U.S. Senators Call for Review of ESRB in Wake of Manhunt 2
U.S. Senators Call for Review of ESRB in Wake of Manhunt 2
November 20, 2007
In what appears to be looming political trouble for the video game industry, four United States senators have signed a letter calling for a "thorough review" of the ESRB rating system.As reported by Video Business, Senators Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Joe Lieberman (ID-CT), Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Sam Brownback (R-KS) sent the letter to ESRB president Patricia Vance yesterday. The move was prompted by the furor surrounding the M rating assigned by the ESRB to a revised version of Manhunt 2.
All four senators have been critics of the video game industry in the past. Lieberman is generally credited with pressuring the industry to create a rating system in the mid-1990's. Clinton was the most prominent political voice heard during the 2005 Hot Coffee scandal.
Brownback has legislation pending in the Senate which would mandate that the ESRB play games to their entirety before assigning a rating. Bayh was a co-sponsor, along with Lieberman and Clinton, of the unsuccessful Family Entertainment Protection Act.
Clinton, of course, is the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. From the letter:
As you know, in June 2007, the British Board of Film Classification refused to rate Rockstar’s Manhunt 2 videogame … stating that it contains ‘unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone. In October 2007, the BBFC again refused to rate a revised Manhunt 2 stating that ‘the impact of the revisions on the bleakness and callousness of tone … is clearly insufficient.
[The ESRB, however,] reduced the revised version’s rating to “Mature,” effectively opening the door to its widespread distribution and its licensing approval by game system manufacturers Sony and Nintendo.
The senators also expressed concern over the game's appearance on Nintendo's Wii, intimating that the system's motion-sensitive controller “permits children to act out each of the many graphic torture scenes and murders.” They suggested that the Wii controller be considered as a factor in future rating assignments:
In sum, we ask your consideration of whether it is time to review the robustness, reliability and repeatability of your ratings process, particularly for this genre of ‘ultra-violent’ videogames and advances in game controllers.
GP: Particulary in regard to Clinton and Lieberman (pictured at left), the letter represents a setback for the ESRB and the video game industry. As recently as December of 2006, the pair had publicly praised the ESRB.
Comments
BBFC has nothing to do with America, other than giving these hollow shells something they think is leverage.
Not surprised to see the names attached to this one. And one of them a presidential candidate? THIS is what you focus on Hillary?
Every voter in American should make sure, come the primaries, everyone knows what Hillary Clinton wants to focus on. Not healthcare. Not schools. Not education.
Video games.
They forget to mention that:
1. M means you have to be 17 and above to play. Not exactly the age range of the "kids" they're trying to protect now, is it?
2. It was cut down to an M after several scenes were cut out of of the original version. And of thy argue it was possible, fine - show me an average kid within the stated age bracket that's capable of hacking the PSP ISO (which has to be ripped, hence is illegal) to show the scenes.
You're better off watching youtube to see the said scenes - why don't they ban that instead?
Pretty much speaks for itself.
As SolidSnark pointed out, what does the BBFC have to do with the price of tea in China? Or the ESRB? Or American values and morals, for that matter? Nothing! Nil. Nada. Zip. I really hate when anyone refers to another nations policies when defending a position. We are not those nations. We do not share their policies. If you can't defend you position based on American laws and policies, maybe you shouldn't. I believe there is an unwritten law that our courts don't cite foreign courts. So why should the ESRB reference the BBFC?
Yep, political leaders like this are really taking this country forward into a brighter future.
I agree with Solidsnake. The BBFC has nothing to do with the ESRB. Two different countries. Two different ways of managing entertainment.
The FTC has already done a study on the ESRB. Manhunt 2 was rated fairly and properly. The only problem here that I see is ignorant politicians and their ignorant supporters.
Does that mean we can ban Lifetime Television for women now? How about Iraq news coverage? How about the Bible?
