Video games and the law

[LadyCrimson]

Can you give a specific example of ESRB misrating games? I see ESRB get a lot of crap, but IMO they do a pretty reasonable job.

It's not so much misrating as not descriptive enough and/or could use another rating or two, ala pg-13 (or whatever).

 

That is, "Mature/M" titles "may contain more intense violence, blood and gore, sexual themes/content, use of alcohol/drugs, and frequent use of strong language" but on the box itself the descriptions seem stunted/not specific to the game itself, enough. Just my opinion tho. It's like how some R movies are "harder" R' than others, either in violence or sexual content (or both).

 

There also seems to be a missing rating...at least according to wiki...you have Teen which "might be considered unsuitable for children under 12 years of age" and then M, (17+). Is there one in the middle I'm unaware of?

Edit: sorry, that sounds confusing. I mean, is there one that might be more like "not for under 14 or 15?" Social mores these days (because of increasing easy access to 'net, movies on TV etc that makes such exposure more common) seem to be that a lot of parents may not mind their 16 year old see a lot of those R rated horror movies, for example, but would object to their 12-13 year old doing so. There's a big difference between 12 and 16/17, imo.

Edited October 26, 2010 by LadyCrimson

[Calax]

Actually Crimson the T rating reads

 

TEEN

Titles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.

 

and the M rating is

MATURE

Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

 

Where things get iffy IMO is in the M-rating because anymore you seem to have "hard" M (god of war, GTA) and "lite" m (Call of Duty, and most FPS in general).

 

Edit;

 

Btw, dagon, have you ever seen an AO rated game in a retailer? Did you even knew they existed? That rating and NC-17 is EXACTLY why you don't want this law to go through.

Edited October 26, 2010 by Calax

[Thorton_AP]

Isn't it illegal for certain types of stores to stock AO games? Or is it just a story policy thing?

[Calax]

It's not illegal per-se, but they'd have to design the store around having an Adults Only section, and games have that "kids only" stigma attached which ends up causing most stores to just not have it and not to have to deal with angry parents yelling about "contaminating our kids".

 

The list of AO games doesn't help matters.

 

Basically the amount of hoops they'd jump through and negative press they get wouldn't be worth it.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Calax

[Orogun01]

This law in particular gives leeway for them to say which games are not fit for minors and will penalize any mistake. The problem is that they did not have any concrete definition of what constitutes a disapproved game, which makes this a make it up as you go game for them and puts distributors in a bind since they don't know which games are appropriate.

 

Result: less distribution of mature games and the market is cornered on child's play.

I'm not sure what you mean by distributors. It would be the retailer who's responsible for not selling the prohibited games to minors, there would be no other restrictions on distribution of games. As far as the law being too vague, that could be the main reason the law is overturned. Basically every retailer would have to play every game and come up with a list of games that are unsuitable for minors. Of course, they could just take the shortcut of not selling any M-rated games to minors, but I don't think that holds water legally.

It's the retailer the one that also, gets penalized if they carry games forbidden by the bill and decides which games to sell. This in turn makes the publisher push for a certain kind of games; as usual the ones that sell the most. It basically turns the dreaded AO rating into an abstract concept that can be used to remove every "bad" game from distribution since the retailer can't be sure of what is what.

Hopefully it won't hold, but I would take Nepenthe's word over mine in that subject.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Except that if a retailer can't sell an item to those below the age of 17, they might not carry it, which would kill that products sale and possibly it's developer. Also, comparing this to porn is... stupid. It's better to compare it to what comic books went through in the 70's with the Comics Code Authority after a whack job said "If you show your kids comics they'll become homocidal maniacs!" using the same logic as "If you let your kids breath they'll become Homocidal Maniacs!" It took until the 90's for them to get rid of the CCA and they only got rid of it because they did a PSA specifically for the government.

So your argument is what? Children should be playing M rated games so that they can support production of M rated games for adults?

 

Can you give a specific example of ESRB misrating games? I see ESRB get a lot of crap, but IMO they do a pretty reasonable job.

It's not so much misrating as not descriptive enough and/or could use another rating or two, ala pg-13 (or whatever).

 

That is, "Mature/M" titles "may contain more intense violence, blood and gore, sexual themes/content, use of alcohol/drugs, and frequent use of strong language" but on the box itself the descriptions seem stunted/not specific to the game itself, enough. Just my opinion tho. It's like how some R movies are "harder" R' than others, either in violence or sexual content (or both).

 

There also seems to be a missing rating...at least according to wiki...you have Teen which "might be considered unsuitable for children under 12 years of age" and then M, (17+). Is there one in the middle I'm unaware of?

