Eleven States Join California at the Supreme Court

[cerebus23]

Funny also i thought the esrb rating system was to give retailers and parents a guide to the age rating of games and who should be playing them.

Why do we need the state to be doing anything beyond say requiring retailers to ask for id for 18+ games, which many retailers do already. Why do we need to cover up the titles or create a seperate adults only section in stores and want to elevate video games to the realm of porno...and jesus that is just the stupidest thing i ever heard unless you play some import japanese games.

And if they want to say that violent video games equate violent people then explain why when pcs and consoles are in so many homes and the popularity of adult video games is through the roof. why are there no mass killings on the streets? really if there is any causality between video games and real world violence then people running around with chain saws and running people over on the sidewalk should be somewhat common. many courts have already looked at their evidence to that and tossed it out as contrived and thin.

Why are we letting parents off? why should we not be fining parents that let their 8 year old play grand theft auto? I mean if we really want to protect kids and help parents how about going after them when they are lazy stupid and uncaring.

This whole court case needs to be tossed out because the only thing it is trying to do is chill developers from making M rated games that will get the full label warning or be stuck in a back room where they will be out of sight or at the high end of the spectrum if they get equated with porn some of the bigger retailers will not carry them at all. This would hit games like dragon age and mass effect and fallout 3 not just games like god of war and gran theft auto because they all M rated but there is a massive amt of difference between them.

 

[MrHero17]

Tell me this people who are okay with this proposed law. What precedent does the government have in telling a 16 year old that they can't play Dragon Age but telling a 17 year old that they can? Now it's pretty well documented that the ages that certain things are allowed at is rather arbitrary (the government just has to draw a line somewhere). Having the government mandate that the ESRB age rating system be legally enforced is moronic for that reason, it's a guideline, it's ultimately up to myself what games I am okay with my children playing. That's why they list the specific things the game is rated for on the box, some people are okay with cartoon violence but not with alcohol references.

There's also the fact that this places video games as a whole under a harsher standard than most other forms of media. We all have internet access, if you want to see why this is bad then go read up on what the comic book industry had to go through or what Hollywood had to deal with because of the Hays code (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code). And it doesn't seem like any of the people pushing for these new regulations actually knows a damned thing about video games, it's happened enough times in history before us and I am sick of seeing older generations ban the media of the newer ones because they can't be bothered to understand it.

(A similar argument can and has been made against the FCC)

 

[Jaded Scribe]

Sure, but my parents were still able to keep tabs on what I bought, what I watched, etc. Buy something they didn't approve of? I had to take it back. If I was caught "smuggling" items they felt were inappropriate, I lost my TV privileges, and if that didn't curtail me, I wasn't allowed to be home alone.

Current Gen consoles all have parental control systems in place to limit what ratings require a password. You can do the same thing on a computer.

Parent your own damn kids. Don't let the government do it for you.

Sorry we disagree. I'd rather my daughter not be 13 years old and sneak a copy of GTA7 when it comes out. Don't discount the ingenuity of children. I bought myself extra controllers and AV cables for when I got grounded. My parents wouldn't take the system away from me just the stuff needed to play it.

However, if my daughter came to me and asked if she could buy GTA7 and I felt she was mature enough to play it, I'd get it for her. In your world, I'm letting the Government parent my child, but in mine I'm being an active part of her life. I would anyway because there's nothing more important to me than her, but if I can get a little help behind the scenes I don't mind it.

Parents can't be everywhere at all times.

edit

This isn't the end of the world people. It's my experience that most places (at least those local to me) already enforce the esrb rating system so little changes should this law pass.

So, because your parents made a stupid mistake and didn't take away your console, then we should roll over?

The issue here isn't just about parenting. But the larger picture. This does a great deal more than turn into Law what is already common policy in most retailers. Having this law go through will do severe harm to the industry. The reasons why have been detailed out many times.

