NIMF Commends MS Over Halo 2 Vista Rating Issue, Issues an Oops! to ESRB

NIMF Commends MS Over Halo 2 Vista Rating Issue, Issues an Oops! to ESRB

May 30, 2007
The National Institute on Media and the Family issued a statement yesterday praising Microsoft in regard to the recent delay of Halo 2 Vista over a content issue.

From the NIMF statement:
The National Institute on Media and the Family commends Microsoft for their leadership and transparency in alerting the public and the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) of the hidden game content.

Thankfully, Microsoft took the leadership role in ordering the ESRB to issue stickers with the correct rating information on the packaging. Microsoft has taken great strides in ensuring that parents have the tools available to make healthier media decisions. From parental controls to game ratings, Microsoft has become a reliable friend for families.

An initial version of the NIMF statement also spanked the ESRB, saying:
The ESRB should take a lesson from Microsoft and do a more thorough review of video game content.

However, the ESRB comment was retracted about an hour later. A new release explained:
We apologize for earlier comments regarding the ESRB.  Due to inaccurate news stories we received, we issued a statement that was incorrect. It is clear that ESRB and Microsoft worked together to fix this mistake.

It's not the first time in recent memory that NIMF has issued, then retracted and re-issued a statement. Last November the organization made reference to the "devastating" effects of games on children but subsequently removed that characterization.

UPDATE: NIMF has issued a formal apology for its gaffe, which reads in part:
[NIMF] apologizes for its erroneous statement... We now understand that, prior to the initial shipment of the game, Microsoft and the ESRB worked proactively to ensure that the rating on all packaging was updated to include content that Microsoft discovered in a map editor tool... which was disclosed to the ESRB after a rating had already been assigned to the game.   We commend the ESRB and Microsoft for making these efforts to protect consumers...

We further acknowledge that the ESRB has participated in discussions with the research community, facilitating a deeper understanding of what they do and the significant efforts being made to inform consumers about the games they purchase.  We applaud those efforts and look forward to continuing the dialogue while putting this mistake behind us. 
Posted in

Comments

Submitted by ZippyDSMlee - May 31, 2007 at 7:21 pm -0500
Pounding their 2 inch stiffy over yet another non issue....thank you so much for sharing...
Submitted by evilrockstu - May 31, 2007 at 8:53 am -0500
What a tremendous amount of hot air over nothing. I issue an 'oops' to the NIMF, Microsoft AND the ESRB for wasting their time, and no doubt large amounts of money. Such a depressing waste.
Submitted by jonc2006 - May 31, 2007 at 1:34 am -0500
@Andrew Eisen

well those types of people need to lighten up. there are more important issues going on in the world today that need attention. god forbid someones child sees a part of the body they probably see everyday on themselves. im not saying they should but dont people have better things to complain about?
Submitted by mechboy - May 30, 2007 at 8:09 pm -0500
This just struck me as the NIMF looking for an opportunity to take a cheap shot at the ESRB. At least they admitted they screwed up but at the same time it seems as if they don't know how the ESRB does things and how they fit in within the industry.
Submitted by Andrew Eisen - May 30, 2007 at 6:26 pm -0500
Hellfire,

Yes, the MPAA's rating system does include content descriptors.

Shrek the Third is rated PG for: "some crude humor, suggestive content and swashbuckling actions"

Don't believe me? Check out the film's website and look at the ratings logo on the bottom.


Andrew Eisen
Submitted by Hellfire - May 30, 2007 at 5:45 pm -0500
The MPAA's rating system does not include content descriptors, only the suggested audience (G: General Audiences, PG: Parental Guidance Suggested, etc). The television rating system does include content description in the form of the letters "V", "S", "L", and "D" for Violence, Sexual Situations, Language, and Course Dialog.

In contrast, the ESRB's rating system is in my opinion far superior. It specifies an age rating which is more delineated than the MPAA's rating system and also includes information about how that rating was determined via content descriptors.

