Ah, election years, is it a wonder why less and less people go to the polls with every one?

Auto FAIL!!!

1st amendment and 14, Brownback loses by default.

God I swear, these idiots get dummer by the minute.

Why do people always only mention games like Oblivion when they talk about games that are very big? How about every single MMO out there? Those games have far more content than games like Oblivion do. And MMOs get patched about every single month or even more often than that in some cases. Does the ESRB have to test those patches as well? There is no way you can play MMOs in their entirety. And playing a game all the way wouldn't have stopped Hot Coffee from happening either.

America seems to be on the fasttrack to destroy the MMO industry when this ever allowed. And isn't this completely unconstitutional? Here he is suggesting that a governmental organization is telling a private organization what to do. The government can't dictate what kind of methods the ESRB should or shouldn't use.

Yet another attempt at legislation that will go nowhere.

The bill would also direct the FTC to define parameters for describing video game content

Violates the First Amendment right there.

Also the fact that it focuses on the video game industry means the bill violates the industry's Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of due process.

No surprise that Brownnoser is doing this, as he's got Presidential aspirations as well.

Aside from MMOs and RPGs like Oblivion already mentioned, how would this even apply at all to sandbox games like The Sims, or any of the GTA series?

Publishers would never pay the ESRB what it costs to rate games in this manner. If gaming magazines don't review games this way with advertiser support, how can the ESRB ever do it?

The entire system of ESRB ratings is supposed to be voluntary. Publishers voluntarily submit for ratings, and retailers voluntarily choose what they will or will not stock on their shelves in part based on those ratings.

This shouldn't be a political issue at all. If consumers find the ESRB ratings unreliable, they should communicate this directly to the retailer. If the retailer cannot use the rating system for the purpose for which it was designed, they will communicate this to the ESRB and to the publishers.

As much as people like to pile on it, the ESRB system is not broken. One instance of one publisher submitting a sandbox game that had hidden content unlocked by consumers is not an indictment of the ESRB's entire system.

What the ESRB ought to be doing right now is getting the retailers and publishers to rally behind it; because if the ESRB is seen as a total failure and it is replaced with a mandatory, legislated ratings system, that certainly won't be better either for retailers or publishers.

The only reason I can think for them not to do so is that 1) they resent the necessity of any ratings system whatsoever, and 2) they hope that while the scandals may eliminate the ESRB, that legal challenges can successfully be brought against any mandatory, legislated ratings system that replaces it, which will create a vacuum.

Actually, that might be what the publishers want. I doubt all retailers want to have to decide what games are appropriate by reading reviews.

Who’s the GAO?

“The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an agency that works for Congress and the American people. Congress asks GAO to study the programs and expenditures of the federal government… It studies how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. GAO advises Congress and the heads of executive agencies (such as Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, Department of Defense, DOD, and Health and Human Services, HHS) about ways to make government more effective and responsive. GAO evaluates federal programs, audits federal expenditures, and issues legal opinions... Its work leads to laws and acts that improve government operations, and save billions of dollars.”

The ESRB is not the federal government.


Andrew Eisen

Brownback's a douche, plain and simple. He's always been against stuff like this, as he's a foot-washing baptist of the worst stripe (no really, he is. I once heard a news story about a former digruntled staffer of his who claimed that he made his subordinates wash his feet in his office). After Lieberman goes, Brownback ought to be next.

Anyway, this legislation won't pass for the two simple reasons that have been cited before in the similar bill: GAO and FTC, as it is NOT their job to monitor and dictate content and would be considered clearly unconstitutional for them to do so.

Utterly physically impossible. I think the ESRB is doing a fine job as it is. You haven't heard of the MPAA re-rating anything because of an oversight, have you?

Testing, Testing. This is a test of the comments system, if you can see this, please disregard.

Thank you for your Cooperation, good night.

It's time to change the way the ESRB works.

From here on out, every game will be sold WITH a strategy guide, thereby forcing the the authors of such books to give their own review of the game and allowing parents to see absolutely everything their child can see or do on said videogame.