Most of the kids I grew up with usually respected their parents' boundaries, if reasons for those boundaries were laid out. If they didn't, they were punished.

Why not discuss that M-rated game with her *before* it's released?

If this law is only going to apply to "interactive media" and not all media equally, then it's not right, and should not be passed.

I would rather parents learned how to control their kids.

It's interesting having this discussion with you because it's clear to me that despite the "sky is falling, change is terrible" mindset you seem to have concerning this law we both feel the same way about it. You'll note I'm not advocating government holding our hands with regards to raising our childs, or indeed anything else. In both of our preferred outcomes the parents takes responsibility for the child and is involved in their life and entertaining buying choices.

I totally agree with you, and I'm at least one parent you won't have to worry about making ill informed decisions about my daughters gaming habits should she decide to get into that.

But I'm also a realist. You and I both know that there ARE parents out there that are ill informed or just don't give a shit. For the life of me I can't see any reason why it's bad to have a fall back system in place to pick up where the parents dropped the ball. Especially if nothing really changes by putting it into place.

My problem (and I have said this several times) is not the spirit of the law itself (if applied to all entertainment industries equally). I'd debate it, but I honestly don't see the big deal in many ways. It's the discrimination of the industry. Your daughter couldn't go and pick up GTA 5 when it dropped, but she could still go and pick up the entire "Saw" collection on Blu-Ray.

It's the idea that "interactive media" (and wtf is that? What defines interactive media? Where are the lines drawn?) should be treated differently for some reason. This type of law has been overturned when used to limit sale of movies, books, or music. Why should video games be different?

Considering that while gaming is about 40 years old (Pong was released in 1972, but really, video games can be traced back to the 1940s supercomputers), it still has yet to gain legitimacy in the eyes of many. Doing this would be sending a loud and clear message that video games are somehow more dangerous than movies, books, or music. And isn't that the kind of press we've all been trying to avoid?

Haven't we, as gamers, struggled hiding our hobby from employers, family and significant others? Do we want the CNN/FoxNews drivel that "video games are ruining the youth of America more than sex, drugs, or rock and roll" to gain any kind of legitimacy?

It's not that "omg, the sky is falling" it's "Why is my hobby different than my husband's movie hobby?" This kind of double standards puts video games in an inferior position as a legitimate hobby to virtually everything else.

And yes, that is a big deal to me.

 

[Andy Chalk]

It's not? Last time I checked I needed an adult with me to purchase it.

It's a common misconception, as this thread and many others like it on this site make very clear. Most retailers have make it a policy to follow ESRB ratings, just like most movie theaters make it a policy not to let kids in to R-rated films. And if a retailer is busted violating those guidelines, they can be hit with a rather hefty fine by the ESRB. But it's entirely voluntary. So while the stores you shop at may have policies that don't let you buy M-rated games without an adult, there's no law on the books that forces them to have such a policy.

 

[theironbat46]

It's not? Last time I checked I needed an adult with me to purchase it.

It's a common misconception, as this thread and many others like it on this site make very clear. Most retailers have make it a policy to follow ESRB ratings, just like most movie theaters make it a policy not to let kids in to R-rated films. And if a retailer is busted violating those guidelines, they can be hit with a rather hefty fine by the ESRB. But it's entirely voluntary. So while the stores you shop at may have policies that don't let you buy M-rated games without an adult, there's no law on the books that forces them to have such a policy.

Well what do you know about that. Thanks, I always though it was law.

 

[airwolfe591]

didn't read the other 5 pages of posts, or any other for that matter, but I found out that the FCC Indecency Rules have been struck down.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/e324584c-b565-4896-b8b3-610715bc0e54/1/doc/06-1760-ag_opn2.pdf

Edit: Just to double check, found this also http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/13/news/economy/fcc_indecency/index.htm

 

[Baldr]

If I was the ESRB I would file suit against Blumenthal for Defamation.

