenagers and Teenagers are given the same ratings as games that are definately not ok for these children. The problem with the ESRB is not that it is too weak in rating the Grand Theft Autos (adults who can vote should be allowed to play the game), the problem is that the ESRB is too tough rating every other game. Because the ESRB makes it impossible for parents to distinguish between an acceptable game and an unacceptable game, the ESRB has little value in its core role of providing information to parents.

    2. Re:System isn't broken by itscolduphere · · Score: 1

      A garden variety beat-em-up like Devil May Cry, which is low on the purely objectionable content and which would be rated PG-13 as a movie, gets the same "M" rating as muder simulator Manhunt.

      Let's not forget that the ESRB is still new...the MPAA did not always have a PG-13 rating either. They used to have G, PG, and R, much like E, T, and M. And they had the same problem: movies that walked the thin line between that which is appropriate for children and that which is not had to be filtered into either the PG or R ratings, and often the rating would end up seeming inappropriate.

      Your example of Pirates! seems a little off, though...I think Pirates! is actually a game that warrants a T rating, just not the same T rating as many other more mature games get. And Devil May Cry might seem a little harmless to get an M, but neither would I give it a T and lump it in with a game like Pirates!.

      Basically, the ESRB needs a PG-13. Maybe call it LT for late teens, or whatever. But, just as with movies, more than three ratings are needed to properly categorize videogames...four would work a lot better. (Note that I am dismissing both the NC-17 ratings and the AO rating, as both seem to have more to do with pressuring a company to change their movie/game than actually rating what is there...they really aren't, in general, functional ratings)

      Oh, and yes I know that the movie ratings system is far from perfect, with the constant push to get everything a PG-13 rating (because it allows kids in but doesn't have the same stigma as a PG movie), and blah blah blah. I still say that, within reason, more ratings levels are better than less.

  20. What's So Wrong With the ESRB? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Funny

    It exists.

  21. Gah! by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

    It's not the ESRB's fault that people outside of their offices are ignoring the rating... is it? Yes? No? Depends?

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  22. Parents should actually look at ratings first... by Yoje · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Before these parent groups start complaining about the ESRB, they should actually pay attention to the ratings these games get. GTA was rated 'M', which, according to ESRB's website, is "... suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language." 'AO' rating is "... content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older." Only 1 year difference.

    So, putting aside the problem with how the ESRB is supposed to rate content it knows nothing about ("Hot Coffee"), this game was already marked by the ESRB as for adults only. It did not get the specific "Adults Only" rating, but when a game is rated for people 17+, I would assume that it does not include scenes from Sesame Street.

    When the Hot Coffee thing first went mainstream, there were plenty of quotes in the media from parents and grandparents outcrying why this content was hidden in a game they gave their kids. WTF?! The game is already rated 17+. The rating system did not fail you, you failed to look at the rating system.

    That is the biggest problem with the ratings system, not that it is bias, or fails to take into account hidden content. It is that most parents don't bother to look at them. A lot may not even realize they exist. Most think back to the Mario and Pac-man days and assume that modern video games are similar, with slightly better graphics. And before someone comments, "Well wait, I'm a parent and I'm not like that," well, by being on slashdot you've proven you're in the minority. Most parents pay little attention to the ratings of a video game, and you know it.

    Ultimately, this is all about control. The government wants to control the rating system, and most parents want to be controlled, i.e. told, what to buy and not buy. Looking at the ratings for most games so far, they seem to be rated fairly, it's just that the parents aren't looking/caring about them unless they hear about it on the six o'clock news, then it is the ESRB's fault for not having a neon-flashing sign in 6-foot lettering announcing the game's rating. They (parent groups and the gov't) have been looking to push this agenda for a while now, Hot Coffee was not a sign that the ESRB system is failing, it was the excuse they needed to take control.

  23. Re:Yeah... by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

    Unlike pornography and alcohol, it's not actually against the law to sell violent games and movies to minors. Even those states that have passed bans on the latter have all had them overturned.

    Stores and theaters voluntarily agree to abide by these guidelines because the either the good publicity apparently does more for them than the loss of sales or the CEO beleives its worth it despite lesser revenue.

  24. Pfft, read the WoW review by MMaestro · · Score: 1
    Violence Amount: Yellow

    WoW only gets a yellow for violence?! Whoa! I must be playing the wrong version since I've seen Civilian NPCs get killed, theres an outright war going on (especially on the PvP servers) and players are lining up to enter Battlegrounds to bash each other's heads in.

