New ESRB Legislation in the Works 56
Gamasutra is reporting on new Senate legislation intended to place additional requirements on the ESRB. Backed by R-Kansas Sam Brownback, the 'Truth in Video Game Rating Act' aims to mandate specific amounts of time with each title, and places the organization under the auspices of the Government Accountability Office. From the article: "Were the Truth in Video Game Rating Act to pass, it would require the ESRB to have access to the full content of and hands-on time with the games it was to rate, rather than simply relying on the video demonstrations submitted by developers and publishers as it currently. The hands-on system might be more akin to the UK's BBFC ratings board's approach, which requires a team of testers to spend at least a day playing through a game."
Suitable quote from GTA Vice City: (Score:2)
nice (Score:2)
Not to mention I'd love to have the job of one of those testers...
"What do you do?"
"I sit around and play video games all day."
Re: (Score:1)
There's nothing unconstitutional about a rating system, as much as we hate to hear it. The voice of the game companies is not being stifled in any way through the legislature. They can still make whatever game they want, they're not being prohibited from making it by any law passed by Congress.
True, they end up getting stifled by the economic powers-that-be, but if you're going to be mad at anyone, it's really not Congress, but the Wal-Mar
Re:nice (Score:4, Insightful)
Third party rating systems mandated by law violate due process. That's already been held in the case of movies.
Re: (Score:1)
The voice of the game companies that are willing to pay for the ESRB to pay testers to play their games is not being stifled in any way through legislature.
Now all the ESRB needs to do is say that raitings will cost $1,000,000 per title. Still think Congress isn't restricting the freedom of speech? How about due to congressional pressure they refuse to look at Ultra-Combine-Masscre XVII. Are their freedom of speech being restricted yet?
Re: (Score:2)
If your game has you chainsawing nun's heads off, you can bet your ass people will protest your game, at least on some level because they think your game is 'bad'. You will not, however, see a label on the cover of the game sayin
Re: (Score:2)
Did I cut that nuns head off with a chainsaw and blood spurted? Yes. That is extreme violence. Is that offensive? Depends who you are.
Violence is not snynonymous with offensive, any confusion there is not the fault of the system.
If I rea
Re: (Score:1)
Re:nice (Score:5, Interesting)
"Additionally, ESRB's in-house game experts randomly play the final games to verify that all the information provided during the rating process was accurate and complete."
So they already test the games, just not all of them. Kind of like taxes; does the IRS audit all US tax returns? No, they have to let the majority go by with a skin deep look and use random fine-tooth comb audits to try and keep everyone honest. Could they audit all the tax returns? Yes, but it would be very time consuming and costly. If the ESRB had to take an in-depth approach, they'd have to find some way to cover these costs. Whether they get that from the game developers or the government, it'll cost gamers in the end.
I think it's ok to trust the game developers to be honest. Past instances where the rating has failed have been delt with appropriatly and I think this bill is unnecessary buracracy.
btw, here's [esrb.org] where you signup for employment. Its only 1-4 times a month.
And more to the point (Score:5, Insightful)
And let's please not forget the stupidity that caused all this: GTA: SA. The game features graphic violence of all kinds, you can kill people with weapons, your fists, running them over, etc. In fact you are required to and rewarded for it. You can have sex in the game, just drive up to a prostitute when damaged, she'll get in your car and you can do your business. You can even kill her and take your money back afterwards (or simply become a pimp and she'll pay you). All that is in the main, M-rated version of the game. What got everyone worked up was you could mod the game to allow access to a removed mini game where you could bang your girlfriend. She is naked, though not in any sort of high detail.
That's what people got worked up over. All the rest of that was ok for their kids, but god forbid they see a 10-polygon TLO (tit like object)! We clearly need stronger ratings control.
The ESRB does a good job rating games as it is, it's just retards getting all worked up over nothing. They scream about how inappropriate GTA: SA is but it's clear they never bothered to read the rating that's there in the first place. I highly doubt there's many people who'd think all the shit that's in the game is ok, but not the one removed mini-game you have to mod it to activate. They were mostly just pissed that they'd been a bad parent and bought their kids a game they shouldn't have.
Re: (Score:1)
"A day with a game" what is a day to them, 9 hours or 24 hours of play time what is a day?
The bigger point it unless thay hire gamers to play them, There is no way thay are going to get any hidden-content out in that time... Or in game like Elder Scroll: Oblivian it takes better the
Pointless (Score:4, Insightful)
Any attempt to interfere with these rights will be struck down. This is a waste of time and money.