 

[Mr. Grey]

This is the best they can come up with as a concern? Really? Oh right, elections are coming up again for congress be it state or national... isn't it? That makes sense then... shame people don't give a damn. They want everyone currently in there ousted, they couldn't give a rat's ass if the politicians are talking about this.

I find that all this does is waste a lot of money, even if passed all of that revenue is lost and it could open the way for one hell of an onslaught against all other forms of entertainment industry.

"Revenue lost? Are you mad?"​

Let's not discuss whether or not I am insane. Let's discuss why publishers won't even waste money developing Mature Rated games if it won't rake in the maximum amount of profit. Wait, that's it. They won't waste that kind of money on making Mature Rated games if it won't give back what was spent on it and then some. They'll just put that into Teen Rated games or games Rated for Everyone. This law will impede upon the creation of Mature Rated games something great, you won't see it on the PC what with piracy and all that jazz... nope, you won't see it at all. Save for indie development, but then they themselves can get heavily fined which puts them out of business and gives them jail time. Also forget about online sales, no way to confirm if it was a child or not but you better believe there will be a department wasting money on finding out, but the risk is there and they'll avoid it entirely.

And you can forget getting it from another company in another country. American Government is prone to bullying and won't be afraid to punish you and the retailer over in that other country -- they will probably fail with punishing the company, but they will find a way to punish you. Which hurts that developer's profit since - apparently - American consumers grant more money to them than their own country's. This also can lead to another Prohibition Era...

Retailers won't even bother putting it up on their shelves because, guess what? Not only are lawsuits a matter of concern - believe me... they are - now they can confirm they will get fined horribly due to the incompetence of one of their employees. One employee and they're fined and then there are investigations to see how many of those games were sold before this one, which is just one hell of a blow to their publicity. Which is another thing they won't risk as people take headlines more seriously than what the article actually entails.

"Seedy Seller Sells Illegal Game to Minor"​

Plus, let's not forget how much money is wasted on those investigations. All because one game was sold to a kid, a game which I need not remind you - but will anyway - has no proof that it harms him unless his parents weren't doing their job right.

... but back to the Prohibition Era statement. This may very well cause people to illegally import and sell at a high cost to consumers video games with no demands of tax income. These people will be smart and they will succeed. Oh you got one peddler? Ten took his place. You got them? But you just missed the other ten over there. Don't have enough funding? Whatever for? Oh right, they have to pack your department to the brim, don't they? Cutbacks on everything else you say? Huh, who'd have thunk it? Worst case scenario, but where there is opportunity there is someone taking it.

These are the issues I take concern with. That and the money wasted, which should be very obvious. Plus I had a lot of fun writing that Prohibition Era rant, so I advise you to take it with a grain of salt.

I apologize for any typos, I'm typing on a laptop which has a smaller keyboard and wishes to be a pain in my butt.

 

[Tetsuhara]

Ok, here's what I think is wrong with this entire attempt at legislature, and it's not any of the other arguments I've heard discussed yet.

At the core of this entire law is the stated fact that video games ARE harmful in some way to young people. Otherwise, why would there need to be a law to restrict their sales to begin with?

I don't believe that video games are nearly as harmful as a lot of pundits try to claim, but the basis of this law is that 'violent' video games are harmful and tries to build on that.

If this law does go into effect it would make a legal precedent for the concept that 'violent' video games do cause harm and give ammo to those who have been seeking to clamp down on the industry as a whole. And that's why I don't want it to pass.

 

[undeadmouse]

The fact that the video game industry allowed this to happen is proof that they are all a bunch of mouth breathers. I mean, excuse my anger, but haven't they learned anything from the movie industry! I mean what the f*** is the point of the ESRB if they weren't able to tie this off when it was just a minor pin prick - now it's a god damn open carotid artery!