As long as we're relying on the few to interpret acceptable levels for the many, then by all rights we should ban the Trinity Broadcast Network, perhaps the bleakest and most callous thing on TV.
countless of vital issues to make a stand on but what does Hilary center on???? VIDEO GAMES FOR CHILDREN OVER THE AGE OF 17....
THIS IS THE LAST STRAW IF SHE IS THE FRONT RUNNER I VOTING FOR REPUBLICANS......
Rather than not voting at all, vote for anyone except those two. That's my plan in that scenario anyway. It's better to show up at the polls and vote for candidates that have no chance of winning, or only exist in your imagination than it is to not show up to vote at all. That's because then you'd be on the record as being displeased with the choice of candidates, than on the record as being apathetic.
"permits children to act out each of the many graphic torture scenes and murders"
no, parents allowing children access to the game are doing that.
the game is rated M! that means no children! get it through your heads!
Come, boys and girls! Let's practice our writing abilities and skills of influence.
"A letter writin' we will go, a letter writin' we will go, hi' ho' the derry-o, a letter writin' we will go."
In all seriousness, flood your representatives (both in Congress and Senate) e-mail box with your voice. They have taken their stance, so we should take a stand and let them know what we think.
Honestly, why is pandering to the masses over such a small-time issue considered a great political move during election time?
Grumble grumble... I hate politicians.
Well . . . exposed SuperBowl Nipple and Elvis's hips would disagree w/ you. It looks like they don't want to be outdone by anyone on anything. Including censorship. :)
That would create an interesting situation for the US politicians and their rally of morality.
As the saying goes, all the Congressional fretting over video games is a solution in search of a problem. Hillary et. al. can come back when they have more to say in a letter than simply "we don't like this so it should be banned."
"bleakness and callousness of tone"
Anyone ever see Requiem for a Dream?
This is a seriously bad move for Clinton. The Games Industry is not a small player in the world and I can foresee some funded rebuttals and adverts against her and her viewpoint on the subject. She is certainly not inspiring those who are tired of the last 8 years of having their rights removed to vote for her.
Simply, wow!
If the ESRB did play through the games in their entirety they would surely miss something leading to a huge uproar where the politicians would blame them, completely forgetting they were the ones that caused it.
I really hope that everyone who calls themselves gamers will vote against this , watch her plan backfire on her.
The good news, however, is that in the next 20 years these old farts will die off and we'll have a new round of politicians who aren't prude like Clinton here.
GP: Feel free to express your views, but please avoid using a term that is derogatory toward all women. I've deleted it.
What should be done instead, is a review of how much politicians actually understand about video games and the rating mechanism, and a review of why parents don't seem to understand the ratings. If a person doesn't understand calculus, you don't assume calculus is wrong and order a review, you work with and teach the person to help them understand!
Still, I'm sure everyone knows that this is nothing more than a stab at the Soccer Mom vote for Hilary, with the other senators hanging on as well as the worst kind of attention is no attention...
I though democrats were "liberals" which means you believe individual liberty is the most important political goal. I guess gamers don't count as individuals or something.
They don't really address whether games are qualified as art. They just say that some games are not suitable for children - which is okay. Then they say that the government needs to control the industry to make sure children don't get to play these games - which is not.
Again, I ask, have these people seen the game at all? Any of it, except maybe a few pictures grabbed by those psychopathic "for teh children" groups? What, no? They don't know squat about the game? In that case, their opinions are meaningless, as they don't know what they're talking about.
arowe87:
Neither side is looking out for your liberty. The Republicans are in the pocket of big business, and if they weren't they'd be the most likely candidate for protection of Liberty, or they would be if everyone wasn't so paranoid.
The less laws and government, the more liberty you have. Neither side is working toward this. (Well, with the exception of Ron Paul, but my hopes are almost nonexistent for that whole thing.)
