Agonizing_Gas
Shared on Thu, 09/14/2006 - 01:28A recent article from 2o2p's own JTGJR007 was on the front page of 2o2p a while back and it made me reflect on the purpose of the video game rating system. To dumb it down a bit, the ESRB is doing for games what the MPAA does for movies. Taking the content of the game (from the lyrics in the soundtrack and the words in the dialog, to the amount of violence, blood and gore) they review each game and suggest (or is it appoint?) each game a rating based on the audience they feel that it is appropriate for. Those ratings are: EC = Early Childhood (a difficult rating to find); E = Everyone; E10+ = 10 years old and up; T = Teen; M = 17 years old and up; AO = Adults only. Essentially they measure up with the movie ratings of G, PG, PG-13, R, and X or NC17. Each game also includes a description of why it has the rating it has on the back of the box, such as violence, blood and gore, language, etc. On the surface, the rating system looks good. Parents know about movie ratings, so they should be smart enough to figure out how game rating systems work. Scratch the surface though and you'll find that it doesn't work like it should.
As an adult gamer, I barely pay attention to the rating of a game simply because I don't have kids. At the same time, I'm not used to checking for ratings on games because when I grew up we didn't have the variety in content that we have now. The Atari 2600, for instance, didn't have game ratings. The same is true for the NES. Since the ESRB was established the same year I got out of high school, I simply based my purchases on what I thought was going to be the most fun. Parents of the time were carefree. Mario, Sonic, Madden and the like were all pretty tame. Video games were almost equated with cartoons, as they could have been appropriate for any age group. Parents and kids alike were trained that video games are all okay for kids.
The problem is that the parents that were once the kids of my generation are still in the same mindset. Games have changed considerably over the past 12 years that the ESRB has been around. The rating system serves a purpose, but one that is failing. Parents know about the movie rating system since it's been around their whole lives, but they are unaware of how much video games have changed. While it was once safe to drop your kids off at a toy store with a few bills to pick up a game, that is no longer the case. Just as parents need to be active in what their children watch on TV or in the theater, they need to participate in the selection process of games. And in some warped way a few of them are.
Before my current job I managed a video game retail store. The reaction that parents had to the rating system was often disappointing and embarrassing. I would carefully explain the rating of the game and the reasons that it was rated the way it was. They would look at me like I had just spoken in some foreign tongue that they had never heard. "But that doesn't have nudity or anything in it, does it?" At this point, I would expalin that no, the game might not have sex or nudity in it (thank God, for the poor parent might actually have to participate in their child's life for a moment to cover the birds and the bees), but it is still not seen as approprate for his or her age group. The parent would then say that the child sees violence in movies and on TV all the time, so there's really just no escaping it, and that it's fine since their child is used to it. My suggestion? Don't feel helpless, you're the damn parent. If you don't want your kid to take in so much violence, perhaps you should make some changes in your house. As to why we're the complete opposite from the rest of modern civilization by hiding sex and glorifying violence is beyond me. But I digress.
The blame can't be put squarely on the shoulders of the parents though. Take the case of Florence Cohen for example. This 85-year-old grandmother bought "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" for her 14-year-old grandson. At the time of purchase the game had an M rating. When the rating changed to AO after the "Hot Coffee" mod was discovered, Grandma Flo was ever so disappointed. In fact, she was so disturbed that she sued Rockstar Games and Take Two Interactive for engaging in false, misleading and deceptive practices. She did, however, demand that the game be taken away from her grandson...
While I know this story is over a year old, let's review this with Grandma Flo: Bought M rated game for 14-year-old. Took game away from grandson. Sued Rockstar and Take Two for engaging in false, misleading and deceptive practices. Regardless of the rating (M or AO), isn't Flo the one that is ultimately responsible since she bought the game? Are 14-year-olds entitled to play any video game that comes out, regardless of rating? Can there be games that have adult content that are made for (brace yourself) adults? GASP!
Mature gamers should be able to have mature content in games, but it is becoming increasingly difficult. With Grandma Flo and Jack Johnson (the loud mouthed attorney from Florida that has made an name for himself by labeling video games as the root of all evil) pointing at the video game industry as the villians, there seems to be a lack of focus on the responsibility of parents (and yes, even grandparents). The ESRB may have given Oblivion a lower rating than it should have, but that is the fault of the ESRB, not the developer or publisher. The scene that was discovered in the "Hot Coffee" mod for GTA: San Andreas was unexpected, but it wasn't on a disk rated E or T. It was rated M. To be honest, I doubt that someone of the target audience that spent the $50 on GTA would be shocked and disgusted by the questionable scene uncovered by the mod. After all, in GTA you can hire a hooker, but that's okay because you don't really see anything...
It is not the responisiblity of the video game industry to raise the youth of today. Game developers should be able to create games for whichever target audience that they want. The rating system is in place, it just needs to be used properly. The laws passed in several states to prohibit the sale of video games to minors at least points at the issue and calls for attention. If I had something I shouldn't have when I was a kid, my parents took it away. They didn't sue the manufacturer or go yell at the person that sold the item to me. I paid for it. It's time to start putting the blame where it belongs. The current generation of parents has to hold themselves accountable for what their kids are exposed to and quit displacing the blame to avoid responsibility.
As an adult gamer, I barely pay attention to the rating of a game simply because I don't have kids. At the same time, I'm not used to checking for ratings on games because when I grew up we didn't have the variety in content that we have now. The Atari 2600, for instance, didn't have game ratings. The same is true for the NES. Since the ESRB was established the same year I got out of high school, I simply based my purchases on what I thought was going to be the most fun. Parents of the time were carefree. Mario, Sonic, Madden and the like were all pretty tame. Video games were almost equated with cartoons, as they could have been appropriate for any age group. Parents and kids alike were trained that video games are all okay for kids.
The problem is that the parents that were once the kids of my generation are still in the same mindset. Games have changed considerably over the past 12 years that the ESRB has been around. The rating system serves a purpose, but one that is failing. Parents know about the movie rating system since it's been around their whole lives, but they are unaware of how much video games have changed. While it was once safe to drop your kids off at a toy store with a few bills to pick up a game, that is no longer the case. Just as parents need to be active in what their children watch on TV or in the theater, they need to participate in the selection process of games. And in some warped way a few of them are.
Before my current job I managed a video game retail store. The reaction that parents had to the rating system was often disappointing and embarrassing. I would carefully explain the rating of the game and the reasons that it was rated the way it was. They would look at me like I had just spoken in some foreign tongue that they had never heard. "But that doesn't have nudity or anything in it, does it?" At this point, I would expalin that no, the game might not have sex or nudity in it (thank God, for the poor parent might actually have to participate in their child's life for a moment to cover the birds and the bees), but it is still not seen as approprate for his or her age group. The parent would then say that the child sees violence in movies and on TV all the time, so there's really just no escaping it, and that it's fine since their child is used to it. My suggestion? Don't feel helpless, you're the damn parent. If you don't want your kid to take in so much violence, perhaps you should make some changes in your house. As to why we're the complete opposite from the rest of modern civilization by hiding sex and glorifying violence is beyond me. But I digress.
The blame can't be put squarely on the shoulders of the parents though. Take the case of Florence Cohen for example. This 85-year-old grandmother bought "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" for her 14-year-old grandson. At the time of purchase the game had an M rating. When the rating changed to AO after the "Hot Coffee" mod was discovered, Grandma Flo was ever so disappointed. In fact, she was so disturbed that she sued Rockstar Games and Take Two Interactive for engaging in false, misleading and deceptive practices. She did, however, demand that the game be taken away from her grandson...
While I know this story is over a year old, let's review this with Grandma Flo: Bought M rated game for 14-year-old. Took game away from grandson. Sued Rockstar and Take Two for engaging in false, misleading and deceptive practices. Regardless of the rating (M or AO), isn't Flo the one that is ultimately responsible since she bought the game? Are 14-year-olds entitled to play any video game that comes out, regardless of rating? Can there be games that have adult content that are made for (brace yourself) adults? GASP!
Mature gamers should be able to have mature content in games, but it is becoming increasingly difficult. With Grandma Flo and Jack Johnson (the loud mouthed attorney from Florida that has made an name for himself by labeling video games as the root of all evil) pointing at the video game industry as the villians, there seems to be a lack of focus on the responsibility of parents (and yes, even grandparents). The ESRB may have given Oblivion a lower rating than it should have, but that is the fault of the ESRB, not the developer or publisher. The scene that was discovered in the "Hot Coffee" mod for GTA: San Andreas was unexpected, but it wasn't on a disk rated E or T. It was rated M. To be honest, I doubt that someone of the target audience that spent the $50 on GTA would be shocked and disgusted by the questionable scene uncovered by the mod. After all, in GTA you can hire a hooker, but that's okay because you don't really see anything...
It is not the responisiblity of the video game industry to raise the youth of today. Game developers should be able to create games for whichever target audience that they want. The rating system is in place, it just needs to be used properly. The laws passed in several states to prohibit the sale of video games to minors at least points at the issue and calls for attention. If I had something I shouldn't have when I was a kid, my parents took it away. They didn't sue the manufacturer or go yell at the person that sold the item to me. I paid for it. It's time to start putting the blame where it belongs. The current generation of parents has to hold themselves accountable for what their kids are exposed to and quit displacing the blame to avoid responsibility.
- Agonizing_Gas's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
Submitted by Umbee on Mon, 09/18/2006 - 10:23