You kind of hit on one of the main points I have with this. "Hellraiser (Unbelievably graphic horror movie, for the uninitated. More than you can probably imagine.)" 14 year old Billy can, right now, legally buy this title all he wants. There are no laws saying that the kids can not buy and watch this movie. Retailers have always kelp the standard that if you are under the age of 18 they will not sell you r of higher rated movies, and that was fine
Why is it not fine with video games? Retailers have been instructed to adhear to ESRB rules for a long time. Most retailers I have been to do have policies set in place enforce this. Games don't reach the unbelievably graphic horror that hellraiser does. The interactivity in video games does not give the user the ability to torture and mame people that way that is depicted in many movies. If anything the video game in many cases is much cleaner and less violent then the movie industry. But video games are getting attacked, for enforcing moral responsibility the exact same way movies have.
For those people who think this law only makes sense and people should stop complaining about it. Honestly this law does not restrict too much. It only makes a suggestion into a law.(with some legal loopholes) What is scary is the fact that it is taking a step toward what we fear. We don't want the government taking steps to enforce morals on the citizens because it doesn't turn out well. It "could" lead to another prohibition all over again, if people don't get there thoughts heard. You shouldn't have to wait for the government to go too far before you can say that they are heading in the wrong direction.
The change on this is that it is being turned into a law rather then a recommendation.
Previously stores have been upholding the ESRB ratings voluntarily. The same way they do with CDs and movies. That hasn't been a law past for either one of those. Most retailers, like Wal-Mart, EB games target GameStop and many others, have held the ESRB recommendations for years and do not sell M or AO games to minors.
A way that I could see this restricting is not in the law but in the enforcement of it. If because of this all violent video games now can only be displayed in location where children are not allowed to enter (as is done with pornography or if companies must now card for all purchases of mature videogames(as is with cigarettes). Many of locations that sell video games may not carry violent video games anymore.
If it goes the way of restricting viewing of the product, Wal-Mart is not going to create a separate section within their stores just for the sale of mature games. They would simply not carry them anymore.
If it goes the way of cigarettes where the purchaser must be carded before every sale this is going to create allot of hassle for the large companies. They will have the change within their product databases whether the item must be carded for the purchase or not buy a title by title basses rather then just a product basis (cigarettes alcohol) and then they would have to monitor their registers at all times because if the casher forgets to check the age of the buyer it is now a legal problem.
Large companies may not find this hassle worth it. And they may simply stop caring mature titles. If Wal-Mart and similar companies stop caring your game you have lost a very considerable market for your game and your company will have a very hard time competing in the market. Financially this sounds pretty scary for the game industry.
As far as freedom of speech goes is that the way that games get put into that violent category. This IS NOT using the ESRB or another rating system. The bill only gives examples of what can not be in games that are now to be regulated. Under these regulations there are only generic descriptions of what type of violent acts are no longer going to be allowed. Because there is not a rating system or an impartial body that will be making this decisions there is now a loophole open where someone may bring up legal claims on just about any video game.
A mother may watch their kid playing lets say a new Tony Hawk game. When the mother looks at the game their kid happened to wipe out on the skate board and there is a long animation of the skater falling down a hill running into multiple objects. Because this is a violent and gruesome animation if the mother had a problem with it she may now bring legal action against the place where the game was purchased. It doesn't matter that the game was rated teen. There was still some violence that she saw as unacceptable for her children.
Slashdot Mirror
You kind of hit on one of the main points I have with this. "Hellraiser (Unbelievably graphic horror movie, for the uninitated. More than you can probably imagine.)" 14 year old Billy can, right now, legally buy this title all he wants. There are no laws saying that the kids can not buy and watch this movie. Retailers have always kelp the standard that if you are under the age of 18 they will not sell you r of higher rated movies, and that was fine
Why is it not fine with video games? Retailers have been instructed to adhear to ESRB rules for a long time. Most retailers I have been to do have policies set in place enforce this. Games don't reach the unbelievably graphic horror that hellraiser does. The interactivity in video games does not give the user the ability to torture and mame people that way that is depicted in many movies. If anything the video game in many cases is much cleaner and less violent then the movie industry. But video games are getting attacked, for enforcing moral responsibility the exact same way movies have.
For those people who think this law only makes sense and people should stop complaining about it. Honestly this law does not restrict too much. It only makes a suggestion into a law.(with some legal loopholes) What is scary is the fact that it is taking a step toward what we fear. We don't want the government taking steps to enforce morals on the citizens because it doesn't turn out well. It "could" lead to another prohibition all over again, if people don't get there thoughts heard. You shouldn't have to wait for the government to go too far before you can say that they are heading in the wrong direction.
The change on this is that it is being turned into a law rather then a recommendation.
Previously stores have been upholding the ESRB ratings voluntarily. The same way they do with CDs and movies. That hasn't been a law past for either one of those. Most retailers, like Wal-Mart, EB games target GameStop and many others, have held the ESRB recommendations for years and do not sell M or AO games to minors.
A way that I could see this restricting is not in the law but in the enforcement of it. If because of this all violent video games now can only be displayed in location where children are not allowed to enter (as is done with pornography or if companies must now card for all purchases of mature videogames(as is with cigarettes). Many of locations that sell video games may not carry violent video games anymore. If it goes the way of restricting viewing of the product, Wal-Mart is not going to create a separate section within their stores just for the sale of mature games. They would simply not carry them anymore. If it goes the way of cigarettes where the purchaser must be carded before every sale this is going to create allot of hassle for the large companies. They will have the change within their product databases whether the item must be carded for the purchase or not buy a title by title basses rather then just a product basis (cigarettes alcohol) and then they would have to monitor their registers at all times because if the casher forgets to check the age of the buyer it is now a legal problem. Large companies may not find this hassle worth it. And they may simply stop caring mature titles. If Wal-Mart and similar companies stop caring your game you have lost a very considerable market for your game and your company will have a very hard time competing in the market. Financially this sounds pretty scary for the game industry. As far as freedom of speech goes is that the way that games get put into that violent category. This IS NOT using the ESRB or another rating system. The bill only gives examples of what can not be in games that are now to be regulated. Under these regulations there are only generic descriptions of what type of violent acts are no longer going to be allowed. Because there is not a rating system or an impartial body that will be making this decisions there is now a loophole open where someone may bring up legal claims on just about any video game. A mother may watch their kid playing lets say a new Tony Hawk game. When the mother looks at the game their kid happened to wipe out on the skate board and there is a long animation of the skater falling down a hill running into multiple objects. Because this is a violent and gruesome animation if the mother had a problem with it she may now bring legal action against the place where the game was purchased. It doesn't matter that the game was rated teen. There was still some violence that she saw as unacceptable for her children.