I don't think less people would look at the information. I think at worst we would have the same amount. On the plus side the information given would be far more useful.
Psychologist Suggests Ditching Age Rating and Going With Content Instead
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
People don't read ratings, and mostly they complain about games/movies/books/thoughts they haven't seen, read, investigated, or done anything other than heard of. Thus the discussion is largely moot except for political points anyway.
That said, I've been saying this about age-related ratings for years. I've personally known (and taught) 20-somethings that I wouldn't trust with a colouring book, and known 13-year-olds who could handle some pretty heavy stuff without being affected by it. Granted they're both pretty small minorities, but it falls back into the standard sociopolitical trap of blindly classifying everyone into a few large groups. (Yes, I'm aware that I just did that above. I was being overdramatic to make a point. I accept responsibility for that.)
Before ESRB ratings were standard in the USA, there was a competing method that graded a game on several sliding scales based on the depth of depiction of violence, sexuality, etc. I believe it was mostly used on PC games in the mid-90s. Don't recall the name, but I could dig out my old Realms of Arkania: Star Trail box and find a copy of one. I liked that it provided descriptions without just blanket age groups, and generally provided far more information for people to ignore.
That said, I've been saying this about age-related ratings for years. I've personally known (and taught) 20-somethings that I wouldn't trust with a colouring book, and known 13-year-olds who could handle some pretty heavy stuff without being affected by it. Granted they're both pretty small minorities, but it falls back into the standard sociopolitical trap of blindly classifying everyone into a few large groups. (Yes, I'm aware that I just did that above. I was being overdramatic to make a point. I accept responsibility for that.)
Before ESRB ratings were standard in the USA, there was a competing method that graded a game on several sliding scales based on the depth of depiction of violence, sexuality, etc. I believe it was mostly used on PC games in the mid-90s. Don't recall the name, but I could dig out my old Realms of Arkania: Star Trail box and find a copy of one. I liked that it provided descriptions without just blanket age groups, and generally provided far more information for people to ignore.
They'll simply outright ban any game that someone complains about.Douglas Dover said:
I'll tell you what. There needs to be a global standard at least.
I used to work in GAME and French exchange students how were about 15 would always try and buy 50 cent the game. Trying to explain to them that the huge red circle with the number 18 written in it meant they couldn't buy it was often a chore. After a while I just learnt the French phrase; "tu peut pas ce achete".
I used to work in GAME and French exchange students how were about 15 would always try and buy 50 cent the game. Trying to explain to them that the huge red circle with the number 18 written in it meant they couldn't buy it was often a chore. After a while I just learnt the French phrase; "tu peut pas ce achete".
for games like grand theft auto the game box would need to be three times bigger to accomodate all the content it has. holy impractical but perhaps a shorthand perhaps a graphical representation
Well having an ERSB rating on the box is pretty useless for some minors,because they will find a way to persuade their parents to buy it for them(this works in most cases).
The idea of the psychologist is a good one,but it won't change the fact that if the game has extreme content(gore,sex,violence etc)minors won't think of a way to get their hands on it.
The idea of the psychologist is a good one,but it won't change the fact that if the game has extreme content(gore,sex,violence etc)minors won't think of a way to get their hands on it.
"He also noted that there were some topics that some parents felt very strongly about - such as depictions of homosexuality "
Yes, be sure to make your children as homophobic as possible, so they can be as biggotted as you are, "good parents"...
Yes, be sure to make your children as homophobic as possible, so they can be as biggotted as you are, "good parents"...
guess im not the only one saying that ratings are complete and utter failure of humanity.
for people who keep saying the idiocy of "omg my 10 year old kid will see gore and grow up to be psychopath" should probably remember their youth. people lived before ratings existed, kids watched movies like The Blob at ages of 6 and they grew up to be decent casual people. im sorry if you were so underdeveloped to be unable to differentiate between real world and movie/game but that doesn't mean everyone was.
anyway, according to this forum rules i probably went a bit too far, but id rather express my real opinion than hide behind censorship.
for people who keep saying the idiocy of "omg my 10 year old kid will see gore and grow up to be psychopath" should probably remember their youth. people lived before ratings existed, kids watched movies like The Blob at ages of 6 and they grew up to be decent casual people. im sorry if you were so underdeveloped to be unable to differentiate between real world and movie/game but that doesn't mean everyone was.
anyway, according to this forum rules i probably went a bit too far, but id rather express my real opinion than hide behind censorship.
Very cynical bunch of people around here.
I'm sure there's a LOT of parents who would find a proper rating system very helpful. Especially with the gamer generation getting older and starting to become parents themselves.
I'm sure there's a LOT of parents who would find a proper rating system very helpful. Especially with the gamer generation getting older and starting to become parents themselves.
Thank you for noting this. Some people have an issue with homosexuality, apparently, some of these people are parents and got into the study. Big surprise. Studies like this tend to go over a lot of different things and that would probably meet a VERY vitriolic response, hence the singling out of it for the sake of example. Maybe the guy is a raging homophobe, but for all the actual quote notes about him, he could just as easily be homosexual... or an asexually reproducing bacteria.4173 said:
Yeah, but the problem with this is that it suggests that parents actually look at the ratings info on the box... and I'm pretty sure they don't do that.
Before the ESRB ratings games did have something like this, where language, gore, and sexuality all received separate scores. I'd love to see us go back to something like that.
When my wife and I want to watch a movie with our six-year-old we go to IMDB and check the parental information. While the age ratings aren't useless (we wouldn't bother with an R rated movie, for example) we're going to learn far more from the IMDB descriptions than simply a G/PG/PG-13 rating.
ESRB does give some information on what went into a rating but I think it really is insufficient.
When my wife and I want to watch a movie with our six-year-old we go to IMDB and check the parental information. While the age ratings aren't useless (we wouldn't bother with an R rated movie, for example) we're going to learn far more from the IMDB descriptions than simply a G/PG/PG-13 rating.
ESRB does give some information on what went into a rating but I think it really is insufficient.
The content is already listed on the back of the box next to the rating. I don't see a problem with the current system, it gives the most information for the most customers. If a parent only cares about the rating, it's there but if they want to read about the content, it's there too.
I think sometimes people create unnecessary changes to justify their paycheck.
I think sometimes people create unnecessary changes to justify their paycheck.
Whilst the ideas are valid and slightly clever; this is what the media would think of a rating system without ages:
WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?
WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?
And you're going to assume that good parents are in such a minority that any attempt to help them would yield trivial benefits?Strazdas said: