Slashdot Mirror
The State of Video Game Regulation
Gamasutra is running an in-depth look at the regulation of video games in the US and other countries. They discuss the reasons for such legislation, such as child protection and intellectual property restrictions, as well as what gamers can expect to see in the coming years.
"Fairfield also points out combinations of laws, which, when put together make for strange outcomes. The biggest of these, for video games, is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. In short, gaining unauthorized access to someone's computer and doing $500 in damages opens you up for criminal charges. It's good for prosecuting hackers, but it makes for a strange fit with social networking websites and user-generated content. That fit was especially strange when prosecutors weren't quite sure how to approach the widely publicized case of Megan Meier. The 13-year-old Meier committed suicide after being deceived and bullied by another girl and her mother, Lori Drew. Unable to find a good way to approach the issue, prosecutors charged Drew under MySpace's End User License Agreement, effectively giving MySpace the power to dictate criminal law."
I always wondered if there was any truth in the, "TV and computer games are bad for you" story until my son was born. When he was 3 and was told to turn off the TV, he had a paddy. He's grown out of that, but now he's 6 and plays on his PC and Nintendo DS, when he's told to finish and switch it off, he gets quite agressive and shouts and makes threats. Even he realizes later that it is ridiculous and unacceptable, but he is so disoriented from being immersed in the game (Lego Star Wars and Lego Indiana Jones if you must know) that he can't see reason at the time. I guess it's all part of learning and growing up.
If you were to ask me personally, I'd say it was stupid and unconstitutional for the government to regulate the game video games business. It's the usual story of government trying to trample on our civil liberties and individual rights.
On the other hand, as somebody who feels that there are certain types of games minors definitely should not be playing, I wish we would see more self-regulation from the games and retail industry, or at least some serious attempts to keep games out of hands of minors without the ESRB.
This game will waste your life. Don't clicky!
There was a case in the Netherlands where kids obtained some items in Runescape through extortion of another kid. This is also punishable just like "normal" theft according to the judge (if you can call theft normal).
Link to article in Dutch: http://www.parool.nl/parool/nl/7/Misdaad/article/detail/38458/2008/10/21/Rechter-straft-jongens-voor-afpersen-in-computerspel.dhtml
when you accept it as such.
I don't see why they should regulate video games any more than they regulate the content of books.
I guess parent used the wrong 'Reply' button.
Do you think these 'serious attempts to keep games out of hands of minors' should restrict a parents ability to buy games for their children? After all, age does not denote maturity ( which is also why I think the 'age of consent' is ridiculous' but that's another topic )
The disappearing pencil trick. Let me show you it.
They're not stamping on civil liberties or the individuals rights, they're trying to protect us from ourselves because we're too stupid to know better!
I'm off to play counter-strike and plant a bomb in a non-descript the middle eastern town...
It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
Yeah, having myspace set legal precedent is a great idea. Since they do such a good job with things like css, (d)html, javascript and the like. I'm sure they'd do incredibly well in the judicial system.
Before you freak out, please read this post as sarcastic.
Believe that we should start executing people for breaking their EULAs.
It's the next logical step towards a beautiful future.
You can't take the sky from me.
But the topic is MySpace. That's quite the tangent, unless there's a MySpace video game. Wait, there ISN'T, is there?
Can you *imagine* what the MySpace game would be like?
::shudder::
Don't put advice in your sig.
... Don't buy them for them, and turn on the content rating system, to stop them from borrowing them from friends. Both the XBox and PS3 have these features. Older consoles don't, I admit. But it's a trivial issue. Nonetheless
Most kids are bright enough to tell fiction from reality, and the ones who aren't are likely to get into trouble anyway.
I hesitate to say it, but George Carlin was right - "Wait, the kid who eats too many marbles doesn't get to grow up to have kids of his own? Good. Fuck 'em."
Boo the Dictator Bush at several events while dodging Sheeple, Cronies and Zombie Service agents. Victory at the end of each round is celebrated with a pitcher of ice cold beer, a big fat blunt and a porn magazine.
Rated "E" for Everyone as everyone should know IT IS JUST A FUCKING GAME FOR CHRIST SAKE!
Brought to you by Trollcom.
"effectively giving MySpace the power to dictate criminal law." is a load of rubbish, people need to read TFA before making statements like that. Lori was prosecuted for using a fake account to ILLEGALLY HARASS and VICTIMISE A MINOR!
The prosecution used the available and existing laws to ensure some sort of punishment for this crime as it generally fell into a non-existing law area. No laws were changed, no laws were trampled on. Unless people sign terms of agreement anywhere, AND intend to mis-represent themselves AND harass and victimise minors to the point of physical/mental harm or death, they have NOTHING to fear.
Period!
But if they do have that intention, they deserve everything they get.
Seriously, the solution is simple. Just do it like they do in NZ. Exactly the same system for video games as for movies. Effectively it just becomes the following:
R18 - Sexual content / Drugs / Extreme violence - GTA
R16 - High levels of violence - UT
M - Medium level violence, alcohol, etc - Baldur's Gate
G - Everyone - Tetris
It's illegal to supply anything with an R rating to someone under the R rating age, even if you're their parent. Nice and simple, and you never have problems with people claiming they didn't know what their kids were playing.
Exactly. The ones who have problems with video games are the ones who have problems anyway. I played 18 rated games in my early teens and I worked out okay because I knew that there was a difference between reality and fiction. If you don't know that then films, books and even childhood "role playing" games like "Cowboys and Indians" can have pretty much the same effect and cause you to think it is acceptable to do things you shouldn't.
Bringing accountability to Government means actually saying what you think, not just accepting that you have no voice...
Incidentally - the Internet & Web is the most effective tool for "having a voice" that the Human Race has ever had, why do you think China comes down so hard on it?
Don't just let Governments (or other people in power) pull the wool over your eyes with crap because it makes their jobs easier... Speak out!! (within legal boundaries)
Remember people, we live in Democracies (well, alot of us do!), you don't just have to bend over and take it unless EVERYONE AGREES you should, and most of the time people JUST AREN'T AWARE/INFORMED of what's happening.
A Man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties -- Albert Einstein
Why are needed "new" laws for "online"?
The current laws for "offline" would work as well, so why???
Well.. according to the article, there were 2 laws made, and both have been shutdown.. Then it also talks about a Ca state law that is being fought..From what I gather, the industry is regulating themselves anyway.. I don't see what the hub-bub is all about.. The Constitution seems to be working just fine in this area.
As to "protecting" children... That is the parents job.. period. If I was a parent today, it would be up to me to decide when I felt they could handle the internet.. or to decide if I felt they had enough of a grasp on the difference between fantasy and reality to handle some of these games... Personally, I feel that any parent that has kids that are under the age of 16 or so surfing the internet by themselves are pretty shitty parents.
There is no kid safe internet.. and if people want that, they will have to build a separate read only internet with "approved" content.. until then, just keep em off it.. problem solved.
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
Different societies have different value systems, and so different countries regulate different media in different ways.
What's important is that games get treated fairly against other media and regulated for what they are, not what scared, ignorant people worry they might be. The problem is that governments and legislators don't yet "get" games, and so fear and ignorance reign supreme.
As an example, in Australia, the government has a Classification Board that rates books, TV, movies and games. The Board is supposed to represent the values of the community and it generally does a pretty good job. Very few movies are refused classification (eg: banned).
Not so with video games. Games are regularly refused classification in Australia, largely because the highest classification for games is MA15+ - so if a game is considered only suitable for adults, then it can't be classified.
Yes, this is ludicrous and there's been a huge response from the local industry and a lot of local gamers. You can read more about it here if you are interested.
The point I'm trying to make, though, is that games are not treated on the same level as other forms of media in Australia, because they're poorly understood by government as a medium - mainly because the people in government didn't grow up playing games. I'd bet there are similar issues to varying degrees in other countries.
Give it a decade or so and things will be different. Until then, we're going to have to keep putting up with emotive comments and costly ineffective legislation from politicians looking for cheap popularity amongst their ignorant and fearful dull-eyed constituents.
