scarbunny said:
CantFaketheFunk said:
scarbunny said:
Anti-Game bill is a little bit off the mark there isn't it? All the bill covered was, in your own words, "a bill that would impose harsh penalties on game retailers that claimed they would not sell mature games to minors but did anyway."
Surely this is would be a good bill to have in place, it would stop 10 year olds playing games they shouldn't, for example GTA IV, at the very least it might reduce the amount of brats I would have to put up with online.
The problem with the bill is that it would simply act as incentive for retailers to ignore ESRB ratings entirely. If they don't say they won't sell M-rated games to minors, they can't get in trouble. So it would actually serve to harm consumers by stripping one of the most valuable information tools that parents have to learn about the content in the games their children are playing - the ESRB ratings.
Then an easy way to get round this would be to add an amendment to the bill making it a legal obligation to display the rating system. The bill if handled correctly would be beneficial for the general publics perception of video games.
Im still not sure why video games aren’t subject to the same classification on movies, ie rated by the same body with the same legal implication, but also parents already understand the system and recognise what is suitable. It is something that is done in a half arsed manner in the UK, if a game has a BBFC symbol then it is illegal to sell to a person under that age.
The are subject to exactly the same classification method, with exactly the same legal implications as movies. That is to say, none. The MPAA ratings in the USA have no legal force at all, they are a voluntary, industry applied system. Just like the ESRB ratings. Movie studios don't have to get their movies rated if they don't want to, and movie theaters and video stores don't have to follow the ratings for sales if they don't want to. Most of the theaters and stores belong to professional organizations that do require them to support the ratings, but again, it's all voluntary.
If I were a retailer and was told "if you say you won't sell M rated games to kids and do so, you'll go to jail", I'd just stop saying I won't sell M rated games to kids. Even if I display the ESRB rating system, I'd put a sign right under it saying "this store does not recognize or follow these ratings". Otherwise, there's too much chance of selling a game to a kid, even by accident or because one of your employees is an idiot. It wouldn't be worth the risk. As it stands, without threats of jail and fines, most retailers do a pretty good job (better than theaters, in fact) of following the ratings. Further legislation isn't needed, education for moronic parents is what is needed.
Oh, and a deep pit capped with steel and concrete is also needed. For idiots like Thompson, natch.
