StealthBot.net: The Supreme Court vs the Entertainment Software Association - StealthBot.net

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Supreme Court vs the Entertainment Software Association

#1 User is offline   SierraKomodo Icon

  • Warn Status: 99.9%
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: January-01 10

Posted September 14, 2010 - 03:33 AM

Linkage

Now what's up with that? Personally, I say that if parents are buying these games for kids when the games are rated /M/, an AO rating will just be ignored as well most likely. Either that, or parents will stop buying these games - And cause a significant drop in profits for the video game industry, which might have a negative effect on quite a few things, including the economy (Which is already pretty bad, by the way.)

#2 User is offline   The-Black-Ninja Icon

  • The Sex
  • Icon
  • Group: Scripting Moderators
  • Posts: 2,526
  • Joined: August-01 09

Posted September 15, 2010 - 03:11 AM

Everytime I see these type of battles or whatever they call them, I always laugh because this it's like parents don't want to do the work of raising a kid and teaching them that video games aren't real life, or better yet, control how much they play. Easier to blame someone else and force someone to work for you cause TV and video games are just SO easy in keeping your kids from screaming and being bored <_< You can rate the games all you want, lazy parents will still be lazy.

#3 User is offline   C0RR0SIVE Icon

  • OLD Senior Member.
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Beta Testers
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: August-17 09

Posted September 15, 2010 - 03:40 AM

That kind of reminds me of the reason that the ESRB was created, games started to become "violent" -.-

And if I remember right, for awhile, one game was rated as AO, so far, the only game, just can't remember the name of it, but it was listed for a month as AO until the producers of the game removed some kind of content as the AO rating, literally killed sales.

This post has been edited by C0RR0SIVE: September 15, 2010 - 03:44 AM


#4 User is offline   The-Black-Ninja Icon

  • The Sex
  • Icon
  • Group: Scripting Moderators
  • Posts: 2,526
  • Joined: August-01 09

Posted September 15, 2010 - 04:12 AM

Most of the EB Games/Gamestop here are asking for ID to people that look underage when they buy some pretty violent games. I remember there was one kid who was buyg...I think it was Modern Warefare 2, he was like 14, the guy is like, "Are you 18?" He goes, "No." Kid says, "That's balls. That's fucking gay, it's just killing people, who gives a fuck.", walks off, the clerk and I look at each other like wtf just happened?!

#5 User is offline   SierraKomodo Icon

  • Warn Status: 99.9%
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: January-01 10

Posted September 15, 2010 - 01:22 PM

My title had a slight error by the way - Should say State of California, not Supreme Court. Can't edit that myself though >.>

Anyway.. This topic really hit off a discussion on a couple other forums, mostly saying this kind of thing is the responsibility of the parents to think about what they buy for their kids since most stores won't sell M rated games to minors (Alot of places require an ID, like Target, Walmart, and other major places. I think Gamestop is the only place that won't require an ID, but still won't sell to obvious minors)

Quote

KOI (Via Starcraft.org)
That’s a horrible, vague article. What constitutes as an “ultra-violent video game”? It needs to stop using weasel words and start reporting the facts more concisely.

That said, it won’t work in preventing possession because they’re 14-16 year olds. After all, porn videos are ‘restricted’ to 18s and over but it’s not like that stops them. On the other hand I don’t see what you can have against a rating system which just further categorises games.

What is your actual point if I may ask? It will be ignored? Well maybe by some but it’s good to have an option. Parents will stop buying games? Well, no, they’ll just buy games that aren’t rated as extra-violent. Your suggestion that alerting parents that a game is violent will cause a dent to the gaming industry is ludicrous. For a first you’re on a Starcraft forum – do you really think Starcraft would be rated as extra-violent? No, games like Starcraft, TF2, C&C and so on would probably be unaffected whatsoever (in fact might receive a boost of customers who turn to buy their games instead). Take a look at the movie industry. Because some films are R-rated, does that stop parents from letting their children watch other films? No, it doesn’t.

And you know… the poor violent video game industry is holding the economy on its back. Personally I relish the fact that half-assed developers like Infinity Ward have to now work to get a more intelligent and mature gamers into their products instead of thinking that they’ll do fine since 14-16 year olds will buy their games no matter how bad they are. Yes, that will probably mean that games will actually improve even more.


Quote

Akhil.WhiteWolf (via GDC Blog Cast) - Original Author
Alright, now I understand from Scott’s comments and his posts on the SC forums that I wasn’t quite clear on a few things.

First: This is NOT the Supreme Court versus the ESA, this is the California State Government versus the ESA.

Second: I never said the video game industry is not being treated like the other entertainment industries; they are for now. This law will change that, and more strict limitations will be placed on those that purchase video games. While I do agree that the ESRB isn’t perfect, it’s definitely a hell of a lot better than having the government control what can and can’t be put into distribution.

Personally, I think what we need to do is just make it put this way: Put, in pretty good detail, the contents of the game; What violence is there? What kind of language is there? etc. etc. The ESRB does a good enough job of that already, but rather than making a tag for it (i.e E, T, M, AO), they should say the suggested age of who should play it.

In response to “K0I” of the SC forums: Your first post, I’ll address what I can.

I did my best. Admittedly, this is mostly a rip of Game Informer’s most recent issue, in an article labeled “Enemy of the State”, by Matt Miller. Not exactly a rip, per say, but a lot of the quotes were taken from the same article. This is just a shorter, summarized version that I figured I should try and spread along with GI’s article. I do highly suggest you give that a look-see and THEN make your real impression. I apologize for not clearing that up in the post.
You have a good point, it won’t stop a lot of kids, because they’ll get their parents to buy it for them. But the main point of this article is trying to get across that this is going to be VERY difficult for game producers: What happens if they aren’t strict enough on their new release? What if the court thinks the game should be “M” rather than “T”, just using previous examples? Those companies could lose a lot of money for that! That could stop companies from even bothering making games, because they don’t want the hassle of possibly getting sued because they weren’t strict enough. Who would want to risk that?
I wasn’t meaning that EVERY game would be affected, just many of them nowadays. But exactly what I was trying to say up there: Where does “mild violence” end and “violence” begin? What about “violence” and “extreme violence”? The ESRB rates them using those terms, but I personally don’t think they’re descriptive enough. If they would make those more specific, then I think we would be a lot better off, because then parents would know what they’re getting in to.
You raise a significant point there, and I honestly can’t argue with that. That would be one of upsides I could see for this.

Scott does raise a good point, though: Minors do make up a good, visible portion of the gaming community. This could severely impact some of the better game companies. As you said, though, K0I, I wouldn’t regret Infinity Ward’s having to work up to higher standards in the slightest.

I hope I got all I could. Continue commenting, and I’ll do my best to address them as they come. But seriously guys, spread the word about this, whether you agree with CSG or not. This kind of catagorization may not stop in the video-game industry.


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users