The MPAA is also not valid I guess, since it is run by the industry also.

No company is trying to make their rating lower to trick kids into buying it, companies shoot for the M rating cause it adds a stigma to their game that makes it instantly more attractive to kids than "kiddy" T-rated games.

So what would he do? Establish an independent ratings board to play every single game to completion? That wouldnt be a huge waste of money now would it?

Has this guy ever heard of the MPAA? Who funds that group? Oh right the movie studios.

He's certainly better-spoken and reasoned than most of these yahoos.

Uhh....MPAA's not a conflict of interest, then? ESRB's voluntary, too, just like the MPAA and i never hear critics arguing the validity/integrity of an 'R' rating...

@parad0x360:

you cant put a price on human life.

"Pushing a button decapitates someone"

I know that one, it's PLAY on my DVD remote!

Wait a second...

I'm happy someone actually acknowledges the video games vs. other media issue, but that answer doesn't hold up. I need him to elaborate. It's simply worse because it's interactive? Even if a movie doesn't have me using a controller, it's still exposing me to the "ultra violent" images, in, guess what? Extremely vivid detail. The blood actually looks like blood there. The body parts, too.

I refuse to believe Gears of War is more offensive than watching Hostel simply because Gears of War uses an analog stick.

Next, the ESRB rates the games based on submitted content, yes. But they are checked by the millions or gamers and, you guessed it, media. They're not going to slip a T on Gears of War to sell more copies because even when they rate it appropriately there is an uproar.

It would literally be impossible for them to get away with. The ESRB rating are always accurate and are the most informant of the media rating systems. Movies should look to them for inspiration, really. Plenty of PG13 movies could easily be rated R due to violence or gore and are only saved because they tone down the cursing.

In a world where even PG13 movies are much worse than the worst rated M games, this argument of his is simply awful. I know he's trying, I feel this is one of the men who genuinely cares, but he's still not getting it.

Why don't any of them get it.

@The_Foo: But a yahoo nonetheless.

@neoepochx: This statement pretty much invalidates the senator's entire point.

Also the lack of, and even evidence against, conclusive research linking video games to a propensity for violence is what really gets me. How can people make such assumptions when videogames have been around for a reasonably long time now? I can barely name a few young males I know who don't play videogames fairly regularly, and obviously that demographic doesn't have skyrocketing crime rates.

@drunkentyger: Oh, yes, yes you can.

@karasu is my homeboy: I don't think any of them will get it until they wake up and realize it's a parental issue and completely out of their hands. Will forcing a completely independent entity to play through every single new game to completion stop parents from buying the game for whiny, spoiled children?

Every time I go to a store to buy an M rated game I have to show ID and I'm 23 for christsakes, obviously the problem isn't with the industry or the retailers.

Pretty much any game that features the ability to decapitate/dismember someone will be M-Rated -- in other words, designated as not appropriate for children. What more does this guy want?

"In a world where even PG13 movies are much worse than the worst rated M games, this argument of his is simply awful. "

@karasu is my homeboy: I'm not so sure about that. Can you give me an example of a scene in a PG-13 movie that is as bad as some of the M-rated games?

@Gray665: Hardly. If I had to pick sides in this, I'd pick Senator Yee's side. A child psychologist before he was a politician, he wrote a law which would fine video game retailers who sold violent material to minors. I'd define a 'yahoo' as someone who wants these games to be banned for sale in the USA, and not someone who merely wants a formal control system to keep this kind of content out of the hands of minors.

I'm not saying it isn't flawed (obviously it was, if it was deemed unconstitutional), but this is a man who sees that video games are violent (which they are) and have the potential to cause violence (whether or not they actually do is irrelevant because the potential is there), so they should be kept away from minors. Until I see hard scientific evidence coming down on either side of this debate, I am happy to err on the side of caution.

@jgross:

Please rent "This Film Is Not Yet Rated." In many ways the MPAA is worse than the ESRB.

I agree, ESRB is flawed and we need a new system. Only 3 people, and they don't even play the games!

What's his point? These games aren't for kids. Simulations of violence are not illegal or obscene. Not all human to human violence/killing is even illegal.

It's not just any violent video game - it is the interactive nature of these violent video games that are particularly harmful to our children.

1- That makes no sense. To be a videogame, you have to be interactive. If he's talking about the events in a cutscene, or not initiated by the player, then it's simply talking about films, in essence. So, yes, it's is any violent videogame.

2- Can we please have a good look at this fabled, oft quoted piece of research to suggest this particular harm?

Having said that, I feel his heart is in the right place, he's just got along with this misinformation, and seems to be doing the right thing in the wrong way.

The issue of self rating, is of course, a non-point. Yet many times upon telling less informed individuals about videogame rating systems, they say, well it's by some videogame rating system, so they're going to be biased. The non-acceptance of videogames amongst many 'reputable' sources has lead people to believe the worst of the medium.