Vote for me and I'll pass legislation that forces videogame developers and producers to change the pornographic packages from an unintelligable 7 1/2 x 5 1/2 x 1/2 to a much improved 18 x by 12 x 5 inch package. This will allow more pictures, larger icons, and lengthier unnecessary descriptors in the esrb box so that parents can begin parenting with quick glances that take less time out of their busy lives rather than sit down with their children day in and day out. After all, time is money.

So vote for me, Blitz Fitness, and I'll show the constitution who's boss.

*This message approved by Blitz Fitness himself, as no one would honestly want this joker in office*

Awwwww....my commercial was too much like a commercial and I got spam-tackled.

I've got a better idea. How about HE has to play every game in its entirety and then rate it. If he thinks its so simple, then why doesn't he try and it and see for himself that it's damn near impossible to play certain games "in their entirety".

This sounds like another attempt to cause a chilling effect on the industry. It should have been "Police yourselves or we will" the ESRB is forme,d let's leaveit at that, but no, give the poiticians and inch, they take ten miles.

!!

Testing...

I CAN'T POST!!

Un-Constitutional.

Essentially forcing games to delay their release until they've gone through what could be a hundred or even hundreds of man-hours of play constitutes a chilling effect on freedom of speech.

Sigh, I know he means well, but someone should explain to him that the Hot Coffee and Topless Orcs incidents would have happened EVEN IF the ESRB had played 100% of both games. Because both required a hack of the game files in order to occur. Playing 100% of the game as it sits on the shelf, without any modifications, would NOT have uncovered these things.

Unless Sen. Brownback is REALLY proposing that the ESRB ALSO go through ALL the files used to create the game, which would take even longer. I hope Sen Brownback is prepared to go through 27,000 texture files per level, just to make sure one doesn't look like a nipple. Oh, and better do combinations of all, just in case two textures lined up form a naughty picture.

I'm not automated spam. It won't let me post!!

- Warren Lewis

Here's another no one's mentioned... Disgaea

3 words... Random level generator...
Kinda hard to play a game in it's "entirity" when the game has an infinite number of levels.

Disgaea's definately not the first, nor will it be the last...
I'd definatly love to see the ESRB use this when they go to defend themselves against the bill. Grant it though, unlike judges, the legislators will ignore it and probably just try to dodge the question.

One good thing about legislation in congress though... better chance of anti-game politicans looking like complete idiots on national TV; all thanks to the daily show. Daily show may not focus much state side, but they just eat up the idiocy that goes down in congress. I'd just love to see another Jon Stewart styled bashing. Ah, the power of common sence...

I can't see this working for any number of reasons.

In an ideal world, yes this would be the case. Speaking as someone who has an eleven year old brother and will someday take up the mantle of parenthood myself, I would honestly prefer that every bit of content in a game be unlocked and reviewed before a rating was assigned to a game. I would prefer that our Hot Coffees and Headshot Modes be taken into account when the game is rated.

Then again, in the same ideal world there is no war; no famine, hunger or poverty; no violence and no crime. As a citizen who must exist in not just the vaccuum of my country but the greater community of the world, I would rather see these more important things disappear first before video games get proper rating... if we're going to be taking steps towards that perfect world.

Then again, what do I know? I'm just some punk kid who plays videogames.

Head Shot modes?

I always thought that most Republicans were all for Small, Less involved in our lives government. I guess Sam must be one of those Big Government Republicans which is contrary to their own offical party stance, which is to leave government OUT of business. Are there any true (a.k.a - small government) Republicans left.

I'm a moderate republican. I consider myself a moderate but when push comes to shove my attitudes put me a tad conservative. I believe in small goverment. So yes, there are a few of us left.

"I think some change is needed in the way games are rated."

Voluntary change by the developers as you say is a good thing and i agree, but when government gets involved and forces it by law, it's wrong. As the government is now taking it over. It reeks of communism.

Brokenscope:

It's too bad there are very few of you left out there. The Republican Party has for the most part been taken over by the Religious Right and the Big Government moralists. This is not what the Republican party was founded on. It was founded on the individual's right to make or break it on their own and less government intrusion in our personal lives.