A good rating system is only a hint for parents. If a parent picks up a game and looking at the rating and content descriptors determines that a game may go either way or be questionable for their child, then it seems to me that they should try out the game and determine for themselves before letting their kid use it. Another great thing they could do is play the game with their child, so that anything that might be questionable can be explained and put in context. This is far better than blanket censoring because some day that kid will run into this kind of content and there wont be anyone to censor it. Unfortunately most parents aren't active enough nor game literate enough to do this.
Submitted by Andrew Eisen - May 30, 2007 at 4:42 pm -0500
Wookiee,

True, but those selfsame PG movies and TV shows all carried content descriptors for partial nudity.

Some people are offended by bare backsides.
Some aren't.

"Partial Nudity" is for the folks that are.

Again, there was no rating change. It's still M. There is partial nudity in the game and it has been labeled as such.


Andrew Eisen
Submitted by Wookiee - May 30, 2007 at 4:04 pm -0500
All this fuss for what's probably just some programmer camaradare? I've seen rear ends in plenty of PG movies and even general rated TV.
Submitted by GamerDad - May 30, 2007 at 1:48 pm -0500
This whole thing is pretty ridiculous.
Submitted by Microsoft Commended by NIMF for Action on Halo 2 Vista - Gam - May 30, 2007 at 1:15 pm -0500
[...] GamePolitics.com has an article on a recent statement by The National Institute on Media and the Family. NIMF commended Microsoft for delaying the Halo 2 Vista release to settle a content issue. MS revealed hidden game content and alerted the Entertainment Software Rating Board to change the rating for the game before release. The institute also issued a rebuke to ESRB, which it later retracted with an apologetic news release. Halo 2 Vista is scheduled for release on May 31st in North America and then on June 8th in Europe. [...]
Submitted by Microsoft Commended by NIMF for Action on Halo 2 Vista - Gam - May 30, 2007 at 1:15 pm -0500
[...] GamePolitics.com has an article on a recent statement by The National Institute on Media and the Family. NIMF commended Microsoft for delaying the Halo 2 Vista release to settle a content issue. MS revealed hidden game content and alerted the Entertainment Software Rating Board to change the rating for the game before release. The institute also issued a rebuke to ESRB, which it later retracted with an apologetic news release. Halo 2 Vista is scheduled for release on May 31st in North America and then on June 8th in Europe. [...]
Submitted by Andrew Eisen - May 30, 2007 at 12:30 pm -0500
"Thankfully, Microsoft took the leadership role in ordering the ESRB to issue stickers with the correct rating information on the packaging." -NIMF

Why are we trying to make the ESRB out to be the bad guys?

"Microsoft has therefore applied stickers with correct ESRB rating information to the packaging of virtually all copies that will ship to retail in the U.S. and Canada. We have been advised by Microsoft that future runs of the game will be produced without the content in question, thus negating the need for the descriptor to be displayed on those versions." -ESRB

Other important bits of info:

-The game was not rerated. Only a new content descriptor was added.
-Even playing the game it is highly unlikely that the ESRB (or anyone else) would ever have come across this error.


Andrew Eisen
Submitted by jamesweis - May 30, 2007 at 12:20 pm -0500
I'm going to go off on a bit of a tangent, but this is something that I started thinking about with these ratings changing and stickers updating the packaging. While adding stickers to the packaging is a nice fix at the retail level for changed ratings, what about the parental controls on the console? A little sticker on the box changing Oblivion from T to M wouldn't tell the parental controls on the console that it's changed. I'm not sure how the controls are implemented, but I would expect for the rating to be encoded somewhere on the disc; done in a way that's static and can't be changed. I know it wouldn't make any difference for Halo on the PC that had a descriptor added, but something like Oblivion can go a long way to defeating the use of the parental controls on the consoles in some instances. Manufacturers are harping on about the controls, but in some small cases they may not function as up to date as a sticker may.
Submitted by Gamer81 - May 30, 2007 at 10:21 am -0500
The NIMF is no stranger to making up bogus accusations:

http://www.d3dgames.com/bbb.html
Submitted by Brokenscope - May 30, 2007 at 10:21 am -0500
Its not in game bug. Its not a bug at all. In the process of making maps you sometimes create little errors that have to be fixed. From what I can tell when you map has a certain kind of error the map editor displays that.