My main problem with the government reviewing the ESRB is the fact that the ESRB is not a government organization. What would be the point of it? Even if they find flaws in it, what can they do? Set up a government rating board? Illegal. Force the ESRB to change its rating practices? Also illegal.
If they want to fix any independent rating board, the should focus on the MPAA. There are so many allegations of corruption, that it’s just not funny.
I can understand anti-gaming actions enacted from the position of crusading moralists but I am completely disgusted by the sight of people who supposedly value freedom attacking video games solely for political leverage. Clinton and others on the left represent a FAR lesser threat than a Bible thumping, freedom hating, religious morons on the right. Thus far, Clinton's critcisms have been limited to drafting strong laws to ensure that games do not end up in the hands of kids. She has yet to take up the Bible thumping, freedom-raping, censorship rhetoric of the far right.
Bible thumpers and political pragmatists alike must realize that these games are not marketed, intended, or legally sold to children. Their greatest point of misconception rests in the fact that Video games are not the sole intellectual domain of children.
I wanted to say that though I'm a democrat myself, Hillary doing something like this is hugely disappointing to me.
M= MATURE= NOT FOR KIDS.
It's not complicated or "flawed" simply because you don't want to pay attention.
If any of these morons become president, we're all doomed. The simple fact that people with no common sense were elected to the senate is in itself deeply disturbing. Just goes to show you, there are very few informed voters in this country.
Honestly, am I the only person who actually watches the debates? Does nobody else realize the general retardation possessed by nearly all politicians?
Sorry for the rant, but this has gone too far!
The end.
Who needs government censorship when console makers and retailers pratice self-regulating, supply-side, censorship that effectively rapes you of your right to demand and access games with adult themes?
Seriously though, this "video games = only for kids" idea needs to stop.
*Sigh* More 'Manhunt 2' nonsense. Just LET IT GO ALREADY, NOBODY IS BUYING IT. THE ANGRY POLITICIANS ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO CARE ABOUT IT.
@ Shoehorn O'Plenty:
The problem with this investigation is that it won't be unbiased. Remember 'Night Trap'? Lieberman and co. responded to that game like it was the worst thing ever, and after a hearing (according to this documentary on violent games that I saw a part of) the creator of the game walked up to Lieberman and asked him if he'd ever played the game. He responded "I don't need to play it, it's FILTH."
Together, these senators are like a monstrous, four-headed censorship dragon. They don't care about your rights. They're only interested in political power, and video games are currently the easiest thing to vilify and score points with the public for fighting.
I think you're very close to hitting the nail on the head there. The problem is that we've moved away from voting for people with actual ideas. People vote for one person because they're not like the other guy. We don't see anyone really taking a stand and saying "this is what I believe" any more. Now I should say that I do have some respect for Lieberman, I've found that he does act with at least some integrity. I get the impression he really does believe in the things that he does. However the majority of people in both main parties have no real ideas.
We have to get back to what We the People means, and we need to do it soon. We need to stop attacking each other because someone might be Christian and someone else might be an atheist. Its asinine and it doesn't actually solve anything.
Grumble grumble… I hate politicians."
That's our only big flaw in the legislative system. Laws are only passed to favor the constituents. What happens if a serious social issue happens to be CAUSED by the constituents? A lot of conflicted politicians, that's what. So most likely they won't end up blaming their own constituents, even if it is the best solution to a problem.
Not to mention comments like this: “permits children to act out each of the many graphic torture scenes and murders.”
To which I response with two things. 1) WTF are you doing letting children play a game intended for young adults and up? 2) Since when did children need a special controller to act something out? Kids play fight all the frigging time inspired by stuff they've watched/read/played.
"I don't know whether to laugh or cry."
The complete and utter stupidity behind their arguments are just ridiculous. It's the SAME CRAP! The same crap over and over! It's this terrifying loop of political crap which blinds them from basic truths! I'm so frustrated with politicians right now I can't even bring myself to point out the inaccuracy and base misconceptions about the ESRB. I'll let someone else do the math right now. I'm done.
