I agree, there is no reason that the game industry should do anything else because when it comes to the purchasing power, the parents are the ones to blame. Did 9 year old Timmy pay for that Xbox 360 all by himself, buy the M rated game, sign up for online with his own credit card, and start calling people slurs his vacuous mind cannot even process the meaning of?Macgyvercas said:
Obligatory "Here here!" I find it pathetic that the video game industry is panned off as a producer of children's toys, yet it holds more responsibility than many American parents when it comes down to influencing their offspring.Matt_LRR said:
I decided neither and went with the Shadow of the Colossus Edition. It's like the size of a Volkswagen. Oil up Mr. Yee.teh_Canape said:
It basically takes away games right to free speech and gives the state the right to ban games out of concern for childrentorno said:
To add to the more epic quoting, this. This exactly.Matt_LRR said:
I like this idea!teh_Canape said:
Difference in culture, I guess. In the USA, we have a much stronger tradition of freedom of speech. Our constitution expects (for the most part) individuals to take responsibility for seeing what they want, and avoiding what they don't, without the government interfering. Any controls by the government, except for areas of clear and present danger, runs the risk of stopping or slowing the free exchange of ideas. To date, only television and radio are controlled by law, and that is only controlled due to the idea of collective ownership of the airwaves by the people. Movies, books, music... any rating systems for these things are industry controlled. It's worked just fine so far.nickpy said:To be honest, I don't see what the problem is. In Britain games have been rated by PEGI as an advisory authority, like your ESRB, but also the BBFC rates games too. Although the PEGI ratings are somewhat more informative, the BBFC ones are legally binding. Hence, a game published in Britain that is PEGI 15 can be legally sold to under-15s, although most shops won't do so. But a game rated BBFC 18 cannot legally be sold to under-18s. Although legally sold is different to legally played. So yes, generally I don't see the problem. We get along just fine and dandy here. If you want a game rated higher than your age, you beg your parents who (should) make an informed decision.
This system doesn't restrict our free speech - there is nothing stopping people from making these games, only a legal penalty for people who sell 18-rated games to children directly, which I think is fair enough. All it takes is one check of a Driver's License (I work in a shop where we sell games, so I do it regularly).
The much bigger problem we have here in Free Speech is our damned libel laws
(Note: in general games not rated 18 will be rated by PEGI only, or at least show only the PEGI rating on the box, although the BBFC is still required to rate them and will give information on it's website. Because the BBFC rating is not on the box, it is not required to be enforced, this is why a game that is PEGI/BBFC rated 15 can still be sold to under-15s legally as the BBFC rating does not appear on the box. They only put the 18 BBFC rating directly on the box, because as before mentioned, industry self-regulation through PEGI is pretty good, they just want to enforce a penalty on the "worst stuff" - i.e. BBFC 18.)
No, you know what? That's my sentiment exactly. Seriously, if you're going to miss the point of something, you shouldn't say anything.Matt_LRR said:
