Slashdot Mirror
FTC Says More Regulation Needed For Games
simoniker writes "The FTC has testified in detail to Congress that, though the game industry has 'made progress' in regulating the marketing of violent video games, 'more needs to be done.' It also revealed that it's conducted undercover surveys into whether underage gamers can buy M-rated games. It also commented: that '...the Commission will continue to monitor closely developments in the area and will initiate actions, such as the case challenging the marketing of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, when appropriate.' Will we see the FTC stepping in more often in controversial cases regarding violent video games?"
What exactly was wrong with the ESRB ratings we had already? They gave an age category and described any potentially offensive content. It was perfect. What more could we need?
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
"The ESRB is completely useless."
Government involvement probably isn't the answer, and this hopefully is just one step towards another independant system.
...because parents these days don't want to be responsible for their kids. We just need to off all of the stupid parents who let little 5 year old Timmy play GTA.*
*Hyperbole alert.
Seriously though, it is (and should) ultimately be up to the parent to decide what their kid (read: under 18 years old in the US) can play. Even thats a bit arbitrary, as I was sixteen when I was playing Counter Strike, a 'M' rated game. Its more of the fact that I knew it was a game, and knew that it was not real. Six year old Timmy is more than likely unable to properly make the distinction.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
I would like to see more regulation by parents. I think it's good to have a rating system like this, but it only works if parents are involved. Parents need to monitor what their children are watching, playing, and doing on the Internet. Of course, this assumes that parents have an idea of what is appropriate.
Investigator speaking to bureaucrat: Does more need to be done?
Bureuacrat: Yes, more needs to be done. And I need more resources with which to do it.
The exact topic du jour matters not one bit.
The primary motivation of any bureaucracy is to extend its dominion and claim more needs to be done.
A surprising number of organizations, many of the quite large, are basically moving along with this motivation and nothing more. I don't care to get flamed so I won't name names, but there's a lot of 'em.
How about actually play the games yourself and determine what is and isn't acceptable to you? That's what drives me up the wall is this assumption by some parents that they shouldn't have to investigate what their kids are doing. Ummm, yes you should, you are parents, that's part of the deal.
One of my coworkers has twin boys age 12 and a younger one age 7. All play videogames. They all have their own computers, they all have their own gameboays etc. None play any games that he hasn't first. He tries them, and decides if he finds them acceptable. He uses the ratings as a guideline, but the ultimate decision is what he feels is ok for his kids. After all, he understands their maturity level.
I don't see why that's such a big deal for some parents. Nobody is saying you need to be a gamer or spend all your time playing games, but you can spend 30-60 minutes playing a game to see if it's acceptable. Hell, for that matter you can start playing games, play them with your kids. No different than any other activity you might dow ith your kids. Never know, might even find it fun, games are actually designed with fun in mind.
I just do not see this as a big problem. As a parent you need to be highly invloved in your kids' lives. Yes, that means your social life will suffer, but that's kinda the deal. I think there needs to be more emphasis on good parenting, less on how society can try to Nerf-pad itself to make sure kids never encounter anything harmful.
#1) The ESRB notice is relatively large on the package.
#2) The ESRB notice is FAR superior to the moving rating system... since it tells you why a movie got the rating it received.
#3) It's the PARENT'S job to oversee what their kids do, not the government, not the gameshop.
The government has been legislating for over 200 years... do we NEED any more freaking laws?!
Games have been around for a short while compared to movies. Movies in the beginning went through the whole "they are evil and will corrupt our children" phase already. Been there, done that. Games haven't finished with it and it looks like they still have a ways to go. In the public's (or maybe I should say politician's) eyes, games are still seen as primarily for children. This has made it easier to let children buy any game they want. People still think child+game=ok. The last point I want to make is that the people who work at stores that sell games are not told (usually) to match the ESRB rating to the customer. If they aren't somehow motivated to do this, then they probably don't give a shit. I know people who got in trouble when they had summer jobs at a BestBuy and sold R moves to 11 year olds. I doubt they would have had the same thing happen if it was a M rated game. These are my opinions. I am not an expert, so please don't treat it as if I were.
I do agree with the assertion that it is ultimately up to the parent in these matters. If they choose to not pay attention to their children's game playing habits, they shouldn't have the right to complain. Also how do kids get the money to buy games these days. I don't remember having $50 laying around when I was 9.