FIFY
The senators also expressed concern over the game’s appearance on Nintendo’s Wii, intimating that the system’s motion-sensitive controller "permits parents and guardians to allow their children to act out each of the many graphic torture scenes and murders using rudimentary actions that are at best a very rough approximation of the actual actions being depicted.”
People would take you more seriously if you could remove the anger from your posts. Example from your post in this thread; see below. This stuff doesn't help you make any point. I only helps you look less credible.
Bible thumping
crusading moralists
Bible thumping
freedom hating
religious morons
Bible thumping
freedom-raping
censorship rhetoric
Bible thumpers
Dude, you've set the bar quite high!
The current crop of democrats generally aren't liberals, just like the current crop of republicans generally aren't conservatives.
"Majority rule" and "Democracy" sound all well and good. EXCEPT...
People don't realize the idea of a "winner" and a "loser".
If the "winners" are those who support, in one fashion or another, censorship of things they don't like or the forcing of their own personal/religious beliefs upon others. The "losers" loose their Rights to their own Freedom of Speech, their own Rights to their own personal/religious beliefs, and are denied other Rights as the case may be.
However, if the roles of "winner"/"loser" were reversed:
Those who "lost" still retain their own personal/religious beliefs, and are still allowed to not HAVE to participate in that which they do not agree with. And the "winners" still retain their own Freedom of Speech, as well as are allowed to enjoy their own personal/religious beliefs without requiring the "losers" to participate, and so on.
The fact is, when it comes down to it, this amounts to demands that one segment of US society must give up a portion of their Rights because another group believes that, while they, themselves don't have to participate, that NO ONE ELSE has the Right to participate either. It's the same with a great many controversial issues.
"Majority Rules" has long since been an idea of subjegating others to a form of dictatorship over the "minority". Offering one's opinions is one thing. Making demands that other's Rights (through petitions among other activities) is the attempt to subjegate a group of individuals who participate in something the "majority" chooses not to.
The ESRB HAS being doing it right, right enough anyway, as they are not the end-all-be-all resource for individuals or Parents any more than the MPAA rating system or the TV rating systems are the end-all-be-all ratings systems for their media. Even the MPAA rating system went through changes over time, but the government shouldn't be dictating what is or is not appropriate for the individual or anyone else's children. The government needs to stop playing politics with the Rights of citizens, changing and interpreting those Rights as a campaign sees fit. If anyone is guilty of causing confusion with the rating systems, it's the politicians.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Here's a big difference between the two:
The BBFC lets you get away with sex, but freaks out at violence.
The ESRB loves the violence, but has a panic attack the instant that any type of sex becomes a possibility.
Let the ESRB do it's job, people! The last thing we need is a 'board of approval' like movies had before the MPAA!
I actually thought that the Senators were going to complain about the whole hacked PSP Manhunt thing, but this? This is bulls---. It's also giving me yet another reason not to vote for Clinton.
What you thought the ESRB consisted of:
A bunch of ratings that mean nothing, and an AO rating that should be applied to any game you believe shouldn't be sold to kids because you're a horrible parent who can't read ratings.
What the ESRB consists of:
eC: Early Childhood. Hardly ever used because the intended age group would rather chew the controller.
E: Everyone. VERY minimal objectional content. the G rating of video games.
E 10+: Everyone age 10 or above. Minimal objectional content. The PG (PARENTAL GUIDANCE!!!!) rating of video games.
T: Teen. some objectional content. typically suggestive themes and violence ranging from moderate to somwhat strong. The PG-13 (PARENTAL GUIDANCE!!!!) of video games.
M: M-A-T-U-R-E. Mature. 17+. The R (RESTRICTED!) of video games. NOT intended for children. I repeat, NOT INTENDED FOR CHILDREN. PARENTAL DISCRETION is advised.