I know that if my teenage nephews wanted the most violent gory game on the planet I would have NO problem with buying it for them. Why? Because not only have they been playing games from the time their little fingers could grasp a controller (for which I still get bitched at for ruining my sisters "hallmark moment" because instead of mommy or daddy my oldest first words were MINE! because I dared to try to sneak in some eternal champions while he was napping after playing Barney) but more importantly from the time they were little I showed them how games were made. The "behind the scenes" as it were.
I used WAD editors(remember those?) to show them how levels were made, used Bryce and Paintshop Pro to show them how scene and character art was made, showed them how scripts controlled the enemy characters, etc. So now when the oldest plays a shooter(the youngest prefers MMOs) I hear dialog like this "Who designed this thing? Would you look at the draw in? And look at all the jagged seams! Do they think this is a PSOne? And who wrote the AI for this thing? Can't they see I have just mowed down a dozen of their buddies? DUCK YOU DUMMY!" so I don't think I have to worry about my boys mixing up fantasy and reality.
But of course these regulations are trying to fix with pointless laws a much deeper and more sinister problem we have in this country: abandoned kids. What I mean by abandoned isn't thrown out onto the street, no, in some ways this is much worse. I am talking about all those kids out there whose parents have simply used the TV(and now the game console) as an excuse to never interact with their children. Picking up my nephews from their friends houses I have seen it first hand. Houses without a single book or magazine so you know the child has never been read to, parents too busy with their own lives to even notice if the kid isn't there, kid allowed to stare at the screen for hours as long as they don't bother the parents, etc.
It is no wonder that kids like that might have trouble separating what they see and play from reality, hell they were raised by the tube. But all the regulations in the world isn't going to make those parents spend time with their kids. Frankly I don't know of anything that would. Maybe instead of ever more stupid regulations we could be pushing for more personal responsibility? Hell if I know. It is just so sad to see with your own eyes kids being raised by a television set.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
They are definately able to find a link between pornography and paediatricians!! Funny that, violence on TV (Big business) and in games doesn't lead to crimes but porn does. Who would have thought...
The key issue here was that she did this in order to commit the crime of inflicting severe emotional distress on another. The first amendment has never protected people who want to do that. What really got Drew was the fact that she broke the ToS in a serious way in order to commit another crime.
The danger is not so much as the child not knowing the difference between fictional and real. But the fact at young ages kids get emotionally connected. Even non-violent games, they get very angry when they loose candy land (a game of chance). But with Video games the child really gets emotionally connected the game, and normally really connects himself with the characters, and when he plays outside of the game he usually plays the video game that he is connected to. Leading them to do dangerous activities, No they probably wont go shooting people, but kicking, punching, finding a stick and using it as a sword. For most games these activities do almost no damage. Thus kids think they are relativity safe to act out in play. Also video games love to extend a persons ability to jump and survive jumps thus making kids more willing to jump of higher areas and hurting themselves.
No just targeting video games is unfair a lot of TV shows even ones targets kids like PowerRangers do the same thing, however video games adds that extra element of emotional connection.
We love to see the extram stories of people killing others. But the real danger is Billy smacking Joey with a baseball bat breaking an arm, pretending (and knowing that he was pretending) to be a video game character with a sword.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I got an even better idea. BE A PARENT and BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR CHILD.
That's the problem with society today. We want everyone else to "make sure out child X". A good parent is involved with there child and knows whats going on, at least to the best of there ability.
No parent is perfect and there is no manual for being a good parent. That being said a good parent will know what there letting there kid see and do.
Take charge, Take control, Take care of your child and stop blaming society because your a lame loser parent.
$5000, not $500
In short, gaining unauthorized access to someone's computer and doing $500 in damages opens you up for criminal charges. Aggresive DRM anyone? I figure disabling my dvd drives and putting difficult to remove malware on my computer without informing me is punishable by some prison time.
The biggest issue, it seems to me, is that people who spend a lot of time playing video games generally lack social skills. While everyone else was learning how to relate to the world, video game players were learning how to relate to video games.