I'm stating the obvious, but I'm continually frustrated by the fact that none of these people seem to want to actually play a video game and learn what they're all about (finding out about things before attacking them isn't really our government's style afterall). It's impossible to blame anyone for it, but the fact is video games need a major image overhaul quickly...these stories prove time and again that the mainstream public is clueless. That really needs to change if the industry wants to continue to protect itself from ignorant lawmakers and, ultimately, ignorant voters.

This whole idea would push submission for ratings of games longer than what they are now. Plus there are no "gamers" at the ESRB they have no idea how to play a game or what to look for. In addtition, this whole idea of playing a game in it's entirety is ridiculous because even if the ESRB were to play lets say all of GTA SA they still wouldn't know about the Hot Coffee thing because it was locked from the players.

Well, since the ESRB is obviously not doing their job, let's just abolish it. Abolish it and let congress rate the games. So out of the millions of things that congress has to do, such as propose taxes, vote on laws, worry about the war on terror,etc. etc., they should spend their time wasted on the trivial thing we call "running the country, making the democratic system work" playing video games, deciding whether that one is safe for our kids. Is the problem about drug use in baseball solved yet?

@ exaggeration17a
I disagree. Keep in mind that the raters are not gamers themselves. Non-gamers are specifically chosen in order to attempt to keep the proceedings unbiased. Furthermore, in order to determine if the game has too much blood, do you actually need to be at the controls? I think the rater can make just as good a decision by watching footage of Sub-Zero ripping Kano's head off than if they pressed Up, Up, Down, Forward, Circle, themselves.

I think whats really important here is that the ESRB was created by the industry as a chioce by the goverment. I think that the ESRB should remain to self regualte otherwise it's possible for a level of creativity to be shunned in the name of conflicts of interests.

If that happens, then the ESRB will have to hire on extra people to play these video games for them... jeez, where do I drop off my application. Minimum wage to sit around and play video games all day, sounds like my thing...

If anyone is gonna play the games for the ESRB it would probably have to be the QA staff of the Title. Because I guarantee you no one knows more about a game then the Testing team.

@ Marshie.

Can't say I blame you, things happen, time goes on, people tend to forget.

And to be honest, I and several gamers have wanted that cheat back i nthe GTA series.

Pretty much all game legislation is moving for the SAME general outcome: government regulation and censorship of game content. We have a long way to go before games are safe from these Left/Right wing extremists. And in light of the Columbine RPG, expect to see indie and independent developers go bye-bye.

What the ESRB should start doing, perhaps as a compromise (or even because it makes sense), is to review all graphic files for a game. It shouldn't take nearly as long as playing the entire game, and I'm sure a boobie texture skin would be easy to spot. Hell, perhaps even a review of audio files would be in order.

Testing

Terminator44,

Yeah. I first tried to make my comment at 6PST. I hit submit and nothing happened. I tried again and it told me I made a duplicate comment. So, I tried again when I got into work today and still had the duplicate comment message. Which is funny because the original comment still hadn't posted. Adding the line at the beginning changed the comment and forced it through. Not sure what the deal with that was.


Andrew Eisen

@ dog_welder,

You did understand that my post was sarcasm, right?

I was being sarcastic because I believe Congress and the Senate have bigger problems to deal with than violent video games, and to an even more trivial matter for them, drug use in baseball.

All I know is that I want at least an interview for the position of getting paid to play a game all the way through.

Regardless, of what Congress does, parents need to wake up and be parents!

IT WORKS!
The spam filter caught my comments. And when I could not find any of my previous posts I panicked thinking that I was banned or something. I tried to contact several people on this site about it. It really freaked me out.

For those I contacted, Sorry for flipping out.

- Warren Lewis

Ahh right this was brought up earlier this year.

Same arguement on their side... and the whole GAO issue only being able to deal with Goverment.

All my comments were eaten by that spam filter as well.

Anyway, everyone else has stated what I wanted to say, that this is unconstitutional on First and Fourteenth Amendment grounds. Come to think of it, we said the same thing about the House version months ago.

Well, now that i'm finally able to post, a quick run down of why this fails.

1. 1st amendment. Obvious, but important as it's been the key to killing every single bill so far.
2. 14th amendment. singling out games vs movies or Tv has also been a major amount of troubel for Game legislating polis.
3. due process and Equal protection.

