Comment Re:That's the whole reason why there is a problem (Score 1) 386
Unlike the rating system for the MPAA, the ESRB ratings are still considered solely in the context of children, because the old fogies in office don't seem to realize that video games are moving/have moved beyond the child market of entertainment. G and PG movies are considered relatively safe for children, and probably automatically mean that it is a child's movie of some kind. PG-13 can mean anything from a young adult movie to something like Live Free or Die Hard. In that case, we see the content in a trailer and determine, "Okay, that looks all right for my kids," or, "There's no way I'm taking my child to see that one." R and NC-17 are considered exclusively to be movies for adults.
With ESRB ratings, you're stuck with the children's context of everything because these morons assume the games are made for children. They're not. An M-Rated game is not intended for your 10-year-old in the exact same way an R-Rated movie isn't. The real problem here is that objections to video games and their content are based solely on the idea that, by their very nature, they're intended for children. That's an opinion that needs to change. Not the ratings system, or the content.
With ESRB ratings, you're stuck with the children's context of everything because these morons assume the games are made for children. They're not. An M-Rated game is not intended for your 10-year-old in the exact same way an R-Rated movie isn't. The real problem here is that objections to video games and their content are based solely on the idea that, by their very nature, they're intended for children. That's an opinion that needs to change. Not the ratings system, or the content.
