ESRB

fhqwhgads said:
Once again, kill the letters, only keep the reasons. Parents need to judge for themselves.
Click to expand...

yeah, like with old time arcade games.

i agree 100%, too many parents wont even look at a game with an M on it, even if its just for "strong language"
 
All the games now a days are too heavily put onto a rating. Some of these rated M games were over hyped and already put to a M without a 2nd chance.
 
My rating system.

E= everyone. period.

E10= E8 to me.

T=PG. I mean, what kind of person this age is going to believe when you shoot someone, blood doesnt come out?

M= now this is where they mess up. they should have two different kinds of M ratings.Games like Halo and Spliner cell chaos theory should be 14+ and games like GTA and Manhunt should be 16 or 17+.

AO= I agree with completely. Except fot GTA: san andreas! >:(
 
I also find it humorous how authoritative bodies will let you operate a motor vehicle, something which can be dangerous to yourself and to everyone around you, but they won't let you smoke, drink, gamble, play violent videogames, or look at naked people. Why is it that they will trust you to avoid a high speed vehicle collision that could instantly kill everyone involved, but they won't let you purchase a magazine?
 
stealth toilet said:
I also find it humorous how authoritative bodies will let you operate a motor vehicle, something which can be dangerous to yourself and to everyone around you, but they won't let you smoke, drink, gamble, play violent videogames, or look at naked people. Why is it that they will trust you to avoid a high speed vehicle collision that could instantly kill everyone involved, but they won't let you purchase a magazine?
Click to expand...

It's because morality (or the lack of) can have an impact on society as a whole, where having an auto accident only affects a very small amount of people involved.

As for the ASRB, it would be better if they were more definitive in their approach on rating games. My example would be God of War. Rated M, it has just about everything an AO games has based on the definition of the AO rating...
 
Dart said:
As for the ASRB, it would be better if they were more definitive in their approach on rating games. My example would be God of War. Rated M, it has just about everything an AO games has based on the definition of the AO rating...
Click to expand...

I agree. Usually they do this because of pressure from the big companies, ie. Sony, MS, Nintendo not so much I assume, to get these games in as many hands as possible. An AO rating is the kiss of death to games for some reason and the developers and publishers would like to avoid that.
 
An AO rating is the kiss of death to games for some reason and the developers and publishers would like to avoid that.
Click to expand...

I already stated why. Places like Wal--Mart and Target won't carry AO rated games, period. I don't think places like EB games carry it either. Hell, you won't find them in rental stores even.
 
stealth toilet said:
I also find it humorous how authoritative bodies will let you operate a motor vehicle, something which can be dangerous to yourself and to everyone around you, but they won't let you smoke, drink, gamble, play violent videogames, or look at naked people. Why is it that they will trust you to avoid a high speed vehicle collision that could instantly kill everyone involved, but they won't let you purchase a magazine?
Click to expand...
And you can go to the marines and the army and go to war before you can drink ::)
 
I don't really have a problem with the current system. I think it would probably work better, though, if people--especially parents--were actually educated about it. It's not that hard to read the back of the box no matter what the rating is and see what the content descriptors are.

What puzzles me is the people who are ok with blood and gore in M-rated games, but not cussing. :huh :lol
 
The wise words of Clif Belinsky

Actually, I got more flak about the swearing [in Gears of War] than the violence... Apparenly, you can be cutting peoples heads off all day long, as long as you dont say a dirty word or show a breast.
Click to expand...
 
SpartanEvolved said:
And shooting someone's head off isn't?
Click to expand...

Uh, no, it isn't. Which is easier? Picking up a gun or calling someone a "poophead"?

Better yet, which is easier for a 6 year old to do? Shoot someone, have sex, or call someone a bad name?
 
Wow...that's really sad. But not every single digit year old plays things like GTA.
 
It's because morality (or the lack of) can have an impact on society as a whole, where having an auto accident only affects a very small amount of people involved.
Click to expand...

I know I don't have to tell you this, but a fatal car accident does affect many people. From the families and communities that lost productive and appreciated members, to the emergency workers, auto manufacturers, and insurance people involved. A car crash can leave a bigger dent on society then you may think.

If politicians and the public at large were actually concerned about morality (or lack there of) then many things about our current day society would not be as they are. "Freedom" comes with certain concessions, namely that we don't impose our own beliefs and values on another member of a free society (to a point, of course). What we consider to be immoral may very well be an accepted and even revered tradition in someone else's culture, and of course the opposite may be true as well. Besides, I've never really thought of smoking a cigarette as "immoral." It may be unhealthy, but then if that's the logic behind it's age limit then there should also be an age limit on fast food. It's unhealthy and addictive, and eating to much of it will cause serious health problems, so it's hard to imagine why one is restricted.

Also, it is hard to imagine how a 16 year old teenage boy who likes to look at a playboy can have a larger impact on society than a three car pile up. And even conceding that, it's still ridiculous that it's arbitrarily ok to be as immoral as you want when you're 18 but not when you're 17, or even 16. Adults, the people who shape and determine the society we live in, can indulge in every legal immoral pleasure they so desire without having a negative impact on society, but a 16 year old kid can't? Sounds like a bit of an illegitimate double standard to me.

I'm not in favor of abolishing age limits on things like cigarettes and pornography, but one must admit it is rather peculiar how, as Strubes pointed out, one is trusted with a 2000 pound vehicle or, as boomsickle pointed out, one is given a gun and trained to kill another human being, before they're allowed to have a beer.
 
Hey, I pointed out the vehicle thing. I thought it was pretty clever. :lol

I see your point and agree stealth. A fatal car accident changed my whole neighborhood's outlook on things.

I don't like the ESRB's reasonings when it comes to its ratings. I just think they have too many. I also have a problem with the Mature rating, as it only allows it to be sold to someone 17 and older. Although I realize they're following the "R" rating for movies, I still don't agree.
 
Strubes said:
Hey, I pointed out the vehicle thing. I thought it was pretty clever. :lol

I see your point and agree stealth. A fatal car accident changed my whole neighborhood's outlook on things.

I don't like the ESRB's reasonings when it comes to its ratings. I just think they have too many. I also have a problem with the Mature rating, as it only allows it to be sold to someone 17 and older. Although I realize they're following the "R" rating for movies, I still don't agree.
Click to expand...

your right, it is a bit strict. but then again, do we really need more 12 year olds playing gta?

or mindless preteens trash talkingnon XBL?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top