These three things will derail the bill long before it ever gets enforced. A shame Sen. Braindead doesn't keep up with current events. Like the last 8 bills that failed. Or 30 years standing precident thanks to the MPAA.

I'm sorry, this has nothing to do with the article, but I was put on the spam list for some reason.

No avatars=the suxxor.

Regarding the FTC overstepping itsself and wrecking itsself, seems like this is a common theme these days. What with the other proposed law which would protect Bush from prosecution and allow future presidents to spy on whoever they damn well please for whatever reason they damn well please! (Nixon is rolling in his grave right now, imagine if they had just said "it's ok dude we'll just make what happened at watergate legal so your veep doesn't have to pardon you!")

We're heading towards being like mexico where the govt was severly fucked up in part because the constitution gave entirely too much power to the federal government and not enough to the states/provinces.

I can't believe you people can't think outside the square...

Other countries have a team of people who play through the ENTIRE game just fine...

Although GTA or Oblivion or The Sims are effectively 'endless', everything you see and will ever see in those games you see within the first 4 hours.

You're not reviewing them - your RATING them for CONTENT. You don't need to play the game in every little detail, just play the game to see if there's any content which will raise the Developer/Publishers desired rating.

The games companies DO give the ESRB a list of things they think will put the game into the given rating. The ESRB then watches videos and gives a rating.

This way, it's juts more thourough and isn't merely relying on what the games developers give them.

Here's one example - a team of ten people playing a game 8 hours a day will knock even the biggest game off in under a few days, especially if they're given unlock or special 'reviewer' codes to allow them to skip ahead.

The ESRB would have millions of dollars, so would easily be able to hire hundreds of people to rate the games. Or, to save money, they could outsource it to India or Chinese persons.

It would require a BIG change in the way games are rated and published, but is that change any WORSE than having dickhead after dickhead attacking the industry everytime some screwed up kid kills someone?

Funky J: Except that the ESRB doesn't have millions of dollars to blow on salaries. Most of their reviewers are volunteers or are paid so little that it's not exactly a full time job. As for games like GTA or Oblivion or The Sims.... see everything in four hours? Are you KIDDING me? I'd barely gotten past the first BIT of Oblivion within four hours. The second and third islands in GTA III don't open up within four hours unless you've got a perfect walkthrough handy.

And that bit about 10 people playing a game 8 hours a day assumes that their time is somehow cumulative, as if I'm somehow exactly 8 hours into play when my coworker begins the game, and the next person is 16 hours in... and we advance at EXACTLY the pace necessary to close all the gaps. Special unlock or reviewer codes to skip ahead don't really exist, either. In a game like Oblivion or GTA, time means nothing.

Also, outsourcing to China or India isn't an option. The ESRB is supposed to rate things based on a North American perspective. I very much doubt that some Chinese dude is going to be able to think like a smalltown American couple.

And yes, it's worth the dickheads attacking the industry. The industry has the first amendment on their side, so they generally win by default. There's no point in bowing to the wishes of every "do-gooder" politician (and by this I mean whatever their sheep-like constituents say is "good" at election time) simply because it means less conflict. That's what allows things like a chilling effect to begin.

Funky J, just a quick question, but what does "in its entirety" mean to you? To me, it means that every aspect of the game must be displayed and shown before it can pass the ESRB. That includes every Easter egg, every unlockable weapon, every little detail that is in the game.

I work in game testing, and let me tell you something. The average game, with us knowing everything about the game and having enough skill in the game to utilize every shortcut, takes us about 3-12 hours. If it's an especially long game, such as roleplaying games, it might take us 30-40 hours.

The fact is that the people who rate the games are not gamers themselves, but average joes and parents off of the streets. These are the people, and the politicians, who are most going to care about the ESRB rating. This is part of the reason why the ESRB works so well because it uses people who would care most about the ESRB.

This law would be a complete drag on the industry, and a nightmare for games with evolving contents, such as massively multiplayer online roleplaying games. Can you imagine having Blizzard or Square-Enix having to have their patches reviewed every few months to ensure that they are in compliance with this law?

To reiterate, the killer phrase in this law is that the game has to be reviewed, "in its entirety".