Those who play games don't realize that they are socially backward because they are socially backward.
What you've just written is a monument to the mollycoddling that Western (but particularly middle class American) children get put through. It's utterly ridiculous. Little boys have run around with sticks, knocked each other over, fallen out of trees, and got busted nicking candy from the store since time immemorial, these things are an important part of establishing identity and social boundaries.
If a kid breaks another kids arm when playing with a baseball bat, he's learnt a damn hard lesson and won't do it again. If it's his arm that gets broken he'll learn to stay away from similar situations.
Adults often try to rationalise this behaviour as "he was playing halo, and he just hit his friend with a bat. It's the game's fault", when it ain't. He was being a kid.
1 Copy of a Hanson's "mmBop" song, or the billable hour when the lawyer laughed and spat coffee all over a brief?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
frackin gov't. When will people get it through their heads that gov't is NOT the answer, it's the PROBLEM. Leave us alone like the founders intended.
Fairfield also points out combinations of laws, which, when put together make for strange outcomes. The biggest of these, for video games, is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. In short, gaining unauthorized access to someone's computer and doing $500 in damages opens you up for criminal charges.
Sony rooted my PC, resulting in loss of hours of my time, well over $500 worth. Why aren't any of Sony's executives in prison?
It's good for prosecuting hackers
And another slashdot story asks about hackable digital converters. When I was a teenager I'd take $10 transistor radios and modify them to be guitar fuzzboxes, and I'd sell them for $50. This can be prosecuted now?
If "hacking" now means only "criminally breaking into computers" than what do we call what was traditionally called hacking? Someone who writes quick and dirty but useable code used to ba a hacker, what do we call him now?
That fit was especially strange when prosecutors weren't quite sure how to approach the widely publicized case of Megan Meier. The 13-year-old Meier committed suicide after being deceived and bullied by another girl and her mother, Lori Drew. Unable to find a good way to approach the issue, prosecutors charged Drew under MySpace's End User License Agreement, effectively giving MySpace the power to dictate criminal law."
Except that Drew was found not guilty of hacking myspace.
Does anybody know a good nerd site I can move to? Because the lack of nerds here lately is unsettling.
Free Martian Whores!
I have no problem as a parent if another parent goes out an buys any game they desire for their child. I also don't have any problem with a parent getting their child alcohol or cigarettes. As far as I'm concerned it is the responsibility of the parent to determine what is OK for their child. Whether or not people parent "properly" is an argument that no one comes away satisfied from.
But what regulation I would like to see is keeping more hardcore games and movies from being sold to minors. I don't see how this infringes on the rights of a parent, and the protections it provides to minors are the same as those provided for other substances, Tobacco, Firearms, Alcohol, and R rated movies (if the theater wishes to enforce this one).
Again, if a parent wants to go out and buy the latest "blow up everything, kill everyone, and laugh about it" game then it's their choice, but I think that it should be something that is up to the parent, not the retailer.
I never hesitate to say that George Carlin was right. He was always right.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I know that if my teenage nephews wanted the most violent gory game on the planet I would have NO problem with buying it for them.
I have a problem with that. They're not your kids. If you feel so strongly about it, perhaps you could persuade your brother/sister on the argument of letting their kids play the games in question. I'm guessing that the parents have a problem with it and that's why the kids are coming to you.
Yeah, IRL, me either. Just don't want to get modded down for being seen to slap down someone's kids...
"... if they are at home watching TV or playing video games, I know exactly where they are, what they are doing, and what they aren't doing."
Children need a huge amount of adult attention. They need more attention than the adult just assuring himself that he knows what they are doing.
"During my teenage years those "not socially backward" kids as you would put them would be drinking, smoking, having sex..." That's because they got very, very little adult attention.
"... or sometimes partying." Partying is good. Partying helps teach how to relate to other people. Partying is better than being alone playing usually very violent games.
Firstly I (and many others) feel that the verdict in the Drew case was a travesty, set a horrible precedent and was the one of the absolute worst uses of the judicial system in recent years - the implications are huge and could affect all of us who spend a lot of time online. It was an abuse of the legal system in my mind, tapping into people's emotions about a tragedy to get a dubious legal ruling passed - it was a judicial lynch mob.
