July 2, 2007 -
Mike Gallagher has been something of a mystery man - until now.With his first E3 looming, the new ESA president gives a revealing interview to Seth Schiesel of the NY Times. Most notably, Gallagher professes to being a gamer, something his predecessor, Doug Lowenstein, was most certainly not.
Gallagher spoke of getting started as a lad with Pong and progressing to more grownup fare:
In the 1990s, as chief of staff for Representative Rick White, a Washington State Republican, Mr. Gallagher helped network the office computers to play Doom, the seminal first-person shooter game.
“I was the chief of staff, so it was my prerogative to be the office champion,” he said.
Gallagher also mentioned playing Zelda with his children on the SNES:
“So it’s 1995 and I’m working on Capitol Hill,” he recounted. “My kids are 5, 3 and 1, and we did the Zelda game for the Super Nintendo, and I really saw how games could be a catalyst in the home because my 3-year-old son is sitting in the middle with the girls on both sides, and he had the manual dexterity to run the controls, but he couldn’t read yet.”
“But my 5-year-old could,” he added. “So my daughter would read the screen to my son, and my 1-year-old is sitting watching this masterful production being put on by her brother and sister.”
Of the game industry's political troubles, Gallagher said:
I think there is a bit of a generation gap, federally, given that a number of the legislators — especially since Congress operates on the seniority system — are older. Video games came very late in their content-consuming careers, and so they’re not as familiar with the intense innovation, competition and excitement that come from video games.
Gallagher also touted Manhunt 2's Adults Only (AO) rating as an example of the industry's ability to self-regulate:
Mr. Gallagher defends the industry’s record on regulating and monitoring itself. He noted, for example, that the [ESRB] which operates independently from the [ESA], recently effectively banned the violent game Manhunt 2.
He also vowed that the ESA would begin to play the political contributions game:
The main challenge is connecting with decision makers and creating champions for the video-game industry in the policy-making arena. So working to set up a way for the [ESA] to participate in the federal election process is one of my top priorities. Contributing on the federal level is a very important part of our success going forward.
Comments
Aren't we all designers? I am two. I have a whole demo and a buggy flash game under my belt.
So let's get more in deapth and include that they must have designed or produced a game that has been rated by the ESRB and still eel a disservice.
So How do you know they feel this way? Do you know them personally?
Not trying to be a jerk, just trying to get my point across. Even if there were a few who did feel a disservice, they are out numbered by those who feel the ESRB is doing a great job and wouldn't change it for the world.
Personally, I think scrapping the ESRB or any part of it, would be a bad PR move as it would allow the anti game activists to scream, "See. We are right. We told you, they don't know what they are talking about."
Name one developer/publisher (besides Take Two or Rockstar) who thinks they are shafted by the ESRB.
I want ones that have actually stated that, not ones that you are speculating about.
They made some chars invincible to avoid an AO rating.
I doubt there is any sexual content. It just doesn't fit the image that has been created about the game. So it most likely got AO over the extreme nature of the killings in the games.
VaMinion - I'll make a indie game within the next year to prove that there can be a reason to allow a player to tortue children. I've actually been planning it out for a couple weeks now but I have a few things in line ahead of it. Trust me, its not what you think but it does have to do with torturing children... in a sense...
Okay then. Name me at least one Designer or producer who have stated publicly that they feel they are being disserviced by the ESRB (besides any who work for Take two or RockStar)
If you're talking about the little sisters, they're not invincible. You can still kill them, you just can't torture them. And frankly, I'm fine with that; there's no reason for a game to allow a player to torture kids (hell, I got moral quandries with killing noncombatant kids in games in the first place, but that's a whole other issue).
But have they stated publicly that thye feel they are being disserviced by the ESRB?
The fact is that the AO rating was intended and designed for "adult" AKA pornographic content. That is why consoles don't support it and most stores don't carry it.
So yes, the ESRB is labeling MH2 as a porno, and it's probably because there are some bare asses or some PG-13 sex scenes. Hot Coffee should have told you that the ESRB considers mild simulated sex that you can see on cable TV to be 18+ and AO. Yes, it's ridiculous and yes it needs to be changed.