    1. Re:Pfft, read the WoW review by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 1

      Yeah - I get the feeling that this group's rating systems are even worse than the ESRB. At least the ESRB is trying, and has an enforcement system to keep developers in line. These guys seem to have some guy in a basement making snap decisions while he's playing, rather than a panel reaching a consensus.

      Then again, I imagine most members of the group have the "videogames - baaaad" approach, so that may be an issue.

      --
      52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
  25. Who listens to NIMF? by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What gives these busibodies more authority than the ESRB? They're just a bunch of self-appointed moralists, one group in a cause already crowded with nutjobs and fundamentalists. The ESRB has the support and recognition of most game producers and merchants who sell games. They admit the rating was a mistake because Rockstar deceived them, and they corrected that rating very quickly. The system worked, what are the whining about?

  26. Stupid plebians... by RyoShin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This whole "Hot Coffee" mod thing is and always has been blown completely out of proportion by those who don't know what the hell they're talking about.

    Firstly, if parents were doing their job (which is unheard of in this day and age, gasp!), the game wouldn't have been in the hands of anyone who couldn't handle the nudity to begin with. This would have made the whole thing a small blip, where someone goes "Hey, there's sex in this game if you do all these changes", someone would write a program to do it automatically, and it would have faded away.

    Second, the only way to access the content was to hack the game. The content was, to my understanding, unreachable through normal play. It's like blaming the toothbrush manufacturer that some inmate turned his toothbrush into a shank and stabbed you. Was the shank already in the toothbrush? Yes, but you had to modify the toothbrush, from it's originally intended purpose, to get to the shank.

    Rockstar (or Take Two or whoever) should have removed the content if they weren't going to use it, but leaving it in should not have gotten the attention it did, especially because the ESRB did jump in and pull the M rating.

    1. Re:Stupid plebians... by mikeage · · Score: 1

      Sorry, bad analogy.

      It's like blaming the toothbrush manufacturer that some inmate turned his toothbrush into a shank and stabbed you. Was the shank already in the toothbrush? Yes, but you had to modify the toothbrush, from it's originally intended purpose, to get to the shank.

      No, it's as if they made toothbrush bristles was attached to a shank, and then molded some plastic over the (intentionally) sharp point to form a smooth handle. (Hrmm... sounds like a fun thing to try at the next prison visit...)

      --
      -- Is "Sig" copyrighted by www.sig.com?
  27. A Useless War by Rapter09 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm 19 now, on the cusp of being an adult (more or less). I grew up with ESRB, and I think they've done a great job. I don't think this peddling from another opponent needs to be even payed attention to. The gamers, the industry as a whole, and educated peoples in the public stand behind ESRB. Granted, my parents have not been involved in actively monitoring what games I play, but since I grew up with the ESRB ratings system, whenever I make little ones of my own I'll know what to look for. It's all about being educated, and it's about being apart of your child's lives, and not letting them play GTA: SA at the age of 6. But heck, when I was 5 we didn't have any fandangled open environments. But we did have Descent. Damn good game.

      The ESRB's credibility has nothing to do with Hot Coffee. In fact, I'm totally floored by the fuss that Hot Coffee has caused. It's not that big of a deal. It had to be hacked to be even remotely viewable. An article posted on Slashdot awhile ago made Hot Coffee to be the biggest industry blunder in our history, but I think it's more of the biggest over-statement in the history of our industry.

  28. Why we cannot trust the ESRB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    An M-rated game was revealed to have content accessible through adding an unauthorized patch to the game. This hidden content was less sexually explicit than many R-rated movies. In spite of the not-so-explicit nature of the sexual content, the ESRB reacted to the resulting public hysteria by bypassing their usual rating procedure, and slapping an AO rating on it.

    The ESRB caved in to public pressure, and placed the equivalent of an X-rating on the equivalent of an R-rated game. What next? Will a protest from the FOP make it so an unrealistic, non-gruesome "cops versus gangsters" shoot-em-up gets an M rating rather than the T rating it deserves? Will pressures from religious groups cause religious themed games to get less severe ratings? If a game is alleged to have caused a fatal shooting or car accident, will outcry from an uninformed public cause its rating to change? Will it affect the rating of its sequel?

    Through their actions, the ESRB has demonstrated that the answer to these questions is "maybe." Unless we know that the ESRB will rate games according to their actual content, we cannot trust their ratings.

    1. Re:Why we cannot trust the ESRB by some+guy+on+slashdot · · Score: 1

      Remember the Law of Inverse Importance:
      The less you know about something, the more important it is.

