National Review Defends Gaming

The National Review has a piece up entitled National Born Regulators, in which they lay out the problems with legislator decision-making processes when discussing videogames, and lay to rest some of the most common misconceptions around gaming. From the article: "Those games are the exception to the rule. The vast majority of video games sold each year do not contain intense violence or sexual themes. The Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB), the video-game industry's self-regulatory labeling body, places ratings and numerous content descriptors on almost every game sold in America today. These ratings and descriptors are remarkably detailed and displayed prominently on all game cartons, making them easy for parents to evaluate."

Comments

Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice

[stlhawkeye]

National Review is basically a conservative think-tank. It's amazing what people steeped in theory come up with when there's no voters to satisfy. Only readers. And people who read think tanks are (typically) more interested in ideas and debate than demagoguery (although, admittedly, not always). Look at what a conservative publication says - "family values, shmamly values, no more government interference, it's not necessary." How do you think Republicans in Congress would vote on this, though? 100% pro-Family Values pro-regulation, 100% voter pandering.

It gets harder and harder to defend these people every year as they shift away from free market economics and individual self-determination and towards more big-government nanny-state big brotherism. If only the Democrats had the guts to step in and fill the void instead of likewise pandering to its base...

Parents should admit when they make a mistake

[mstahl]

A common theme in politics today seems to be that a loud minority of people want the US Government to act as a safety net for poor parenting. Honestly, if you bought your 12-year-old a copy of GTA San Andreas, it's not Rockstar's fault, it's not the US Government's fault, it's not the store's fault, it's yours, because you made a conscious decision to buy your kid that game when the title and the carton art tell the whole story. It's not as if the violent and sexually themed games are hiding among more "wholesome" games and trying to fool parents. They're clearly labelled and it's no one's responsibility but the parents' to take a proactive role in choosing the material to which their children are exposed.

Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake

[itscolduphere]

The video game industry and the retailers are already doing a reasonable job in making sure video games stay out of the hands of minors. We don't need a police state to make it difficult for grown adults to purchase video games, or more expensive, which is what you want to happen.

Of course, because enforcing age restrictions with legal penalties on retailers have made alcohol and tobacco so insanely expensive. Oh...wait. It's mostly taxes doing that, not age restrictions. Never mind.

And the only added difficulty you would see in getting games with legally-enforced age restrictions is having to have an ID handy to buy them. Big freakin' deal.

Also, I'd say retailers have done a pitiful job keeping adult-themed games out of the hands of minors. What, they're running about 50%? About 35% for big-name national chains, who supposedly actually give a crap? Good job.

If a store sold alcohol to minors 35% of the time they'd be fined, lose their license, and have to shut down. It does not represent a "good faith effort" on their part. Not even close. And publishers claim that their games aren't marketed to minors, or meant for minors, but complain when somebody mentions restricting their sales to minors. Smells like industrial-grade BS to me.

PA pretty much summed up my opinion on the right of minors to buy any given game here,