This is why Manhunt 2 hot a raw deal and why I fear more games will get a raw deal if gamers don't get off their asses and mass email the powers that be about this glaring problem.
Yea its not perfect and really the problem lies within the ESRB... their employees. Compare the way the MPAA rates movies to the way the ESRB rates games. The ESRB is much more strict. If the ESRB rated movies I'm sure quinten tarentino's movies would all be AO, so would Saw and Hostle, among many many more. Yet yet were rated R by the MPAA
The ESRB is strict because they don't serve the gamer they serve the watch dog organizations that are made by parents that already look after what their children do. The watch dog organizations should not be listened to what so ever. It should be easy to learn and it is but it sohuld not screw over developers and gamers like it does today. You can deny it all you want but there are many gamers and game developers that feel they are being shafted by the ESRB. And they are.
So far the ESRB fills a good chunk of these requirements. They are not perfect, nor I am trying to imply that, but they are working harder for the game industry than any other group that is trying to rate games.
If you think they are so bad, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and start up a new organization to take over. Even if you did start one, I doubt that you would have anywhere close to the support of publishers and developers that the ESRB has.
I think the ESRB rating system is flawed, you get over it.
They might be on "our side" on game censorship/legislation issues (as long as it doesn't hurt sales...Manhunt 2 anyone?), but ESA is in the opposing side on many other issues most notably on modding game consoles.
Movies get NC-17 for violence as well. It is not just for porn.
If anything is innappropriate for people under 18 it will recieve NC-17 or AO. These ratings were never meant for just porn.
Just because the vast majority of stuff that was rated that was porn, that does not make it a rating meaning porn.
AO != porn. Get over it.
By your ideals the MPAA would group movies like Hostle and Saw together with the porn industry.
When will you admit that the ESRB's rating system is flawed and when will you pressure them to fix it?
I laughed at this. Would this be the same Doom that was 'responsible' for Columbine?
Just because the first amendment doesn't actually protect anyone doesn't mean we shouldn't try to be protected by it. If everyone in histories past were to have the roll over and die mentality you do we wouldn't even beable to speak out against those who govern us. I'd definately be dead by now.
I will always fight against the media and the government. I realize they wont ever give me the protection the first admendment should grand me. But that WILL NEVER prevent me from trying using it. They can sue me, throw me in a cage or kill me but they will never bring me down to a point where I think the best option is to bend over and be happy they arn't as well endowed as others.
@ZippyDSMlee
The MPAA didn't grow the X rating so much as shoved it to the side and came up with the NC-17. NC-17 is more or less the same as X, it might be a light notch under, but it doesn't have the stigma of and X rating.
That's exactly what the ESRB needs to do. They need to come up with a new rating that doesn't have the same stigma of AO.
I never liked the ESRB. Their rating system is flawed to the core because it has too few ratings (Nothing between T and M, as an example), uses all sorts of "content descriptors" that are mostly inaccurate and misrated more games then I can think.
But did they misrate Manhunt 2, promoting VILE CENSORSHIP? Most likely not. They took their guidelines and checked off the things until it reached the AO rating. Probably with plenty to spare. They're not censoring anything, they're doing their job. Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony never allowed AO games on their consoles. And this is a known fact ever since... oh... when the NES came out? So why haven't you and all the "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" activists rallied before Manhunt 2 was released? And Wal*Mart doesn't even hold M games in Quebec, so it's no wonder they wouldn't hold a Adult-Only game, but why haven't you cried tears of blood over this BEFORE.
The First Amendment doesn't protect anyone, sorry to tell you this. First Amendment, freedom of speech and all that shiznit doesn't stop ANYTHING. The media, the governement and the Illuminati/Seven Wise Men/Knight Templars will always control the information and tell you what to know and what to not know. Face it, all you know is what they want you to know.