      No one allowed to demo Halo 2? Huge midnight madness.

      Don't know where the WMDs are? Go to War.

      Not sure what this Hot Coffee thing is all about? Bans and shame! Think of the children!

    2. Re:Why we cannot trust the ESRB by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      FUD FUD FUD...

      Seriously, if there was any more doom and gloom in this post, it would magically shoot smoke out of my monitor. Have you reviewed the ESRB's methods and standards of rating games? Have you also reviewed the content accessible in the "Hot Coffee" mod, and then compared this against the ESRB's methods and standards? Only if you can say yes to both of these can you give an informed opinion as to whether or not the change in rating was appropriate. Otherwise, your point is pure FUD.

  29. Re:Really? An F and a C+ - over one game? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'm guessing that the "The National Institute for Media and the Family" has an axe to grind - and looking at their review of Harvest Moon which rates the game's "Illegal/Harmful: Yellow" - I mean, it's a game about farming! Where's the "Illegal/Harmful" in the entire game!


    Even better. Tony Hawk has a "red light" for graphic violence because, get this, you can scrape your knee when you fall. Last I checked, an accidental fall != violence...
  30. Not just the ESRB by twoallbeefpatties · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Anyone who has had to deal with the process of getting a violent movie hacked down from a NC-17 rating to an R rating could probably tell you that the movie business's process of rating a film has its own problems. Think about it - is that the kind of rating system we want, where a game has to be produced and sent in to a ratings board, who then nitpicks a series of random encounters that they think may the game too violent and send it back with a list of things that would need to be taken out to avoid an AO rating?

    To this point, the ratings board has been very non-subjective, if I must say. They haven't tried to apply a lot of their own values to the games; they've mostly recognized that bloody games are just bloody games, and the only thing that constitutes pornography is actual, intended pornography. This is how other games with nudity and serious gore (God of War, anyone?) squeaked by with an M rating. It's too bad that the public pressure came down that they felt the rating on San Andreas had to be changed. Certainly the worst thing that could happen is that the public pressure causes them to apply the same kind of litmus test that has to be applied to film.

    Anyone who takes a serious beef with the ESRB, I hope you happen to catch This Film Is Not Yet Rated when it comes out in a few months.

    --
    Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
    1. Re:Not just the ESRB by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      to be produced and sent in to a ratings board, who then nitpicks a series of random encounters that they think may the game too violent and send it back with a list of things that would need to be taken out to avoid an AO rating?
       
      It's my understanding that they don't do that, though. The MPAA ratings board hangs a rating on a movie and that's that. If the producer wants to chop it down to get a lower rating he has to play a kind of guessing game to determine what he has to remove to get the lower rating. The board won't "make suggestions" due to their fear of interfering with the producer's artistic expression.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    2. Re:Not just the ESRB by Krater76 · · Score: 1

      I think the rating board is given a target rating and then watches the film and then either grants the rating or sets a different one. If they choose a different (higher) rating for the movie they say what would get it lower.

      I've heard filmmakers talk about what they had to cut out to get it down and it sounded to me like it is a pretty specific list they get back of where they could make changes to comply with the rating they want. 'Eyes Wide Shut' is a good example. It was going to get an NC-17 for the orgy scenes. But they added CGI 'others' to the scenes to block the view from the camera to tone down the scenes and got an R-rating instead.

      FYI, a PG-13 movie can only have one use of the word 'fuck' in it but it can't refer to anyones mother (like 'mother-fucker'). You can say 'shit' all you want but I think there are restrictions on that like it can't refer to literal 'shit'. No noun, only a verb/adverb/adjective.

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
  31. Re:Parents should actually look at ratings first.. by itscolduphere · · Score: 1

    Before these parent groups start complaining about the ESRB, they should actually pay attention to the ratings these games get. GTA was rated 'M', which, according to ESRB's website, is "... suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language." 'AO' rating is "... content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older." Only 1 year difference.

    The beauty of the AO rating is that it has almost nothing at all to do with the age at which it becomes appropriate (since we're talking a 1-year difference from M), or the content in the game.

    It's really just a political tool to keep "objectionable" games from being released without modification. Threaten a game with an AO rating, and the publisher will more often than not do what needs to be done to get an M...because it's not about whether or not the vital 17-year-old to 17-year-and-364-day old market can purchase your game. It's about censorship by proxy, because a vast majority of retailers will not carry an AO game, making it an almost guaranteed financial death sentence for the game. Much like the NC-17 rating is used to keep movies with certain content from ever seeing wide theatrical release without being edited.