@Funky J: Unfortunately, government controlled ratings DO have an effect on the gaming industry. I live an Australia and I can't tell you how many times I've seen something listed as 'Released' on the web, sprinted down to the local EB and told it won't be out for another couple months because the almighty OFLC (Office of Film and Literature Classification, apparently games are film and literature o.O) are still deciding on the rating. Thanks to the Commenwealth Classification Act (1995) for that one. Also, like Will D above, I too used to work in QA, I'm now in development making actual games and I can tell you that no matter how long you play, how well you know the game you can't suddenly see all the content by playing at at a hax rate.

@Yukimura. Gun crimes in Australia are WAAAAAAY down FYI. I could cite a number of examples of crime statistics over the years, but I don't want this to look like one of my emails to Jack-T ^^. Here's how the OFLC rating works: you must pay them a goddamn fee to rate a commercial product. Yep, government gets more money. Grats. Luckily, the opposition has managed to stop numerous Bills from passing which would raise the fees from being dramatically increased. Anyway, the government takes that money and shoves it somewhere then they decide whether or not the game is suitable.

Here's a major biting point for Australian gamers: if a game is considered "unsuitable" for minors, it is Refused Classification completely. Australian has no R18+ equivalent for video games like they do for films. If it isn't MA15+, it ain't allowed in. Nudity in games, for example as such in BMX XXX, is considered unsuitable unless 'educational, medical or good for community health'. San Andreas was pulled off the shelves in the wake of the Hot Coffee scandal (I got mine early :D)

Now, here's an interesting side note: Bully has been rated M15+ in Australia, contrary to everyone's belief that it would be MA. The Classification Board states "[...] found that the themes, violence and sexual references are moderate in playing and viewing impact in the context of a comedic game about the trials of life in a troubled educational institution. According to the player’s behaviour during gameplay, Jimmy either accumulates punishment points until he is apprehended by authority figures, or increases in the school’s social standing. Punishments include lawn mowing, snow shovelling, receiving demerit points and attending extra classes.

During the game the player is not encouraged to attack innocent bystanders or undertake acts of “bullying”, and is not rewarded for doing so. The “missions” the player undertakes are generally about thwarting acts of bullying, exploitation or discrimination.

Violence towards innocent bystanders such as school girls and smaller school children causes authority figures such as prefects, teachers and police officers to chase and apprehend the player-controlled character, Jimmy."

There ya go JT, suck it. I'm pissed off about these issues being raised in America, because I have no doubt the our fine country will no doubt follow suit.

Pointing this out:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15032063/
Someone prolly will use it.

This just seems like a dumb idea to me. The notion that it's an attempt to destroy the ESRB seems a little weird as well - don't these guys want ratings on games?

I dunno; part of me thinks it's a reasonable enough idea, or at least driven by the right desires, but it's suggestion is highly inefficient and not a reasonable replacement for the system that's already in place.

Like a lot of game legislation, it sounds like a reasonable idea that's not really been thought through properly.

@Yukimura

I'm not trying to be nasty but you seem to really have it in for my little country and its laws. We do not have an outright ban on guns, just guns used in homes. We have laws allowing a registered individual (of which I used to be one) to own a rifle or similar for sport. You cannot own a handgun (unless its a Flintlocke type pistol) or an automatic. Our crime rate is not a sinister epidemic like your post seems to indicate. Its very rare for a gun related crime to be mentioned on the news, a large part of the crime is knife related.

As for our games ratings, we simply have PEGI which is very much like the ESRB and then we have the BBFC standard ratings which are given to submitted games which feature anything that could be considered unsuitable for younger players. This classification is EXACTLY the same as our film classification. Our laws prevent retailers to selling these games/films to the underage. Whilst I agree that you have a somewhat more free system we do not have this horrible fascist control system like you keep making it sound. I'd argue that the main reason the games take so long to come out over here is for exactly the same reason we won't be getting Mortal Kombat Armageddon for Xbox...you use NTSC, we use PAL...not immensly different but it does require some reworking.

I didn't say gun crime. I said violent crime, and if I'm not mistaken, following the enactment of your gun laws, crime soared 300 percent in as little as three years. While You are correct about gun laws, the fact is, the cities and countries that have the worst level of crime are those that have, suprisingly, the strictist gun regulations. as an example, I live in arizone, which has very loose gun laws. Until the recent Sniper serial shooting, very rarly was gun crime a major issue, however overall, crime in general in the Phoenix area and around arizona is a record low.