I've been agreeing with you for the most part, I do not believe that it was in any way a "good" thing for the ESRB effectively ban Manhunt 2 (Gallagher, or the reporter's, words not mine.) However, I do not see why you feel there should be a separate rating for pornographic games, such a thing does not exist in the movie industry (X isn't an MPAA rating anymore it's just a designation that movies traditionally gave themselves to say they didn't bother going through the MPAA's rating system and it later became associated with pornography, and NC-17 does not simply cover porn or even sexually explicit movies although most NC-17 movies are sexually explicit, in fact, there are very few NC-17 movies that can even be called pornography as most porn movies don’t want to spend the time or money having the MPAA rate something when they’re already pretty sure of its rating) and frankly why should it matter if there's inappropriate sexuality or inappropriate violence for a minor to view? It's both inappropriate. I would also like to ask, should this porn designation also cover gratuitous sexuality but presented in a more tasteful way that's plot-dependant and not just there for the sake of itself? Further, should there be a separate rating for a game which is gratuitously violent but the violence serves a purpose for either storyline or as an homage of some type (say the gaming equivalent of "Reservoir Dogs") vs. a game which is violent for the sake of it (the so-called "torture porn" e.g. the gaming equivalent of "Hostel.") The ESRB's job is to decide upon who is old enough to play a game, not the artistic merits of said game, if that was the case then we shouldn't just have a "porn game" rating we should have a "This game sucks, and if you buy it you will be wasting 50 bucks that could have better went to a good game or feeding starving children" rating.
If Take Two really, really wanted to release the game as AO they could open their own store and release their own console and release their own game on it. There is nothing that can stop them from doing so. I know they won't, but there is nothing that can legaly stop them from taking that option. There is nothing that can legaly force any company to release Manhunt 2 if they don't want to either. It is self-censorship but it is under a private company. It is just like you can't force me to curse, but you sure as fucking hell can't stop me from doing it either.
Manhunt 2 does have a sex scene that is portrayed on a TV while you kill people in a room. This is confirmed in one of the many previews. There may be more since there is a sex club level.
I'm sure this had a lot to do with the AO rating since the ESRB has shown its intolerance towards any type of sex in a game. Speaking of which the M rating has provisions for "strong sexual content" which by most definitions is two naked people havings sex. Hot Coffee had two clothed people having sex.
I don't think violence plays that big a factor here since the first Manhunt already set a precedent that snuff film type killing is A-okay. There isn't that much difference between disemboweling a guy with a chainsaw and watching his guts spill on the floor and ripping a guys nuts off with a pair of pliers.
No matter how you cut it, the ESRB didn't like something in the game and decided to ban it with the AO rating. Something that is totally unacceptable and needs to be addressed by Nintendo, Walmart, the ESRB, gamers and everyone in between.
Someone said it before that the big problem isn't the ratings, but the systems. While it is within their rights to not allow AO games, it kinda defeats the purpose of the rating system in the first place. M is R, and AO is X. There's a certain stigma related to it that console developers don't like associated with their system. If they either weren't so taken aback by said stigma, or if they created an acceptable rating that's suitable for adults only, that would suffice.
It's not a question of whether or not what the ESRB is doing is completely right, it is whether it is acceptable or not. And as I said, with a government hovering by, I don't mind losing what looks to be a few controversial games in exchange for keeping the government of our backs for a while more. Remember, this is a waiting game. As D-toid says, we just need to wait until all the old people die, and there's no more ignorance politicians trying to push their morals on the video game industry. If we push too far, they might eventually push back harder, and take away rights with bans, prohibitions, censorings, etc. However, if we at least keep them at bay whenever they attack, and not go too far on the offense, things can at least hopefully not get any worse. Choose your battles. Changing the ESRB over a few upset people (gamers and developers alike) is a step in the wrong direction until the government is more gamer friendly.
As far as movies, Saw Hostel did get the same rating as movies like Color of Night, Basic Instinct and Mullholland Dr, which got their ratings for sexual content. Granted, it's not as high a rating, but the MPAA isn't separating out violence and sex either. They don't have NC-17 and X. NC-17 replaced X, which was never exactly a real rating to begin with.
Personally, I think that if the developer does not have the balls to defend themselves, they should not expect others to defend them.
Also, testing isn't really a playthrough.
Either way, I'll resign my sugestion.
If the rater cannot even get passed the first level, they are not even seeing the whole game. Then you ahve to have a gamer play the game. This may not sound bad at first, but a gamer would be more likely to get side tracked within the game and not catch everything.
Additionally, if word got out about who these gamer/reviewers were then there could be some bribing going on. A little incentive from te developer. ;)