Slashdot Mirror
New ESRB Legislation in the Works
Gamasutra is reporting on new Senate legislation intended to place additional requirements on the ESRB. Backed by R-Kansas Sam Brownback, the 'Truth in Video Game Rating Act' aims to mandate specific amounts of time with each title, and places the organization under the auspices of the Government Accountability Office. From the article: "Were the Truth in Video Game Rating Act to pass, it would require the ESRB to have access to the full content of and hands-on time with the games it was to rate, rather than simply relying on the video demonstrations submitted by developers and publishers as it currently. The hands-on system might be more akin to the UK's BBFC ratings board's approach, which requires a team of testers to spend at least a day playing through a game."
The courts will uphold the right of the ESRB to give an opinion on any game they choose to, without having to jump through government mandated hoops. This is their right under the first amendment. The courts will uphold the right of game publishers to display the ESRB's opinions on their games if they choose to. This is their right under the first amendment.
Any attempt to interfere with these rights will be struck down. This is a waste of time and money.
To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
After all, a small, independant game has a better shot at online distribution anyway. The only reason most games are rated is to get them into stores (or not), but if it's available as a download, there's no reason for it.
Now to actually make a game in the first place...
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Third party rating systems mandated by law violate due process. That's already been held in the case of movies.
A rating on a game should be a guideline only. As a parent it is your duty to check the game out yourself and see if it's ok for your kid. The rating will give you an idea of the ballpark it's in and why it's there (they specify what the game contains that earned it a rating) but only you know your kids and what is ok and not ok for them to see.
And let's please not forget the stupidity that caused all this: GTA: SA. The game features graphic violence of all kinds, you can kill people with weapons, your fists, running them over, etc. In fact you are required to and rewarded for it. You can have sex in the game, just drive up to a prostitute when damaged, she'll get in your car and you can do your business. You can even kill her and take your money back afterwards (or simply become a pimp and she'll pay you). All that is in the main, M-rated version of the game. What got everyone worked up was you could mod the game to allow access to a removed mini game where you could bang your girlfriend. She is naked, though not in any sort of high detail.
That's what people got worked up over. All the rest of that was ok for their kids, but god forbid they see a 10-polygon TLO (tit like object)! We clearly need stronger ratings control.
The ESRB does a good job rating games as it is, it's just retards getting all worked up over nothing. They scream about how inappropriate GTA: SA is but it's clear they never bothered to read the rating that's there in the first place. I highly doubt there's many people who'd think all the shit that's in the game is ok, but not the one removed mini-game you have to mod it to activate. They were mostly just pissed that they'd been a bad parent and bought their kids a game they shouldn't have.
The MPAA ratings board is even more opaque than the ESRB. The members of the board are not publically identified, and the board will not give specific reasons behind their ratings, only generalities. Also, their appeals process involves a board made up entirely of major studio and major distributor insiders.
In addition, the MPAA suffers from the same problem the ESRB seems to have by rating sexual content (even if it's only implied) far more harshly than violent content.
To say the ESRB has shortcomings and then invoke the MPAA's ratings board as an example of the right way to do things is silly. Check out This Film is Not Yet Rated for more details on how the MPAA Ratings Board (doesn't) work.
All this is going to do is allow the government to take more money from the businesses at gunpoint. If they're going after the violent video games, why not go after all games except for the Ungame as they could have a negative effect on children. Just another example of government abuse of power.
_________________________________
A vote against a Libertarian candidate is
a vote to abolish the Constitution itself.
This actually makes a lot of sense: game developers know what is on the disc, what media has been compressed, etc etc etc. Why not require a table of contents of all the models and such on the disc be given to the ESRB? It isn't quite as easy and practical at the beginning of the cycle when the media isn't being filled as often, but when you get into handhelds and later in the cycle, the developers have to be economical with space usage, and therefore should have a really good idea of what's on the disc and where, right? And if they don't, you'd think it would only benefit the companies by forcing them into a situation where they can be more economical.
Imagine if, a couple months before the ESRB deadline they're starting to put their disc/cartridge inventory list together and they notice that they've got unused duplicate textures filling up 5% of the disc...now they can remove those and fill that space with bikini alternate costumes or something.
It's an extra restriction on developers, for sure, but it would qualm all of the claims of hidden pr0n on little Jimmy's games and lead to better space usage by developers...