But this will change. I don't think this man should be in any way vilified for this, and his previous actions. Just better informed. And I think that is our duty. (The fact that he had an interview at GameCyte leads me to believe he is genuine about his concerns).

@FanDam:
I saw a head get cut off in Prince Caspian. And there were plenty of face stabs. It is rated PG.

Never saw that in Halo.

Video Games v Other media? Hmmm... I recently watched a SAW movie for the first time and I felt physically disgusted at what was being portrayed on screen. Similarly, I have read books which have sickened me in their vivid description of detailed violence. Have played plenty of so called violent video games involving blood guts etc but none of them come near the level of realistic violence portrayed in other media. I think if anyone was going to be 'inspired' to commit acts then I would look more towards 'other media' than video games.

@FanDam:

"In a world where even PG13 movies are much worse than the worst rated M games, this argument of his is simply awful. "

@karasu is my homeboy: I'm not so sure about that. Can you give me an example of a scene in a PG-13 movie that is as bad as some of the M-rated games?

LOTR, there's several decapitations, lots of black gooey orc blood, appendage amputations. etc etc. I think they were able to get away with it because the orcs weren't "human" so it was ok to eviscerate them. It's a PG-13 movie that has a whole butt load of violence though.

stop the hate

make war, not love.

The fact that Yee immediately starts talking about children playing violent video games is an epic fail in the first place.

Amzing how elected people who are supposed to be doing something for the peopl. Waste time on things that are just not the way they are seeing it. do you see soemthing diff. being a senator? does that give me special powers to see more violence or gory sutff that any other?

Just like Karasu said i would love to see what parents would say after watching hostel and playing Grand auto? which one do you guys think they would say something?

Yo!! Senator Yee GET A LIFE and do something usefull for the people that elected you!!!

At least I know who never to vote for now.

@Drake Lake: I think because the people who rate these games take into account that "shooting someone in Halo" is much worse than "watching someone being shot in a movie" since you yourself are doing the action.

Also, take into account the movie industry had their rating problems in their infancy, but as the industry began to mature it tamed down. Give the ESRB some time. As a new generation takes over, we will see change.

Wow, I can't believe he let's his kids play Manhunt 2, I sure as hell wouldn't let mine push a button and cut off a limb.

@jarjarwang: Seriously, let's get this guy's kids in the army...

These games are designed to entertain adults. NOT CHILDREN. If there is a problem here, it's lack of parenting.

BTW: There are children in Africa who don't push buttons on a controller to shoot a pretend gun and kill fake people, they pull the trigger and kill REAL ones.

@arstal: You're old enough to vote? So you're not a minor. So the law that he penned (which was struck down anyway) doesn't even apply to you.

But he's against selling Manhunt 2 to your eight year old neice, and that loses him a vote?

Not every politician promoting a collective conscience for the video game industry is a bad guy. I'd trust a child psychologist with this decision, especially if his peers are behind him on this.

@Dr.Chocobo:
He just wanted an example; I delivered, sort of.

@FanDam: Can you give me an example of a scene in a PG-13 movie that is as bad as some of the M-rated games?

The M-rating is too broadly used. I've said this before that it is crazy that Halo 3 and Grand Theft Auto 4 have the same rating. There is nothing in Halo 3 that I haven't seen in a PG-13 movie. GTA4 is clearly for adults only.

If a game says "Shit!" once, it gets an M rating. If the player cuts babies in half with chainsaws to restore their health, it also gets an M rating.

@Dr.Chocobo:
"As a new generation takes over, we will see change."

With you here. Give it time, guys, and just keep holding on.

Who does this guy work for, the Thought Police? Oh no, Califor---- WHAT!!!!! You my friend, are OFF the island.

The industry will provide you with some of the information that causes one to rate in a particular way.

And what happens when "the industry" doesn't provide you with all the necessary information? Ask Rockstar - GTA: San Andreas was rerated AO and pulled from store shelves because of the Hot Coffee incident. They had to release patches, rerelease the game to get its M rating back, contend with legal action, and most importantly in terms of business, it probably impacted their bottom line in a negative fashion.

I'd bet this guy a quarter that every other game developer will stay in line just for the sake of not having to waste time and money dealing with the bad PR involved with cheating the ESRB, inadvertently or otherwise.

The point is the system is already doing a pretty good job of policing itself, and short of sitting a team down and playing through games that could take anywhere from 10-40 hours up to hundreds of hours it's probably about as good as it's going to get.

One thing Rockstar can't do however is force parents to read the labels on the products they are buying for their children. That one's squarely on the parents.

@Glaiel-Gamer: Developers and publishers absolutely have a rating in mind when creating a title(which is usually Teen)and create the game to meet it. Unfortunately the exact rating appears to be a moving target based on previous games,the overall context of the game in question and who knows what else.