Re: (Score:2)
Or you'll start to see ESRB members hauled off to jail for kiddie porn or drug use. Their replacements will play along nicely. [/conspiracy_theory]
I'll be self-rating. (Score:2, Insightful)
Now to actually make a game in the first place...
To make a game... (Score:1)
http://www.planetalia.com/cursos/Java-Invaders/JA
Covers enough of the basics that you could definitely whip up a game.
Re: (Score:2)
Instructions for self-rating (Score:2)
Once you have made your game, you can determine and apply a TIGRS rating [tigrs.org].
Longer Reviews... Good or pointless? (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a knee-jerk reaction to a non-existant problem. Longer reviews of both GTA: SA and Oblivion would not have revealed either situation in normal gameplay. Both were exploited by third parties after the fact. Their ratings would not have changed. Admittedly, it was foolish for Rockstar not to remove the hot coffee features completely, and for Bethesda to leave that topless texture on the disc, but unless the ESRB starts employing hackers and programmers to digg through the game's content as a whole aside from playing it, these things will continue to go unnoticed until found by third parties should they ever occur again.
Legislating this is a stab at "Save the Children" for an election boost. The Do-Nothing congress of the 21st century will probably fail at doing anything here as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or you could just pass a law banning all third party mods entirely. It's basically the same thing as above. Ne
Re: (Score:1)
The nude texture found on the discs was only a tiny part of the re-rating. The actual content of the game was the real catalyst for the M.
I don't see the problem with this. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I doubt that when the movie system was first started up that there was a large push/campaign/whatever to make sure parents understood what the raitings were about. They just learned aobut them as they went to movies. Combine that with the fact that the movie industry caters to a much larger selection of the popu
Re:I don't see the problem with this. (Score:5, Insightful)
In addition, the MPAA suffers from the same problem the ESRB seems to have by rating sexual content (even if it's only implied) far more harshly than violent content.
To say the ESRB has shortcomings and then invoke the MPAA's ratings board as an example of the right way to do things is silly. Check out This Film is Not Yet Rated [imdb.com] for more details on how the MPAA Ratings Board (doesn't) work.
Re: (Score:1)
That's crazy talk. Movies are always rated with little blurbs like "Strong Thematic Elements." I'm sorry, but it's just not possible to get anymore specific than that without giving out the actual script. Generalities!?! Whatever man.
Re: (Score:1)
Homosexuality is rated far more harshly than heterosexuality. Female orgasms are rated far more harshly than male orgasms.
LK
Re: (Score:1)
TheVede (Score:1, Offtopic)
TIGRS (Score:2)
Screw ESRB. What's wrong with TIGRS [tigrs.org]?
Impossible to enforce. (Score:2)
Difficulty, "easter eggs" and games such as the MMO genre offer make this a sure-fire loss.
Not Realistic (Score:3, Interesting)
This could prove to be such a costly measure, that a civilian run ESRB could eventually become impossible to maintain. If you think this is bad, I can only guess as to what a federally run version of the ESRB would be like.
Re: (Score:2)
Lieberman lost Gore my vote. (Score:2)
There just wasn't enough negatives between the 2 to force me to pick one or the other. They were both "middle of the road" for their respective parties at the the time. The only thing worse though
Re: (Score:2)
Um, that doesn't make any sense. I voted against Gore mainly cause the issue wasn't even on Bush's radar. Though Lieberman was making it a big part of the morals issue that he wanted to bring into the white house. Every time that I researched Lieberman he seemed just as "religious right" except Jewish instead of Ch
If you don't vote Libertarian, you ASKED FOR THIS! (Score:1, Insightful)
_________________________________
A vote against a Libertarian candidate is
a vote to abolish the Constitution itself.
Re:If you don't vote Libertarian, you ASKED FOR TH (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
What points? You made a broad assertion and failed to support it.
Pointing out a logical fallacy != trolling.
Sounds like a job opportunity! (Score:2)
Imagine the office drama at a job like that.
"She always gets the good games to rate -- I hear she's playing with the bosses joystick!"
The Lowest Code Owns (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
GAO (Score:2)
From the GAO's site [gao.gov] (emphasis mine):
Under recently passed legislation, we have changed our name from the General Accounting Office to the Government Accountability Office. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an agency that works