I have three words that if followed simply (or researched at all by anyone in the ESRB) could have prevented all of this nonsense: "The Hays Code" - Now before you roll your eyes - note this - when the Hays Code was created in the late 1920's the movie industry was a (quite wonderful) steaming cesspool of sex and debauchery - weekend orgies at the studio, prostitutes, drugs - the good stuff. Watch any WB gangster film from around that time and you'll get my meaning.... so needless to say the government comes along and tells the heads of the studios - that they're going to make laws that govern the movies - Said studio heads clearly don't want laws against their products, so instead of letting the government write laws governing the industry the studios come up with the Hays Code - that is, they decided to self-enforce - this created all sorts of boring stuff - like women and men sleeping in separate beds and reduced violence and wholesome messages, etc. - but the movie heads knew that as long as there were no laws governing what they did, and as long as they appeared to the government like they were making an effort to clean up they could be as subversive as they wanted and later down the line they could change the code to whatever they wanted - because the movie industry f'ing wrote it! ... and needless to say, that's what they did... no government interference ... no annoying laws that could result in fines or jail time. And they did this with only good sense. The video game industry has precedent it could follow and it totally failed! ...I love video games ... but this kinda bull is so frustrating.

 

[chinangel]

So, they'll restrict sales of 'm' rated games to minors?
Something like already exists for, say, pornography?

Could someone tell me why this is bad?
I'm genuinely curious.

it's not that it's bad, it's just video games being used as a punching bag again for no other reason other than they are video games.

 

[cobrausn]

Texas, ...

*facepalm*

Considering how many 'horribly violent' video games are made here, and the boon to the state economy that provides, I wouldn't have thought...

I have determined that we need more lobbying for video games in my state.

 

[subject_87]

Well, I'm glad my home of Pennsylvania isn't supporting this.

 

[vanthebaron]

this is so fucking stupid. the PMRC fucked with music, and now they want to do the same thing with games, and the tossers in my state are backing this shit. then again illinois produced so of the WORST governors in US history. if this shit keeps up we'll end up like australia.

 

[DannibalG36]

So state politicians are "vitally interested in protecting the welfare of children and in helping parents raise them."

WHAT... THE... FUCK...

Since when does a government have the power to interfere with the normal raising of children? Don't parents have that responsibility? Oh, that's right. Now it takes a fucking bureaucratic village to raise a child. Fine. Go ahead, all ye politicos, and dispose of normal parental responsibility.

Pff, whatever, parenting has only been around since the fucking dawn of humanity.

On reflection, I'm not entirely sure how I would fare as a parent.

 

[Tomo Stryker]

I got to agree with Dannibal above me. Since when was it ever the job of the government or any politician to tuck me or my family in bed at night? Even though I must look at both sides equally before making a bias opinion, you must look at the reality.

Online in either Xbox Live or PSN even playing Counter Strike Source you are going to find that annoying eight year old brat or the equivalent in some form and yes he probably will do something rash that will make you totally embarrassed to call yourself human. But this whole thing is just pissing in the eye of ESRB, there saying that they don't do their job and that we need MORE regulation. I'm seventeen and I'm also going to turn eighteen in multiple months so this doesn't bother me personally if I were eleven and playing Dragon Age without my moms permission.

On the other side regulation is necessary so that some children don't turn in homicidal Max Payne or blood thirsty character. But honestly have you or anyone you know even consider doing something SO incredibly stupid that when they do get caught there going to turn around and blame Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and then turn all the focused rage that Moms against this and that society has they want to burn down Rockstar's studios?

Even though both sides have valid merit, I personally never agreed with big government. As much as I want to play Team Fortress 2 without hearing a prepubescent voice crack over my head set, I would rather do it without mass regulation (proven fact about drinking and smoking, mass regulation almost NEVER works!).

 

[mr_rubino]

And we see once again Southern conservatives (and California, "lawl") want the government to keep their grubby pincers out of our lives!!! ...unless of course it means other people can make the really tough decisions for them.