Secondly I am so tired of the double standard in video games in how any type of the most gruesome violence is permitted (with the rating system) but even a minor mention of sex or nudity and the game can;t be made. Sex has to be sanitized, yet you can blow someones brains out.
I love violent games as much as the next person, the generally are some of the best games out there - well made shooters are especially up my alley - loved GTA, but damn, it would be nice not to have to tiptoe around any sex or nudity (if it's appropriate). In games made for adults this should be an option. I am not talking about having those things just for the sake of having them, but am referring to the ability for a designer to make a game truly geared towards adults that isn't a lame excuse/attempt at porn. I would like to see the ability for AO titles to be viable, what that would be I don't know, but take the sex scene is GTA4 - they could have made those a lot more fun or funny had they had a little visual latitude.
As a parent I totally understand how and why people are concerned about violent games. I play a lot of games I wouldn't want my daughter to play until she is old enough to understand certain things. The biggest issue I would have with these sort of games is the same issue I have with TV and some movies when it comes to kids, and it the desensitization to violence and the pain and suffering of others. I think that can do a real disservice to the humanity inside a person if they grow up constantly witnessing violent acts.
However, with all of that said I think that it is a parent's job to monitor what their kids see and buy and put it in the proper context.
I do think that the voluntary ratings system is the way to go....The absolute worst thing that could be done is censorship of game content by the government - it would especially be pointless because it's not like it would have an effect on TV (which is much worse). Censorship doesn't solve anything - it's bad enough that the industry self censors based on what they think will sell or be controversial.
Parents who aren't digitally literate could use a little education about these ratings and what they mean, but all in all determining what is appropriate for a child or the market isn't a government job, it's a parent/industry job, and for the record if given the choice between my child seeing explicit violence or explicit sex it's my feeling that sex is much less harmful.
With all the overpopulation and everything.
I was socially backward before I got into video games. How? I spent all of my free time at the public library, reading everything I could get my hands on.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
And usually that only happens in prisons.
Usually that only happens in American prisons.
I know that if my teenage nephews wanted the most violent gory game on the planet I would have NO problem with buying it for them.
I have a problem with that. They're not your kids. If you feel so strongly about it, perhaps you could persuade your brother/sister on the argument of letting their kids play the games in question. I'm guessing that the parents have a problem with it and that's why the kids are coming to you.
very good point. especially the 'if the parents have a problem' part. the main issue s that aoarently parents cannot read the ESRB disclaimers including but not limited to "Strong sexual content, gore, strong language, alcohol and/or drug references" etc... So when Mrs. soccer mom picks up GTAIV for her 12 year old kid, and completely decided to not only disregard that the game is fucking called grand theft auto, but that it is rated mature, has many things the parent probably wouldn't like their kid seeing, and is specifically told by the cashier that this game must be bought by 17 or older, she sees those games 'promoting violence' and that automatically makes it rockstar's fault for not making a fucking barney game. Sorry for the loose structure, I just cant fucking stand people who don't understand that not only are there warnings about content like this, but they DON'T HAVE TO BUY IT. It is not up to the fucking government to raise our kids (our being metaphorical, i have no kids) It is up to the god damn parents..... fucking do your damn ob already. /rant
It's bad enough when the general media smears the name of Hackers, but we really should know better on /.
Ruby Neural Evolution of Augmenting Topologies
What precedent? Are you talking about the precedent of holding someone responsible for harassing their neighbor? Because I'm all for that. Are you suggesting that just because she did it online and under a false identity means that she shouldn't be held accountable? She did get off pretty much with just a hand slapping since she got nothing more than misdemeanors which is far less than she deserved.
As an aside a friend of mine brought up a good point. He thinks that Lori Drew was just taking the blame for her daughter. I hope he's right because it seems insane to think that she did something so childish and hurtful.
On the other hand, as somebody who feels that there are certain types of games minors definitely should not be playing, I wish we would see more self-regulation from the games and retail industry, or at least some serious attempts to keep games out of hands of minors without the ESRB.