On the other hand take a look at london. You all had your guns taken away, and yet your crime rate didn't drop, it nearly doubled in the first year. And has gotten worse sense.

I not trying to be mean but the fact is, gun laws like game laws do not accomplish what they are supposed to . It's like that famous quote. "if you outlaw guns, only criminals have guns, and the people who criminals prey on are defenseless against them"

Same goes for game law. Government control of any medium, in my opinion, is an absoulute crime and should be resisted at all costs. Some people might argue thats an alarmist view, but then, thats what was said in Nazi germany and Soviet russia when the state had 100 percent control of the media. That worked out well.

look, america was founded on freedom, hell, we fought Brittan in a bloody and violent war to get that freedom. Like hellI'll I 'll suddenly see us start to backslide towards the very thing this country was formed to resist.

As far as i'm concerned, the following coutnries are slowly sliding towards total media censorship.

1. The Uk,
2. New zealand.
3. Australia,
4. Germany.
5. Most any islamic country you can name.

The list goes on. Dont' lecture me about the virtues of goverment run media. To Parapharse foamy the squirrel.

"Fuck these government censors up the ass with a PLASMA FLAT SCREEN!!"

"6) I’m not even going to get into this whole patriot distorted view of the War of Independance and the evil Brits…"

That was Patriot as in the Mel Gibson movie...should have pointed that out

Correction noted Dag, guess I got carried away there. Noted that report you cited was 3 years old almost, but once again, I made no specific comment about murder. Point taken none the less.

I however stand by my statements regarding censorship. I do not retract them in anyway. Any country, regardless of government that activly engages in censorship, of ANY KIND, is commiting crime against expression in my eyes. While the British government has a been a stanuch supporter of the US, tha doesn't change the fact that you have a system in your government that places media control in political hands. In america, such actions have become the subject of enormous controversy, including the formation of a coalition to have the FCC disbanded and replaced by a non content controlling authroity.

Adimittedly, the UK, as well as the other nations I mentions, are not nearly as far down the road as the Nazi party was. But neither were they, at first. It started simply, with the banning of books by the Nazi regime, but within less then a year, all MEDIA, period, was under nazi control. It may take a slower course, but the UK, and the other countries I cited, are walking that EXACT PATH!!!.

One final note. yes, i'm aware of the distorted view of the revolutionary war, but even, from a purely factual standpoint, America want to war with brittian cause it tried to excersise far to much control over the US, starting with taxes and leading up to religion. While the movies distort this and paint the Brits in a mostly negitive light, it doesn't change the fact that, at the time, the English government tired to put the screws to the us and got it's face punched in for it's trouble. I hate the thought that the US would ever start taking ideas from the UK. Fact is, our to countries are just to different for that to ever work.

I do correct myself and apoligize about the mix up in the crime statistics, but it doesn't change my views on media or censorship. As I said before, and this applies to all CENSORS, ANYWHERE.

“Fuck these government censors up the ass with a PLASMA FLAT SCREEN!!”

Sorry dag, but nothing is gonna change my mind on that. However, that quote works in a lot of ways. Just remove government censors and replace with whatever you despise, News media, Jack Thompson, and it's instant insult time.

So, again, didn't mean to blow my top, but the fact is, I stand by my beliefs when it comes to censor ship. And like I once told JT. The day he wants to take my games, he better bring an army. Cause I will leave them lying in the street before I let anyone tell me what I can and cannot watch/play/see/read/say/think.

Thank you London we love you GOOD NIGHT!

Glad we cleared the crime bit up. I blame UK football for that new stereotype which has been placed upon us. I disagree entirely with your nazi correlation simply because our censorship laws are actually getting more relaxed rather then less, most of the censorship falls down on the conservative Thatcher era when many things were restricted.

Personally I like the BBFC rating but then we do have a system in place which makes it work, thats where your censor groups have got it wrong your country wouldn't tolerate such a system being put in place as it would quell creativity and sales. It doesn't effect us because wi