U.S. Congressmen Want ESRB Rating Clips Posted Online

[Andy Chalk]

U.S. Congressmen Want ESRB Rating Clips Posted Online

Two U.S. Congressmen have sent a letter to the ESRB asking the Board to make its rating process more transparent by putting videos submitted by publishers to the rating agency online for public viewing.

Written by Democrat Joe Baca and Republican Frank Wolf, the letter says that only clips for games rated T (Teen) or higher need to be made available, and since many of the videos are quite long, only segments that are "most relevant" to the game's final rating need to be posted. The videos in question are gameplay clips submitted to the ESRB as part of the game rating process, and often include material or information not available prior to a game's release.

"Parents must have access to consistent, accurate, and objective information about video game content so they are able to choose games that are right for their children," the letter says. "By posting clips of T-rated games and above, parents and consumers will be better informed on the content of the games."

The Congressmen issued a joint statement following the release of the letter, saying, "We believe that posting comprehensive clips of T-rated games and higher online is advantageous for both consumers and the ESRB. The public will be more accurately informed of the substance of games before making purchasing decisions, and the rating process of the ESRB will be brought to light and given more credibility."

(Source: GameSpot [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6183649.html])

Permalink

 

[eggdog14]

I have to say i support this, or a method of similar nature. Knowledge of the actual content of a game can be hard to come by for parents who are less technically savvy, and seeing videos would allow them to judge the game for themselves. They can make more informed decisions, as opposed to blinding following (or disregarding) the superficial ESRB ratings.

 

[Nordstrom]

I think that the idea is hilarious. To protect kids from games they're suggesting that the material be posted on the internet. That's great, but kids are more likely to find the material than parents.

 

[SilentHunter7]

I wouldn't mind something like that, but who do our fine congressmen expect to pay for all that bandwidth?

 

[SatansBestBuddy]

I wouldn't mind something like that, but who do our fine congressmen expect to pay for all that bandwidth?

ESRB would, I believe, as they are the ones who post game ratings anyway, they would also be expected to post the game videos that resulted in the ratings as well.

That is, if they follow this advice, which I highly doubt.

Not only would it cost more money that I'm sure the ESRB would be unwilling to pay, I'm sure that whatever privacy companies ask for would be written down on several dozen sheets of signed legal paper, all of which would most likely add up to the rating game videos never reaching the publics eyes.

The rating alone should be enough for any responsible parent, if they want to see more of a certain game, they will just have to go on YouTube and find some gameplay vids themselves or, heaven forbid, play the game in question to find out.

......

On second thought, posting the rating videos does cut out a lot of middle men in finding out how violent a game can be, but it's still nowhere near as good as a first hand impression.

 

[CarlosYenrac]

What makes anybody think these parents are going to even look at the videos?
They could already google the game and see gameplay trailers, but the majority who won't do that now won't go and see them on the ESRB site either....

 

[SenseOfTumour]

As ever the main problem is so many parents don't care enough to even glance at a rating, so what are the chances they'll sit thru 10 minutes of dodgy youtube quality game footage to make an informed decision?

Far easier to buy " Infant Stabber III Uncut " for 8 year old Timmy and then complain that they didn't know it was bad.

I'm pleased personally that some games in the UK get a simple movie rating of 18, and they're illegal to sell to minors, doesn't stop idiot parents queueing up to buy it to stop a toddler tantrum, but it removes the blame on games and vendors. Or should, at least, but parents and kids are immune from criticism...the fuckers.


So, here's my suggestion, whenever a game rated higher than 12 or 'Teen' is sold, the vendor must ask the parent if they agree and understand the rating, then there's a statement on the reciept, waiving all rights to ***** about it after the event.

Yes, I'm hostile, but I saw way too many wrongly chosen games, and advice from me ignored, when I was a till monkey.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

As ever the main problem is so many parents don't care enough to even glance at a rating, so what are the chances they'll sit thru 10 minutes of dodgy youtube quality game footage to make an informed decision?

Far easier to buy " Infant Stabber III Uncut " for 8 year old Timmy and then complain that they didn't know it was bad.

I'm pleased personally that some games in the UK get a simple movie rating of 18, and they're illegal to sell to minors, doesn't stop idiot parents queueing up to buy it to stop a toddler tantrum, but it removes the blame on games and vendors. Or should, at least, but parents and kids are immune from criticism...the fuckers.


So, here's my suggestion, whenever a game rated higher than 12 or 'Teen' is sold, the vendor must ask the parent if they agree and understand the rating, then there's a statement on the reciept, waiving all rights to ***** about it after the event.

Yes, I'm hostile, but I saw way too many wrongly chosen games, and advice from me ignored, when I was a till monkey.

A contract isn't a bad idea. At the very least it makes people stop and look at a game content, and only takes signing the name, and indemnifies the shop. It also requires that a parent be present.

 

[ElephantGuts]

I suppose this is a good idea. It's just a shame people are too stupid to be able to just listen to the ESRB.

 

[KaiRai]

As ever the main problem is so many parents don't care enough to even glance at a rating, so what are the chances they'll sit thru 10 minutes of dodgy youtube quality game footage to make an informed decision?

Far easier to buy " Infant Stabber III Uncut " for 8 year old Timmy and then complain that they didn't know it was bad.

I'm pleased personally that some games in the UK get a simple movie rating of 18, and they're illegal to sell to minors, doesn't stop idiot parents queueing up to buy it to stop a toddler tantrum, but it removes the blame on games and vendors. Or should, at least, but parents and kids are immune from criticism...the fuckers.


So, here's my suggestion, whenever a game rated higher than 12 or 'Teen' is sold, the vendor must ask the parent if they agree and understand the rating, then there's a statement on the reciept, waiving all rights to ***** about it after the event.

Yes, I'm hostile, but I saw way too many wrongly chosen games, and advice from me ignored, when I was a till monkey.

Please become a politician and put those thoughts into action! God knows someone needs to have a brain down there, you're ideas are smart.

 

[The Rockerfly]

Good luck with that guys.
The ambition is nice but it is doomed to fail

 

[Bored Tomatoe]

I think that the idea is hilarious. To protect kids from games they're suggesting that the material be posted on the internet. That's great, but kids are more likely to find the material than parents.

Nuh uh! They'll implement that birthday selection screen that totally works.

 

[SilentHunter7]

This was 2 years ago, did anything ever come of it?

I suppose this is a good idea. It's just a shame people are too stupid to be able to just listen to the ESRB.

I don't think any ratings or regulations should exist.

No ratings or regulations, huh? Why? You want to give more ammo to the conservative groups who want to ban video games?

Also, considering the ESRB is industry run, and there are no government restrictions on content, I'd say the game industry is one of the least regulated industries in the nation.

 

[timmytom1]

Sounds quite reasonable to me ,if we`re lucky it will raise awareness that videogames are not entirely childs toys

 

[ramboman88]

This congressman is just a real life troll...

Seriously, for example; games like grand theft auto are named after a CRIME. How can a parent think it would be a good idea to get it for a little kid.

Or if you want to laugh your ass off just read the esrb rating for duke nukem forever! Kids will try to make their parents buy it for them and they will blindly do so.

The esrb shouldnt have to edit the videos for time, that's not their job. Maybe a group of these so called "concerned parents" can get togther and review games themselves! Hell, it would probably take them less effort than all the complaining they do.

Well as a matter of fact, there is a site that has reviews aimed at parents. They even offer "more appropriate" suggestions for games that are very similar. Forgot the name of the site though.

In any case, the esrb can fumble too. Oblivion should have been rated M from the beggining. Seriously, therte where bloody corpses hanging from the ceiling during the first part, which happens to be the only part you HAVE to play no matter what. It was funny though, my sister was scared as crap and couldn't "venture out". In retrospect, I should have been a good sport and offered to beat that part for her...

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Well this is a slightly less ridiculous idea than Joe Idiot's last idea, but it's still ridiculous. If the ESRB ratings were any more transparent than they are NOW, they'd be vapour. It's like the old saying "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." IE you can provide the ratings and content descriptors and whatever, but you can't force the parents to actually make use of them.

 

[DustyDrB]

This news post is from...2007. Necromancy: Extreme Edition.

captcha: The Arkabrt. I'm gonna name my Dragon Age 2 sword that.

 

[Giest4life]

Lol. Frank Wolf is my neighboring district's congressman, and my brother used to work for his campaign a couple of years ago. He's good guy...mostly.

 

[Kingsnake661]

The more open, and upfrount a game publisher IS with the games content, and the better the rating system, is accually a good thing for most hardcore gamers. Peoples biggest complaint about games, in essence is that it's corruptring kids, right? (more or less) Parents often complain that they don't know what in these games... well, seems to me, making it easier to find out, and more spesific, should in theroy take ammunation away from games critics. If it's all out in the open, you can't be accused to trying to sneak one past the parents/critics. It's not a bad idea really.

I kind of wish even movie rating were alittle more clear some times as to why they are rated they way they are. I've seen some PG-13 movies that I, IMO, didn't think were suitable for a 13 year old, and watched a few R rated movies that baffle me as to WHY they were rated R in the first place... Which, IMO, kind of rinders teh whole rating system... moot. Same goes for games. More clearity is a good thing IMO.