I think this in theory is a great idea. But it's not very useful as a service though. The only people who would use such a thing are mature responsible parents and they're not the ones which are creating the "problem". Plus the main issue with the ESRB is that people just outright IGNORE the ratings on the box. This is even easier to ignore.

I think the ESRB should include with the age rating a little chart like the colour chart they're using here. They can change it to numbers or something instead. Of course people will still ignore it but at least then the game industry can say "we say right on the box that this game has this much violence, sex, and profanity." People are going to ignore the rating anyway but if they include more detailed info on the box at least they're lowering their liability.

I like your idea, Ian. It needs to be readable in a short span of time. Maybe indicate it with colour-coded bar graphs or something, like a short bar that's green is good, a medium bar that's yellow is a warning, and a red bar that's long is bad. People don't want to read too much.

As for this system, it sounds okay, but I don't like how it trashes the ESRB. The ESRB ratings aren't perfect, but they're quick and simple, which is important for getting overworked or over-lazy parents to use the system.

I'm getting fatigue from the sheer amount of anti-videogame violence rhetoric during the past couple of weeks.

"The color coded warning system is brought to you by Tom Ridge*."

Then again, we don't see DVDs slapped with a big ol "R" on the front of the case either.
I think the current ratings system is doing well, though I've always thought there should be an additional rating between "E" and "T".

*Fact checking brought to you by Djunknown

It's funny, everyone knows what 'R' and stuff is, but a lot of people have never even heard of Teen or Mature.

Must game retailers create a little gated alcove where they display all the M-rated games like some local video rental stores did for their pr0n selection? WHY NOT

I think the ESRB does a fine job, personally. I remember some really poorly thought-out game ratings in the early 90's in reaction to Mortal Kombat (Sega's own was horrid... a 13+ rating for Mega Man: Wily Wars because he flinched when he was hit, that's why it never got a US release, and the equivalent of an M for Switch because there's a joke where the kid grows boobs as one of the bad endings later on, we're talking stick-figure quality anatomy), but most of the ESRB ratings I've not had a problem with. It's just an issue of parents failing to read the warnings, and then later blaming the companies for whatever issue they ran into.

Thanks to them, we have to tap the screen each time we start the DS to pass a Health and Safety warning. -_-;

Here is something I watched on CSPAN. http://www.c-span.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=video+games

I don't know if there has been any news coverage of this on any of the game sites, but I thought it was interesting and related. I'm a news junky, so I watch CSPAN because they cover polotics better than anyone. It is a shame that the most trust worthy news source is a gov't station.

the JFK game he was talking about. http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/21/kennedy.game.reut/index.html

Liberman is a Republicrat.

This guy David Walsh is obsessed with teen boys.


It is funny that he mentions virtual reality when Nintendo is said to be the closest to virtual reality.

David Walsh seems to only be playing GTA and Halo because he says that the best games are violent shooters. To me the best games are Zelda and Metroid.


I don't have to say that those kids in those ads were fed those lines about choping the heads off of super-hard pavement queens.

Hmmm... looking at their examples, it'd seem that a lot of games would have a Red Rating. Since I'm assuming that most parents screen for violence first, they might think that Fable is just a hack fest (which is half true, but still...) It'd be make games with moderate violence look extra naughty.

Quote

---

The color coded warning system is brought to you by John Ashcroft

---

It's a shame that we can't get an independent ratings board that's less uptight. It seems to me that this organization was founded on the principle that the ESRB wasn't being strict or harsh enough on games, when my view is exactly the opposite.

I don't see how people can complain about games like GTA (I didn't really see any reason to give III and Vice City an M, it really isn't that bloody, there's only moderate cursing that's PG-13 level, and violence is really cartoony and definately not something that's "only for 17 and up") when movies like Bad Boyz II aren't even being mentioned in the news when they are so much worse. GTA is very sharp, well written, funny, and a brilliant parody of American life in the 80's, early 90's, and late 90's. It's also not blatantly over-the-top just to be over the top like the aforementioned Bruckheimer film. The things in GTA are accurate to what they are making fun of. San Andreas has tons of cussing and ghetto talk, GTAIII has the mindset and respect for family that is characteristic of the Mafia and Yakuza, Vice City is very representative of 80's Miami; they are all matter of fact. Haitians complain about Vice City's missions where you kill the Haitians. Well you are allied with the Cubans, I mean Japan isn't complaining that in Rise of Nations you get to pick America and destroy Japanese cities with nuclear weapons. Look at Bad Boys 2 again. That movie just blatantly makes fun of homosexuals, black people, white people, the KKK, Russians, Cubans, Haitians and does it all with so much blood, violence, language, sex, and some downright nasty stuff just for the heck of it. There's no reason for any of it at all except to appeal to the stupidest of teens and 20-somethings. I mean some of the stuff is pretty funny or all but unlike GTA where there is actually a reason and consequence for your actions, as well as a brilliantly told story and witty humor BB2 (and plenty of other movies, but I'm picking on this one because I saw it the other day, I was a fan of the original but after seeing the second I was really shocked at some of the stunts they pulled, and why anyone would rant about games and not this, not that it was that bad or anything, just shocking) is the one that "needs" to be yelled at. Ok, not really, but better BB2 and similar movies than works of art such as GTA.

Quote

---

I didn't really see any reason to give III and Vice City an M, it really isn't that bloody, there's only moderate cursing that's PG-13 level, and violence is really cartoony and definately not something that's "only for 17 and up

---

>“The fact is, parents don’t know the half of what is going on in these games,” said David G. Kinney, CEO of Veritasiti Corporation, the parent company of both PSVratings and Current Attractions.

And this guy is hoping to change that? Parents don't know what's in the games for the simple fact that they don't care. Red, yellow and green bars on the cover aren't going to change a thing (except maybe getting pre-teen boys to want games that has a large, red bar under the "sex" catagory...)

This seems to make things yet more complicated... I think the ESRB is okay, but the two changes I would make would be to make the ESRB completly independant from the industry and I'd go with the more understood "G", "PG", "PG-13", "R", and "NC-17" movie ratings that everyone is already familiar with.

"Look mom, can I get this new Pokémon game?"
"No Johnny, it's Fire Red! It must be way too mature for you!"

Lots of stupid parents can't even figure out the current rating system. I can't wait to see how they react if this thing goes through. It is just going to confuse people more.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Djunknown

Quote

---

The color coded warning system is brought to you by John Ashcroft

---

I think we have Tom Ridge and the Department of Homeland Security to thank for that...

---