Edit: sorry, that sounds confusing. I mean, is there one that might be more like "not for under 14 or 15?" Social mores these days (because of increasing easy access to 'net, movies on TV etc that makes such exposure more common) seem to be that a lot of parents may not mind their 16 year old see a lot of those R rated horror movies, for example, but would object to their 12-13 year old doing so. There's a big difference between 12 and 16/17, imo.

Yes, I actually used to be of the same opinion. My feeling was ESRB (which is game industry controlled) refused to introduce a rating between T and M because they didn't want to stigmatize M rated games by making that category exclusively "hard" M. This way parents think "hey Halo is M rated, there's nothing really bad about it, M rated games must be OK for kids", which is what the industry secretely wanted all along. However, in the last few years the problem sort of "fixed" itself. Games have become so crude and violent you really wouldn't want to give a lower than M rating to most of them. The parents are still as clueless as ever though.

 

Btw, dagon, have you ever seen an AO rated game in a retailer? Did you even knew they existed? That rating and NC-17 is EXACTLY why you don't want this law to go through.

AO rating means the game is obscene. Most retailers won't carry obscene material, although admittedly they push the edge on unrated DVD's, but that's another story.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Calax]

Except that if a retailer can't sell an item to those below the age of 17, they might not carry it, which would kill that products sale and possibly it's developer. Also, comparing this to porn is... stupid. It's better to compare it to what comic books went through in the 70's with the Comics Code Authority after a whack job said "If you show your kids comics they'll become homocidal maniacs!" using the same logic as "If you let your kids breath they'll become Homocidal Maniacs!" It took until the 90's for them to get rid of the CCA and they only got rid of it because they did a PSA specifically for the government.

So your argument is what? Children should be playing M rated games so that they can support production of M rated games for adults?

 

So is down up to you? Because what you think I said and what I did say are completely different things. What I'm saying is that if M games become dangerous to sell, they won't be sold. It has nothing to do with who's playing, just the ability of a retailer to sell a product. If a game gets rated M for mature and that law is active, you will NOT see any M rated games being sold in stores, because it would be to dangerous for a retailer to sell an M rated game. If a retailer won't touch it, then it doesn't get made because you will NOT have a return on investment. That's why games do everything they can to avoid AO because it's in the SAME EXACT POSITION as M rated games (by choice rather than by law)

 

So no:

Fallout

Fable

Grand Theft Auto

Halo

Call of Duty

Farenheit

Heavy Rain

Red Dead

Company of Heroes

Alpha Protocol

Mass Effect

Metal Gear

[Wrath of Dagon]

That makes no sense. All they have to do is check ID's to sell M rated games. We all know no retailer will touch tobacco or alcohol because they're illegal to sell to minors.

[Calax]

That makes no sense. All they have to do is check ID's to sell M rated games. We all know no retailer will touch tobacco or alcohol because they're illegal to sell to minors.

Please see AO rated games. They're technically not illegal to sell, but no retailer will carry them because they're carrying the fine and the PR backlash

 

Also, this law would criminalize the sale in the same way that tobacco and alcohol are.

[Wrath of Dagon]

That was my point, retailers still sell tobacco and alcohol even though they're illegal to sell to minors. As far as AO games, most probably would be illegal to sell to minors, since it's illegal to sell any obscene material already, without any new laws. As I explained, most retailers won't carry obscene material, whether legal or not.

[Calax]

That was my point, retailers still sell tobacco and alcohol even though they're illegal to sell to minors. As far as AO games, most probably would be illegal to sell to minors, since it's illegal to sell any obscene material already, without any new laws. As I explained, most retailers won't carry obscene material, whether legal or not.

There are retailers who carry tobacco and alcohol, but then, that sort of thing is aimed squarely at the age bracket above the legal limit. games are aimed at the bracket that isn't necessarily above the limit.

 

And actually, AO doesn't mean obscene. A few releases have gotten that (Farenheit for example is on that list) but usually games that are from Euro or Japan that are translated without any cut content (the Witcher in it's "pure" form is this for example). But the fact is that no game goes there if it wants a big name, or isn't having a chopped up copy for the M market because you will get 0 retailers who sell it.

 

As soon as a product requires special checks to sell, it'll get either ejected from retailers, or it'll have to build it's own specialty market. See gunz, weaponz, and porn. The biggest difference between your examples and games is that your examples have VERY long traditions of being accepted, games not so much.

[Nepenthe]

That makes no sense. All they have to do is check ID's to sell M rated games. We all know no retailer will touch tobacco or alcohol because they're illegal to sell to minors.

 

I agree with you on this. In the current situation AO games (and some other forms of adult-only entertainment) are not available in regular stores due to a certain stigma they carry. If the legislation is changed so that more games are restricted from minors, it's not a stretch to imagine that the stores would change their policy in this matter - they are, after all, out to make money. Unless most of the sales are to minors who aren't supposed to be playing the games in the first place, which might very well be the case.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Most stores already have a policy of not selling M rated games or R rated movies to minors, but they still carry them to sell to adults. It's very hard for me to believe Wal-mart would suddenly stop selling M-rated games even though they have no problem selling tobacco, alcohol, firearms, ammunition and R-rated and even unrated movies, all of which are illegal to sell to minors except the movies.

 

Edit: Actually here it's illegal to sell alcohol to anyone under 21, not just minors, not sure if it's the same for tobacco and firearms.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Gfted1]

Doesnt Walmart refuse to sell music with explicit lyrics?

[Wrath of Dagon]

I'm not sure, they certainly have no problem selling movies like Saw, in fact they put huge disgusting displays of decaying hands all over the store.

 

Edit: Wal-mart won't carry outright pornography, you could argue that some of the explicit lyrics are actually pornographic, it can go way beyond swearing of the kind you get in movies and games.

 

Edit2: Another thought just occurred to me. Even if the M rated games were completely banned (purely hypothetical, unless the Moral Majority is somehow resurrected and takes over the government) almost all the games Calax mentioned would easily qualify for a T rating with very minor changes. The main reason those games are M is to appeal to adolescents who want to think they're mature. Never did figure out why Halo is rated M.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Calax]

2 things

 

1) they already do check ID for M rated games. It's just they'd have to get more technical about it so that they don't get screwed by a fake ID.

 

2)There are only two types of speech that are not completely protected by the constitution. Threats, and obscene material. The first isn't protected because more often than not it can lead to something, the second isn't covered because well, it's porn . Everything else is technically covered by the First amendment of the constitution of the united states from being censored out of the public eye. This law is a form of censorship at it's core.

[Walsingham]

Thought: given the rising trend in online sales of games, might this just put more people online?

[Calax]

Possibly, but that could also cause a serious drop in THE TIME to buy games (holiday season) because they're not on the shelves when people go to have a look.

 

Would there be some people savvy enough to go to the interwebz? Sure.. the same people who know about and got the initial uncensored patch for Witcher and Fahrenheit. Most would probably just shrug their shoulders and pick up the next thing on the list rather than put in the extra effort.

 

http://kotaku.com/5524553/us-supreme-court...ame-ratings-law

 

 

http://kotaku.com/5642952/who-argues-viole...d-who-disagrees

http://kotaku.com/5586193/this-is-californ...ent-video-games

 

 

The second link has a pretty good summary from Kotaku that's indexed with other articles that go into the whole affair. Have a look. Third is an analysis of the law

Edited October 29, 2010 by Calax

[Walsingham]

Sorry Cal. I'm being a bit thick, but I don't follow your point.

[Calax]

Basically the point is

 

Under any circumstances if a game is removed from the shelves, the sales decrease rapidly. Because A) Impulse buys are gone, and B) If somebody has the game that's gone and another on their list, they'll simply pick up the other to lower the amount of work they're required to do.

 

What worries people more is that if this goes through, then people will be able to legislate against any violent content deemed offensive to minors. Which means everyone's favorite action flicks go poof (as they cannot be sold in stores) and the new ones coming out get so heavily toned down it's basically an episode of power rangers... with less fighting.

[Nihilus5078]

Who the hell came up with this brilliant idea to take M games off the shelves? Whoever this genius is, they might want to know that since the invention of violent video games, the murder rates have dropped.

Edited October 29, 2010 by Nihilus5078

[Wrath of Dagon]

There aren't any games going off the shelves, this is just industry fear mongering.

[Walsingham]

I still blame video games for the Rwandan genocide.

[Calax]

There aren't any games going off the shelves, this is just industry fear mongering.

Again, there are currently no AO games on the shelves because they have been deemed obscene to minors, and carry a fine if they were to be sold to said minors, thus gamestop and other retailers do not stock them. And obscene to minors is exactly what the state of california is putting forth to defend the bill, they're trying to make violence in games on the same level as full frontal nudity.

[Wrath of Dagon]

You have no evidence that regular retailers would've carried obscene materials if they were legal to sell to minors. Retailers carry plenty of stuff that's illegal to sell to minors, as I pointed out before.