    Except in the case of games, there isn't generally an "unrated director's cut" that comes out later.

  32. Re:Really? An F and a C+ - over one game? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't know where it was I read it(maybe gamepolitics, but searching it is a pain since they don't list old articles), but apparently "The National Institute for Media and the Family" wants to get into the game/media regulation business and dictate what is/isn't acceptable.

    So you can probably see why they need to have such reports, they need the PR in order to damage the ESRB's creditability and make themselves known.

  33. This is nonsense by kbolino · · Score: 1

    The ESRB does a fine job. It competently rates games on an easy-to-understand scale. The organization provides a guideline--which is what any rating system is--allowing people who are concerned about the nature of content in a game to know more about it. It is not a force for media control or change, which is what this review wants it to be, but merely a tool--one that any individual can choose to follow or ignore. Simply because this reviewer want parents to pay more attention to what their kids are doing doesn't mean the ratings system is failing. Their metrics are nonsense and their grade is meaningless.

  34. And the kicker... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And from what I can tell, Gods Of War has "blatant pornography" that isn't hidden.

    All their site lists for a "review" is: Description: Players take on the role of a warrior who uses chained blades and a variety of other weapons, meaning the player can create a unique method of vicious attacks. The main character can snap some characters in half and encourages the user find new ways to kill the other characters.

    All categories including sex and nudity are rated STOP, yet they say nothing about the nudity and sex. That doesn't seem very informative to me. Not sure if it is another group, but there is one out there I recall seeing that really goes through the games and list lots of stuff.

  35. Get over it. by Onuma · · Score: 1

    It is my firm belief that if a kid wants to do something, he's going to do it regardless of what ratings or his parents say about it.

    My parents may or may not have been concerned with the video games I grew up with (the 80s and early 90s were different). You could, however, expect some titles to be obviously violent. Robocop, Rampage, anything with "Ninja" in the title, etc. I don't think that parents would expect anything less than Robocop going around shooting baddies and Ninjas cutting stuff up with swords in these cases.

    I think the ESRB does a fine job in defining the normally available content in a game. You can't say "this is good enough for every person above 13" definitely. Maturity level matters way more than actual age in years for children. I know full grown adults who are less mature than a 13 year old in many regards...sadly. The politicians and naysayers should just get off their high horses as far as this is concerned. Let the players decide whether a game is right for them.

    --
    What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
  36. The only thing broken here is.... by Derekloffin · · Score: 1

    The only thing broken here is The National Institute for Media and the Family itself with it's broken record speaches and utterly useless 'report cards'. The ESRB shot back at these twits a couple times already, and I have to 100% with the ESRB in this case. The Institute has no interest in accuracy of ratings. They are only interested in their sound bites, and frankly they have long since lost any credibility in my book.

  37. Re:Really? An F and a C+ - over one game? by stevea1210 · · Score: 1

    They gave Harvest Moon a yellow in illegal/harmful due to : FTFA "Other minor things to watch out for include some alcohol references, and the occasional translation/cultural gap between the U.S. and Japanese version." Having not played the game, I'm curious how intense these alcohol references are. Anyone?

  38. Ridiculous by just_forget_it · · Score: 1

    To quote Maddox: "I want to shoot people in the face, bang prostitutes, traffic drugs, steal cars, and terrorize police officers without this filthy smut in my game. Frankly, I'm appalled that Rockstar would allow such wholesale corruption of our youth." I agree with whoever said that it's the parent's job to review the game before allowing their kid to play it. The child who sparked the controversy was waaaay to young to play according to the original rating. Why is it that the conservative elements in this country hate sex as much as they love violence?

  39. Oh no, an F, the ESRB is in hot water now! by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

    Ok, so MediaWise gave them an F. So who the hell is MediaWise, and why should I (or the ESRB) care about what they have to say?

    Anyone can start an organization and give out Fs to everything they hate. It's easy, watch.

    The Headcase88 Advisory Group gave MediaWise a D+ for "grading accuracy", a 0/2 for "ability to get to their site by typing the name of their organization and adding .com or .org", and an F--- for "amount of positive impact on society per dollar".

    See, it's really not all that hard.

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
  40. Re:I know I should pay more attention to the topic by Maggott · · Score: 1

    You're lucky. I can't take an "ethics and censorship" organisation seriously no matter what it's called. (There's sort of this problem with censorship itself being unethical.)

    --
    All Hail the Maggott Show
  41. Re:Really? An F and a C+ - over one game? by Sage+of+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Well there is a bar in the town, but then show me a small town were there ISN'T a bar.