AO: Adults Only. The NC-17 of video games. Has to have VERY brutal violence, or strong sexual content. the nudity/sexual content line is far more strict for M/AO than it is for R/NC-17.
In fact, video game ratings in general are far more strict than movie ratings. The Xenosaga series is a prime example of 3 games that got royally and in some cases pointlessly butchered in their western localizations in order to recieve a rating of Teen instead of Mature.
GameDevMitch has the right idea. I will further his "letter writin'" campaign with sending the Clinton camp a message that they just lost your vote for focusing on a non-issue while the United States has PLENTY of other issues that should be much higher on a politician's list. Make sure they understand you're educated and see the executive office being there for someone who understands how to prioritize. Personally I'd throw in a jab about terrorism being a little higher on the list than the ESRB being reviewed for a game that should be restricted to what? 21 and older?
This statement was made to get more voters to vote for her by hitting on what is seen as a winning situation since who would EVER question an action done for "the children".
I feel we all need to remind her we're not kids anymore. We have the power to vote and we're intending to use that power to rate her AO for the United States Gov't.
I really thought that Hillary had eased-off the video game issue as it took a backseat other, more immediate, pressing and relevant concerns. I should have known better. I was almost getting comfortable with the idea of voting for her as the likelhood of Obama becoming the frontrunner dwindled. Now I'm not so sure anymore.
I really hope they do a review, and that they find the ratings system is sound. The ESRB worked like it was supposed to. They gave it an AO, Rockstar took it back, they reworked it (slightly) and they gave it an M. What's the problem?
I think they're just sore because the FEPA didn't go through. By the way, whatever happened to CAMRA? Weren't they all behind that too?
As for the whole "bleakness and callouness of tone" thing, that could just as easily be applied to the movie 30 Days of Night which I saw last week. Yet I don't hear anyone complaining about that. :P
Austin Lewis
If one has no gun one can not hunt steak, if one has no steak one needs no knife!
Keep on flip flopping. I really want to vote for a candidate who uses Britain as a measuring stick.
Not that I was going to vote for her anyway, but it's still idiotic beyond belief.
-P
And I'll once again reiterate that MATURE MEANS 17 AND OVER. IT IS CLEARLY LABELED AS SUCH ON THE BOX.
@ GameDevMitch
You're completely right. I've already responded to my legislators and let them know that this kind of move for votes is not acceptable. However since I'm in Microsoft and Nintendo country I'm pretty sure I'm preaching to the choir.
Would seem someone waved alot of money in front of Clinton and she *gasp* reversed her stand on the ESRB. This from a possible leader of the U.S., scary no? Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh and Sam Brownback are more talking heads then anything to be concerned about but yes they form their little block and as such would carry at least some weight. As mentioned earlier the only way to offset such things is to find 4 or more other senators and snail mail/email them until they become awake and take a stand FOR games.
Also there is a falacy I have heard several times in this thread. Yes the title is currently set for M +17. If it had not squeeked under the wire it would been AO and died. They are basically saying they did not want that title to sell at all, without coming right out and saying it. Almost sounds like they want to power of censorship for themselves. They must see themselves as the new moral majority..
Interesting that the Moral Majority were Rarely Moral and never a Majority. At best they are a very loud minority. The majority lets them have their way because they are to lazy/busy/confused etc to deal with it.
M does not mean kids!
-DarthCylon
It also bothers me that short of cornering Clinton or any of the other candidates in a room and making them listen (which is a feat in an of itself, I think a requirement to be in politics is the ability to ignore your constituents unless in presence of large amounts of green), there's not a damn thing I can do about it, other than sit here and watch these people take away my rights, a decent part of my social life, and my one true escape I have from this world that they, have vastly 'effed up, but somehow manage to blame it on everyone else...
*sigh*
Easy. The Movie industry has Much more money, cloat and political power to defend itself with than gaming. Movies have been with us for better than 5 generations. Gaming is just now working on its 2nd.