From: [kotaku.com]
Eggebrecht revealed his independent studio's difficulties trying to secure a Sony requested Teen rating for its PLAYSTATION 3 dragon game Lair. With a heavy amount of blood and gore, the game was altered to conform to the ESRB's sometimes impolitic ratings criteria. Even though the player can burn scores of human infantry to death, showing blood spraying from dragon wounds resulted in a Mature rating.

I think getting into the weeds with these people is complete nonsense. The government has no role here whatsoever. This is about a relationship between consumers and corporations. Legislation is completely inappropriate and probably unconstitutional. This goes for software, movies, books, television and music. Frank Zappa says it best:

+ Watch video

Kudos to him for being more thoughtful than your average anti-game advocate, at least. The problem with starting an independent agency to rate games is that nobody outside the game industry would be particularly interested in funding it, aside from the government. If that were the case, it would run into constitutional problems on like, the first day.

@Gannoc:
This problem could easily be rectified if three particular companies allowed for that AO rating.

I find it kind of funny that the ESRB created a new rating a while back that hasn't really done anything (E10). Seriously, instead of creating a new rating for these games between a PG13 and R, they make one that no one really asked for?

@Drake Lake:
This problem could easily be rectified if three particular companies allowed for that AO rating. <- Ignore this, please. I don't even know why I typed that.

Making me angry.

As a California resident, I wish they'd stop wasting our taxpayer money on this crap. We have a budget problem, remember? You're going to close a bunch of the state parks so you can fight a dead-end court case whose sole purpose is to look good to the misinformed portion of the voting populace? Reminds me why I didn't vote for these clowns.

I had a different comment on deck but etchasketchist has it correct. Lets run with Zappa.

He says the conflict is there like the ESRB is at the beck of the industry. If anything it's the other way around.

They're not mandatory as it's been said. But unless you're on the PC good luck getting a game out on the market, much less certified on a console without a rating. The ESRB may have been formed because of games and may be funded by the industry, but that's a jump to say that it's the industry's bitch thereof.

@FanDam: I was honestly shocked by your question. Other uses have replied quicker than I was able to, so you have a few examples cited in this thread. If you need more, they're everywhere.

@Gannoc: Well, that can be said for movies, too. I mean, Iron Man is rated the same as some gory, teen thrillers. Iron Man is a man in a suit shooting missiles at tanks. Prom Night, while certainly not one of the goriest PG13 thrillers, shows teenagers being stalked and killed one by one and is obviously marketed at high school students.

It's more of a scale, and then the games are placed within that scale. Then video games go more in-depth within that scale using the descriptors.

Halo 3
Blood and Gore
Mild Language
Violence

GTA IV
Blood
Intense Violence
Partial Nudity
Strong Language
Strong Sexual Content
Use of Drugs and Alcohol

I think you'd have a valid argument or concern if the descriptors didn't exist or weren't as clearly displayed as they are.

@The_Foo:

I agree. While he does sound out of touch, he's a whole hell of a lot more aware than most people in his camp.

@Gannoc:

Definitly. It's like a modicum of bland violence will get you a Teen rating but anything above that will get you an M. AO is reserved for porn and "murder simulation" on the scale of Manhunt 2. Given that most parents aren't too concerned about differentiating between and T and an E game, but froth at the mouth over M games, it would make the most sense if the ESRB either split the M category or used a more explicit system (like MVS for M for Violence and Sexuality or MVLNS for M for Violence, Language, Nudity and Sexuality).

@karasu is my homeboy:

Admittedly, any audience is always interacting with a story or movie. But it stands to reason that the more interactive a medium (like a video game) the more likely it is to be engrossing. The lines between reader and author in a game are even blurrier than they are in any other medium.

In fact, its entirely possible that the more offensive and disturbing the movie, the more alienating it is to the reader. To take Hostel and other "torture porn" movies as an example - most of these movies work on the basic principle that you will be horrified by the violence involved. A game asks, by its very nature, that you be at least partially complicit. The difficulty here is that for us adults, at whom these M games are aimed, there is no real danger - we can distinguish virtual worlds from the real world, and see the limitations and exageration in the mores of the former when compared to the latter. As the age of the gamer drops, however, the more difficulty they have in distinguishing play from the real world.

Now, do retailers already do a good job of enforcing age restrictions? Absolutly. Would this bill really only stand to hurt small game stores? Definitly, though Gamestop/EB do a great job of that already.

@Tonx: While I don't necessarily agree that this one issue would mean a no vote, I don't exactly agree with what you are saying. just because a law doesn't directly affect me, I shouldn't care? So, what you are saying is, just because I am not jewish, I shouldn't care if some crackpot politician would push for a law involving concentration camps? Laws don't always affect you, but they affect the country, and that is what you vote for.

Also, what this guy, as well as many others, propose is wrong. I fully agree (and I am s