Slashdot Mirror
The ESRB Doesn't Take Games Seriously?
Eurogamer has word of comments by the president of developer Factor 5, Julian Eggebrecht. The veteran game developer had some extremely pointed things to say about the ESRB, an organization he painted as 'not taking games seriously'. Says Eggebrecht, "I would be happy if in games we could talk about homosexuality, but we're not even at the point where we can admit that humans have heterosexual relationships, and that is a real problem - and it tends to show that games are not being seen, even by our own ratings boards, as an artform ... It's a flat out bizarre system...It makes it even harder for games than movies because we don't have the intermediate ratings. They don't really tell you what they will object to - they just say 'well, follow the standards that have been set before', which is a problem if you want to push the envelope." There's further discussion of this issue at Ars' Opposable Thumbs blog, which points out that the console makers hold some responsibility here too. Meanwhile, Rockstar is asking for help from the wider games industry to help them to fight the ESRB/BBFC rulings.
Forbidden fruit and all.
The Banjo Players Must Die!
Let's hope this means the ESRB will go the way of the National Legion of Decency. That is, maybe people will just stop paying attention.
Or, does the video game industry have enough power (read: money) yet to get government to change the rules?
Property is theft.
I just watched a movie called "this film is not yet rated" (get it on netflix) where they show just how incompetent and unfair the MPAA ratings board is. If the ESRB is WORSE, then I feel sorry for anyone trying to push the envelope in games developement.
PS. Jack valenti is still dead and in hell
God is real unless declared integer.
A modern video game (above the level of Xbox Live Arcade material) requires a staff of 20 or more people (not including voice work) and can cost millions of dollars and years of work to develop. This means that money is a VERY real consideration in videogame development. No one is going to spend millions to develop a game that only a handful of stores in the whole country will carry.
Now, you can point out that doing a cheap flash game or simple tetris-like title can be done much cheaper and easier than a full-fledged game. But that's clearly not the kind of game the OP was referring to.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Video games? Art? Not really. I've only seen maybe a handful of games that I would call "art" versus just a pasttime. My short short list includes Rez and Flow.
The problem is that while film gets artsy fartsy conventions and festivals, game festivals are all about marketability and anything even remotely controvertial gets slammed (Super Columbine RPG anyone?).
I mean, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, and co have all stated in one way or another that they wouldn't license games exceeding M ratings. Imagine if the companies that build and sell movie projectors had the means to lock-out "unlicensed" film and wouldn't license anything with material they were not comfortable with!
All this combined with useful idiots like Ebert declaring that games cannot be art means there won't be any expansion of thought on gaming until the companies involved grow some balls.
More Twoson than Cupertino
WHO isn't at that point? I can think of two mainstream, A-list games, off the top of my head, that casually included heterosexual AND homosexual relationships:
I've never played the Sims, but I imagine it lets you create gay characters too.
Perhaps the problem is with Mr. Egglebert and Factor 5, not with the industry at large...?
Ever seen Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning? Now tell me, your "normal" motion picture (think ("Live Free or Die Hard") cost $175,000,000 to produce. Star Wreck cost a couple thousand, including CGI, sets, costumes, the whole shebang.
Money does not equal quality. You do not always get what you pay for. If the salesman says "you get what you pay for" hold on to your wallet, sucker. Any Linux-using nerd should know that you don't always pay for what you get, either. I mean, what, $500 for Vista and $0 for the infinitely superior Ubantu.
There's no reason a game should retail at $60 while a movie retails at $15, and no reason why a game needs a big budget. The original DOOM was done by half a dozen guys and nobody has yet to equal its fun, not even the high graphics, big budget successors.
-mcgrew
PS- methinks the ESRB may become gaming's version of the RIAA, eventually existing only to squeeze out new players as the RIAA now does with its fight against P2P and internet radio.
If you're willing to submit to censorship then you don't really care about what you're producing anyway. Most movies are crap. They fit the formula and that's about it. Most games are crap. They fit the formula and that's about it. You can attempt art that happens to make money, but you can't attempt to make money and create art.
If we aren't careful video games are going to end up like comics/graphic novels. Infantilized bullshit featuring super underwear heroes. If we want video games that fulfill our demand for intelligent content, then we need a few game artists to tell the ESRB to fuck off and stick to their vision. The ESRB doesn't take games seriously, because censors don't take intellectual discourse seriously. Like all censors they'd rather have pleasant than interesting. The problem isn't the ESRB. The problem is that otherwise self-respecting adults take them seriously. If you're willing to be told what to think, do, say, or code and you're not 4 years old, you should be embarrassed.
Why don't the publishers simply not have their game reviewed by the ESRB and instead label them unrated? I know the big national chains have no problem carrying unrated movie titles.
because that's when congress steps in.
What? Spongebob Squarepants isn't enough?!
but we're not even at the point where we can admit that humans have heterosexual relationships, and that is a real problem - and it tends to show that games are not being seen, even by our own ratings boards, as an artform
Pssst. Those Sims with the little hearts over the avatars? That's not a secret Masonic password, fella.
"I want to see a game with real sexual content in a store here in Germany - I don't think it will happen unless we really recognise games as an artform," he told the audience. He pointed to Stanley Kubrick film Eyes Wide Shut, which "discusses relationship issues that you have in a marriage". "You don't have that in games - it is time to wake up and make it happen."
So games need more Nicole Kidman fantasizing about infidelity while you, as Tom Cruise, infiltrate a coven of America's elite who just happen to hold their orgies at the estate of the Federal Reserve Chairman while performing Gothic chants in red velvet hoodies?
Mouse control or not?