Games if given time and a bit of hope that will catch up in time then they will need to find a new target.
Video Games are "kid toys" and only kids, or immature adults (or the mentally insane) therefore play them.
Any video game sold is therefore sold to kids.
AO means Adults Only, the rating that ESRB made to distinguish between games for Adults (ie: not sold), and for Kids (ie: sold).
When Manhunt 2 was AO, it protected Kids, was marked for Adults Only (and therefore was not to be sold).
When the ESRB reduced Manhunt 2's rating to something not AO, it became something that could be sold, and therefore was for Kids.
More or less.
Translation:
'We have consistently assured parents that the ESRB only rates games for kids, even ones they claim are only for 17+. We must ensure that parents can rely on the consistency and accuracy of those ratings, so they can continue to ignore them.'
I seriously want to stand at the store and find these people who were so bamboozled by the ESRB's "fake" ratings of 17+ on Manhunt 2, that they actually bought it for their kids. Or allowed it to be played in their house under some kind of weird assumption that 17+ doesn't actually mean 17+. (this excludes any parent who read the description/ratings, and decided that their kid was mature enough to handle it)
Just so I can slap them.
Your logic works for me. I am certain there are some that beleive only kids and adults with holes in their brains buy and play games. Odd that the gaming industry brings in hundreds of million a year isn't it? Someone (like me for instance) might beleive that there are some people out there that want a part of that income and would threaten to say... oh sqeeze off certain titles unless they get it.
Speaking you understand as one of those unstable adults... which reminds me. I need to be pick up Mass Effect today. Bye bye sleep and greymatter for the next few days ;)
Sorry, I don't really see this as a serious issue for the candidates and party members as more of a "lets try and scoop up some conservative votes by pandering to their fears". I'm not really worried about this "thorough review”, its just election year postering and vote grabs, nothing more. Once this election year ends this will become a backburner issue for them.
“permits children to act out each of the many graphic torture scenes and murders.”
Ugh. Now I feel compelled to write a letter to these jokers. It still has not pierced their skulls that M rated games are for adults as much as R rated movies are for adults. If someone said "Oh my god! Saw is too violent for children!" these officials would likely say, "Of course, its not for children."
However, pretty much every democrat in power (and most republicans in that respect) can be given another title: authoritarian.
It's the Big Government argument, most of these people honestly believe that one group of "leaders" should have as much say as possible for the entire population they govern over.
So while the authoritarian liberal politician does believe in the rights of every person, they also believe that they get the final say of what those rights are. Throw in profitable special interest and unrational ideology, and you get crap like this.
...I keep hearing that Clinton is bringing something fresh to the table. Everytime I hear that I want to throw my head into the wall. My political party can't possibly become any more pathetic than it is right now, can it?
Let me explain. The National Workers Socialist Movement was made in order to overcome economic hardships by socializing the labor force in order to improve the economy. Now the problem with this movement was that eventually it turned into a tyrannical government, commonly known as the Nazi Party (Nazi being an acronym). The same thing happened under Stalin in Russia, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Robespiere in France, ect, ect.
Hillary is moving along these lines for many of the same reason as JT; to make a to-do about it so it becomes an issue that can be showboated as her 'stance' of family values. Personally, I don't think she cares one bit about the gaming industry, but sees it as yet another political stepping stone so she can empower her monarchy of the American political system.
As I've seen so far, I'm not the only ne in the country to think this, thankfully.
I have to disagree with this taking a back burner after the elections are over in November of next year. That depends on the political landscape. If, say, the war in Iraq goes VERY south and H. Clinton gets elected as the next President then this "issue" may very well come up again. She'll spearhead legislation or an investigation into the ESRB simply to deflect blame and criticism about how the war effort is going. It's exactly what she's doing now as a front runner. As others here have already stated she's doing this to get more support from conservatives and parents who want to deflect their idiotic parenting on something else. From a political perspective "for the children" is a win-win in the voting pools. Until someone shows that "for the children" when it's complete garbage is unacceptable and costs them votes it will continue to be used.
