LadyLuck34
04-22-2010, 06:56 PM
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/53/shiftesrb.jpg
This one may not make much sense as I think I jumped around a little XD
First, so there's no confusion. The ESRB is the Entertainment Software Rating Board. On their website, they describe themselves as a "non-profit, self-regulatory body that independently assigns ratings, enforces advertising guidelines, and helps ensure responsible online privacy practices for the interactive entertainment software industry."
Recently, MolotovCupcake from SpawnKill, wrote an article (found here (http://spawnkill.com/2010/04/21/spawn-kill-agree-to-disagree-06-children-and-video-games/)) concerning children, parents and the ESRB. I think we all have mixed feelings concerning the "younger" generations on online services, especially as our worst encounnters tend to be on Teen or Mature rated games with ill-mannered kids. However, this begs the question, are the ESRB ratings essentially useless?
Remember, the ESRB is like the "parental advisory" on CDs in the '90s. It's a guideline, not a law. But with the multitude of parents and children that apparently ignore it, what's the point? This doesn't mean it isn't being used. However, I imagine that the parents who do make use of the ESRB ratings do their research on the games their children want and don't necessarily need it. Then, there are the parents that don't know or don't care. It reminds me very much of movie ratings. These ratings, instead of acting as guidelines to help in decision making, seem to only provide miscellaneous information that gives us a vague idea of the game's content.
Now, when I say miscellaneous information, I mean we're recording a show and discussing a game we know very little about. So, someone searches online for info and we happen to see it's rated T, so we assume maybe some mild cursing. Otherwise, I truthfully feel as if the ESRB is a rarely used tool in the video game industry. So what does it provide otherwise (to the consumer)?
For me, I think about this because the ESRB ratings come up a lot when the question of children gaming appears. Besides games rated M, it doesn't really come up (that I've noticed). Even then, the general assumption is that the fault in these cases lies with the parents. The opinion appears to be "well, it's rated T or M, so why did the parent buy it?" But we can just as easily state "it's a violent game, so why...?" This ESRB rating is extra and not exactly necessary in these cases. So does that make it useless?
This comes across as a silly question, but when discussing (or arguing if it involves Peteroccc) I want accurate info quickly. If we want to discuss children and gaming (a topic that is a pink elephant half the time), the ESRB rating seems unnecessary simply because A) you wouldn't be discussing it if it wasn't a 'violent' game and B) if you are discussing it, the questionable content for children would already be known. So does the rating have another use for us?
As a side note, in ending, this argument also applies to movie ratings. The problem in this case is that people seem quicker to blame video games than movies. And I never remember being carded for rated R movies like I have been for M rated games.
Random thought complete =]
This one may not make much sense as I think I jumped around a little XD
First, so there's no confusion. The ESRB is the Entertainment Software Rating Board. On their website, they describe themselves as a "non-profit, self-regulatory body that independently assigns ratings, enforces advertising guidelines, and helps ensure responsible online privacy practices for the interactive entertainment software industry."
Recently, MolotovCupcake from SpawnKill, wrote an article (found here (http://spawnkill.com/2010/04/21/spawn-kill-agree-to-disagree-06-children-and-video-games/)) concerning children, parents and the ESRB. I think we all have mixed feelings concerning the "younger" generations on online services, especially as our worst encounnters tend to be on Teen or Mature rated games with ill-mannered kids. However, this begs the question, are the ESRB ratings essentially useless?
Remember, the ESRB is like the "parental advisory" on CDs in the '90s. It's a guideline, not a law. But with the multitude of parents and children that apparently ignore it, what's the point? This doesn't mean it isn't being used. However, I imagine that the parents who do make use of the ESRB ratings do their research on the games their children want and don't necessarily need it. Then, there are the parents that don't know or don't care. It reminds me very much of movie ratings. These ratings, instead of acting as guidelines to help in decision making, seem to only provide miscellaneous information that gives us a vague idea of the game's content.
Now, when I say miscellaneous information, I mean we're recording a show and discussing a game we know very little about. So, someone searches online for info and we happen to see it's rated T, so we assume maybe some mild cursing. Otherwise, I truthfully feel as if the ESRB is a rarely used tool in the video game industry. So what does it provide otherwise (to the consumer)?
For me, I think about this because the ESRB ratings come up a lot when the question of children gaming appears. Besides games rated M, it doesn't really come up (that I've noticed). Even then, the general assumption is that the fault in these cases lies with the parents. The opinion appears to be "well, it's rated T or M, so why did the parent buy it?" But we can just as easily state "it's a violent game, so why...?" This ESRB rating is extra and not exactly necessary in these cases. So does that make it useless?
This comes across as a silly question, but when discussing (or arguing if it involves Peteroccc) I want accurate info quickly. If we want to discuss children and gaming (a topic that is a pink elephant half the time), the ESRB rating seems unnecessary simply because A) you wouldn't be discussing it if it wasn't a 'violent' game and B) if you are discussing it, the questionable content for children would already be known. So does the rating have another use for us?
As a side note, in ending, this argument also applies to movie ratings. The problem in this case is that people seem quicker to blame video games than movies. And I never remember being carded for rated R movies like I have been for M rated games.
Random thought complete =]