There will be no self-regulation when you're asking someone to cut out part of their market - that is why the government has to be involved. Who wants their store to be the one that won't sell to minors based on principle, only to see the shop down the street taking in all the cash they would have gotten without their moralistic stance?
The father succumbed to drugs(currently dying in a halfway house of hepatitis 3) and sis had problem pregnancies followed by a surgery that left her paralyzed. So as far as the boys are concerned I AM the dad. Their dad was too busy stealing copper for his next meth fix to care about even seeing them when they were born, and sis was laid up barely able to move. I was the one changing the diapers, I was the one holding them and rocking them when they were sick, I was the one that drove them to the doctors or answered the questions about why the sky was blue(which gave me a good excuse to teach a little about how search engines work).
So as far as the boys and the rest of the family is concerned they are as much MINE as they are hers. I stepped up to the plate when there was nobody else able or willing to do the job. My sis still has the photos around somewhere of me asleep in a rocking chair rocking the youngest because he was cranky with the flu and wouldn't sleep otherwise. So not to sound arrogant but taking the job nobody else would take and sticking with it for 16 years has given me some privileges that a normal "show up say hi and split" uncle would have. And that includes anything to do with electronics.
I built their computers, I decide what OS and apps go on them, and I decide what is appropriate. And they have turned out VERY well, if I do say so myself. The oldest is currently reading every anatomy book he can get his hands on and getting ready to enroll in the local college for pre-med(he wants to be one of those doctors without borders) and the youngest hasn't decided on whether he wants to be a pastry chef or maybe fashion design. So I think I did a pretty damned good job. They are both happy, well adjusted, kind and responsible. So don't think I am one of those "stick in my 02 cents and leave" uncles. I was there for the good, the bad, the painful, and the sad. So as far as the boys are concerned in any way that matters they are mine. For them it is "Uncle=dad" and "Real Dad=some guy we met 3 times over the years because he couldn't stay straight".
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
It won't effect any of us who are online. People on here need to quit over-reacting to these things. If this case ever effects your life I will give you a million dollars (obviously, this doesn't count if your harass some poor kid to self harm). The woman is sick and got off with less than she deserved.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
Umm, you do realize the ESRB is a self-regulatory commission, right? It was created by the ESA, and if you RTFA you'd know that the ESA is fighting government regulation tooth and nail. I guess their rating system could be better if, say, it just paralleled the MPAA's, but scrapping the entire organization and starting over from scratch would be anything but productive...
Sendou Wave Kick!!
Are you suggesting that just because she did it online and under a false identity means that she shouldn't be held accountable?
Um, no. She should be punished for the harassment, not for signing up with a fake name. If the former is not actually a crime, then fix that rather than turning the latter into one. As it stands now, just about every Internet user in the US has committed a federal crime, so we should all hope we haven't annoyed any government officials lately.
And yes, if that means Lori Drew gets to walk on a technicality, so be it. She'll still be ostracized for the rest of her life, and that's less bad than opening the door to selective prosecution of anyone who's ever checked their work email from home and thereby violated the "no commercial use" clause of their ISP.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
I'm sorry, but you're wrong - certainly you're entitled to your opinion about whaty happened to Lori Drew, I agree that she was sick and deserved a lot of things - but don't pervert our legal system to try to turn something that isn't a crime into a crime ex post facto.
The verdict on the other hand could affect a lot of people, it could affect me, so on that count you're just plain wrong.
No staking. They stayed in their respective homes.
No libel. The only lies told were about themselves.
No slander. That's verbal communication and this was text.
(PS Are the investigators who found out about the losses investment banks made responsible for the deaths of the high flyers who hilled themselves with the shame?)
And vigelante justice is likewise illegal, so they would have vigilantes kill THEM, and....
gives damages of $5000.
Just ask McKinnon.
That is no defense.
No charge for that one. Further truth fixes will be billed at a rate of $1/word.