Unlike hot coffee it is not a commented out code, it was left in the bundled mapping tools on purpose. Many a mapper would see it during the process of making a map.
Submitted by JBourrie - May 30, 2007 at 10:18 am -0500
So when they retracted the ESRB bit, did they also subtract the equally fallacious statement in the second paragraph?

"Thankfully, Microsoft took the leadership role in ordering the ESRB to issue stickers with the correct rating information on the packaging."

...

...

..?

Lets try this again:

"Thankfully, Microsoft discovered their mistake early enough to alert the ESRB to the offending error screen. The ESRB responded by re-rating the game and issuing stickers with the correct rating information on the packaging."

Truth is so much more... truthy!
Submitted by -Jes- - May 30, 2007 at 9:49 am -0500
Next time, NIMF, do your f#ckin' homework.
Submitted by aniki21 - May 30, 2007 at 9:51 am -0500
Shame on the NIMF for attacking the ESRB based on incomplete media reports. If they wanted to maintain the illusion of competence (and in the NIMF's case that's all it is, sadly), they should at least wait until they have all the facts before they start handing out failing report cards.
Submitted by Daniel - May 30, 2007 at 8:54 am -0500
Only in America. *Facepalms*
Submitted by Gameboy - May 30, 2007 at 9:06 am -0500
Excuse me, but last I checked Sen Brownback's bill to force the ESRB to review every possible minute of the game and search through every line of code hasn't passed and probably never will.

Let's be honest. The only reason Microsoft went through all that trouble was they didn't want to be the new "Hot Coffee".
Submitted by Marlowe - May 30, 2007 at 8:29 am -0500
Ok not only is it a nonissue as everyone has already pointed out, i.e., it's some guy mooning a camera and no one is likely to see it. The game is already rated M, the game already includes language and violence. I would not wish to meet the parents with the type of priorities which would allow their children to be exposed to that type of content but not some guy mooning a camera. I could much better understand this issue if we were talking about an E or even T rated game, I could see how parents who buy the new Mario game for their 8 year olds would take issue if they discovered that type of content no matter how unlikely it was to come up, but we're talking about Halo. That being said, in a post-hot coffee world (I can't believe I'm using that as a phrase) it is good that the ESRB and Microsoft got on this before it became a big stink.
Submitted by Jonathan - May 30, 2007 at 8:31 am -0500
For ***'s sake.

It was a MOONING, and not even the goatse type where you can see everything. With the MPAA, it would get off with no more than a PG. Is it any wonder no one takes NIMF seriously?
Submitted by Conejo - May 30, 2007 at 8:38 am -0500
at least the NIMF can be respectful and admit to mistakes. i would rather have Dr. Walsh as an opponent than Jack Thompson any day.

with Walsh, there is option for civil discourse and compromise.
Submitted by Robb - May 30, 2007 at 8:17 am -0500
NIMF is, generally speaking, wrong on their information. Them agreeing with you is not validation, but an accident. Scott Adam's Dilbert has the "Zero Credibility Guy" who makes things up on-the-spot. When you've heard enough of these errors, you just don't take anything he says as valid. I won't believe anything they say unless they clean up their act first.
Submitted by Konstruct - May 30, 2007 at 8:05 am -0500
The ESRB can't be held liable for glitches. Its not intended content and so why should they have to beta test software in order to make sure that theres absolutely nothing wrong with it? MS dropped the ball by even having something like that in the code. NIMF seem to be a little eager to point fingers they should be careful before those same fingers are bitten.
Submitted by John - May 30, 2007 at 7:26 am -0500
I think it was a guy mooning the camera, on a vista edition error . Something nobody would see. It is just a bum anyways, what's the big deal?
Submitted by Brokenscope - May 30, 2007 at 7:30 am -0500
It was an error that popped up in the level editor. Few people would actually see it, it only showed up if a certain error popped up while making a map. It was a picture of a guy mooning the camera.
Submitted by PantslessJedi - May 30, 2007 at 7:05 am -0500
"Microsoft has taken great strides in ensuring that parents have the tools available to make healthier media decisions."

Ensuring that PARENTS have the tools. That's the key right there.
Submitted by ooftygoofty - May 30, 2007 at 7:12 am -0500
This isn't about that pic of the guy mooning the camera that comes up in level editor (or whatever it was), is it? Granted, NIMF handled this a lot better than some people and organizations, but I still say it's a big nonissue anyway.
Submitted by Sidewinder - May 30, 2007 at 7:05 am -0500
"The National Institute on Media and the Family commends Microsoft for their leadership and transparency in alerting the public and the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) of the hidden game content."

Can it be called "hidden content"? As far as I understood it, it was some freekish glitch or something.
Submitted by kurisu7885 - May 30, 2007 at 6:26 am -0500
*blinkblink* They corrected a mistake. Do I hear the horsemen approaching?

seriously though, it's big of NIMF to retract and correct a statement such as that, in a world where apparently one mistake makes your entire organization invalid permanently in some eyes.
Submitted by MODSonair - MODSonline.com Podcast » MODSonair Episode - June 8, 2007 at 8:18 am -0500
[...] - NIMF Commends MS Over Halo 2 Vista Rating Issue, Issues an Oops! to ESRB http://gamepolitics.com/2007/05/30/… [...]

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 12/01/08 at 04:56pm
E. Zachary Knight: When securom realizes it is running in a virtual machine, then I will be done with PC gaming.
Posted 12/01/08 at 04:54pm
sqlrob: @zippy: versus DRM baloney trying to make my general purpose computer not general purpose. computer gaming=fail
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:56pm
ZippyDSMlee: sqlrob:console=nofixes,control options,no choices=fail
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:24pm
sqlrob: @DeepThorn: That's why I went to console years ago. Steam was the final straw. Windows = offline for my computers
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:23pm
ZippyDSMlee: DeepThorn: KAspersky is all that I sue now, the rest suck,norton has its points but is a system hog.
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:18pm
DeepThorn: yeah... I need to get rid of McFly or whatever it is called
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:17pm
ZippyDSMlee: DeepThorn: I turn of file scanign while I paly a game,still ahve networking protection and whatnot on.
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:16pm
ZippyDSMlee: DeepThorn:Take out 2nd hand thier goes thier bigest custmer in EB...
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:10pm
nelttab: @Deepthorn even then there are pirates out there that can get around that... the online thing anyway
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:08pm
DeepThorn: So much for me wanting a gaming PC offline with no security software...
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:04pm
E. Zachary Knight: But it may require an internet connection to install.
Posted 12/01/08 at 03:03pm
E. Zachary Knight: From the sound of it, it seems that once the disk is activated, it is activated forever.
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:57pm
DeepThorn: EZK - Is the main focus secretly second hand market again, or do they just hate their legit consumers that much?
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:56pm
NovaBlack: yeah i said earlier.. gtaIV available literally the day they announced officially it had securom lol. ITs so pointless its untru
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:54pm
DeepThorn: And justifies pirating it in more people's minds. (and the crackers know it will tick off the publishers more)
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:53pm
ZippyDSMlee: Zevorick: Correction Sicrom makes owning software inconvenant.....
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:50pm
Zevorick: Does it honestly surprise you pin? It's not like SecuRom has EVER stopped Piracy before. It just makes it slightly inconvenient
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:47pm
JDKJ: SeanB: There's been plenty new content and off-topic shouts. Ain't nobody ever get called out before for doing it. Relax.
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:47pm
nelttab: @JDJK aye, i could see that... and you know what... im glad i found this site a coupla months ago
Posted 12/01/08 at 02:45pm
E. Zachary Knight: EMA is getting in on the anti-piracy racket: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=21306
Login or register to post shouts