It's funny to see people reacting exactly how the media and jurors in the case did - emotionally, without considering thhat there is a right and a wrong thing to do things, and that the rule of law HAS to be adhered to in all cases, ESPECIALLY in cases where the public feels a heinous wrong has been done.
We cannot compromise long held principles in a one of a kind situation just because we feel someone needs to be punished to to make an example of her.
Harrassment charges would have been fine. The woman is already a national pariah (as another poster has pointed out) and was run out of her neighborhood.
Seriously, the solution is simple. Just do it like they do in NZ. Exactly the same system for video games as for movies.
The film and game rating systems in the United States already have a one-to-one correspondence: E==G, E10+==PG, T==PG-13, M==R, and AO==NC-17. The only way I can see that it could be made more like the OFLC systems in place in Australia and New Zealand would be if the ESRB were to refuse classification to any video game that would be rated R if it were a film.
R18 - Sexual content / Drugs / Extreme violence - GTA
[...]
G - Everyone - Tetris
But how would you rate Dr. Mario or Lockjaw: The Overdose? They're Tetris-style puzzle games with thinly veiled drug references.
Personally, I feel that any parent that has kids that are under the age of 16 or so surfing the internet by themselves are pretty shitty parents.
Yeah! If my parents hadn't (unknowingly) let me on the internet at age 12, I would never have gotten into contact with that guy from the chess club who wrote the chess-playing program which lead to me taking up programming.
Instead, I would have most likely just sat at home playing games instead of learning a marketable skill.
Had that been the case, I would have had two reasonable career choices after high school: turn my mediocre amateur musician skills into great professional musician skills, or study math.
Instead, because I was let out on the tubes, I taught myself programming. I'm now doing my phd in cryptography.
Sitting alone coding, or sitting alone gaming; I don't think choosing one over the other would have impacted, say, my social skills much. Bear in mind that this is before I started gaming over the internet, since what I had at home was paid out of my own pocket and was slow like shit.
I assume (since I seem to recall) that my mom knew perfectly well that there was porn at the internet, and that I was looking at it. [if not, she probably suspected it]. I remember her telling me something to the effect that porn is always supernormal and that I'm not seeing women in their "natural state" but a state constructed for (and only women selected for) a particular purpose.
To the extent that I didn't turn out fine, I'm willing to wager that the internet wasn't the problem. I've been painfully shy through my teen (and pre-teen) years, but I managed to meet a girlfriend over the internet. I think that, among other things, helped me become less shy.
As always, the plural of anecdote is bullshit, so don't put too much into this. But don't underestimate young minds. And don't shield them from doing stupid things early: that'll make them do stupid things later.
You've got a point. I'm 24, I primarially grew up without many video games, and the ones I had most people would call acceptable due to the shockingly bad graphics.
When I was a child...
I grew up without GTA yet I stole.
I grew up not watching violent tv/movies/games yet I got in fights... a lot.
I crashed bikes, fell in black berries, teased kids, got teased and put myself in all sorts of dangerous situations.
People and children have always done this and always will. There is nothing wrong with it. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that anyone who attempts to insulte their children from these experiences, is actually not helping their child.
This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Heh, when I was little my favorite game was a Spectrum 48k thing called "B.C. Bill." You were a caveman, and had a club. You bopped women on the head and took them back to your cave, then you bopped walking hamburgers and dinosaurs and took them back to the cave. If you got good at bopping women and food, after a time you'd get young versions of you coming out the cave.
I note that I'm not a violent rapist and animal poacher.
the MPAA is really not a model I want to see emulated. There's a documentary, "This film is not yet rated", which exposes the hypocritical, irrational agenda they follow. Specifically, there are a lot of examples of how violence is cool with them but sex isn't; if there is sex, it has to be from the male perspective. Also, bad words are ok... but they can only be repeated a certain number of times. One "Shitfuck" too many and the film ends up with an NC17, decimating potential revenues. If the word is okay once, why not twice or even (gasp!) three times? The worst part of course is the total lack of transparency.
It's soft censorship, carried out by a group of shadowy figures, enforcing a moral agenda that is questionable at best. I don't want to see that emulated in the video game industry anymore than it already is.