*sigh* Sad, sad state of politics.
Also, sure people shouldn't be voting for senators with such bad ideas, but the fact of the matter is that 99 % of the politicians are idiots. More Americans seem to get disgruntled with their political system of basically only two distinct parties, but more than that isn't that great either. Politicians, in my opinion, usually have no clue what is important for a country and what isn't. They only care about scoring points, no matter the political system. So you can decide to not vote for a certain senator or presidential candidate, but there usually is no real choice, it is a choice between the lesser of evils. You can decide to not choose at all, but you will, no matter what, get someone as a senator, governor, president, etc who will do something you are in total disagreement with. That is another reason why the industry shouldn't take a wait-and-see approach. They can't count on the fact that they will face the same outcome as comic books, movies, etc.
Talk about flip-flopper
Read between the lines. Children are ALREADY protected unless you're classifying a 17 year old as a child...? Reviewing a system is called for when it fails. I know... I design them. It goes under the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" category.
They aren't looking to benefit us they're looking to try and benefit their own political agendas. THAT'S what we have a problem with. It's just smoke and mirrors.
Precisely. Email away... You can't SPAM a legislator. They're required by law to take your email, mail, and phone calls.
Fax is good too! You want to hear directly from your representative? Easiest way is to make up a fax letter and sent it to a bunch of your friends and all fax to your heart's content. You'll get a call first asking you to stop jamming up their fax machine. Explain why you're doing it and keep doing it. Eventually the representative will contact you.
Oh and one thing I will say. They do listen, but only when you aren't a single voice in the dark.
What is wrong with reviewing the rating system? Aren’t alot of you the same people who say the children are protected by the system? If people want to tighten or loosen the ratings then so be it.
If it were over a legitimate concern, then by all means ask for a review. When it's a "pretend to do something" political manoeuvre, then they can stuff it.
Hillary Clinton's e-mail page. You know, I don't think she's a bad person, but I do think she is hugely ignorant and misinformed on this matter.
Anyways, to people who are going to e-mail, KEEP IT POLITE AND READABLE. If you just "spam" her with badly written rants, that doesn't really reflect well on gamers and all...
(I'm at work now, but I'll probably send an e-mail later.)
So why are our future leaders expecting us to bend over and accept what the British rating board decided on a game even though it is in conflict with the current laws and the Constitution?
Truly everyone who can do so in a mature and collected manor should let Hillary know that her stance is wrong and educate her on the truth. I plan on doing so when I get back home from work.
What is wrong with reviewing the rating system? Aren’t alot of you the same people who say the children are protected by the system? If people want to tighten or loosen the ratings then so be it.
Because the government doesn't have the right to censor media? The rating system is the industry's not the government. Not to mention the children are already quite well protected as the game they're complaining about in this case is rated for young adults and older. In the odd case that people younger than that happened to play it, it's a parenting problem, not an industry problem.
Actually, a number of politicians note on their email web forms that for you to get their attention, you have to be a constituant (from their state, county, city, etc). Otherwise, they pretty much ignore your letter.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Say Fox News! PLEASE SAY FOX NEWS!!
SPAM THE POLITICIANS WITH VALID, THOUGHT-OUT ARGUEMENTS! AND SOURCES! ...AND PROPER GRAMMAR!
But please, NO pr0n.
Yep. Which is why those outside of Hilary's voting district should send her a message from this form instead:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/help/contact/
That's her presidential campaign site. As long as you're an american citizen your comment will not go unheard.
Translation:
‘We have consistently assured parents that the ESRB only rates games for kids, even ones they claim are only for 17+. We must ensure that parents can rely on the consistency and accuracy of those ratings, so they can continue to ignore them.’
I seriously want to stand at the store and find these people who were so bamboozled by the ESRB’s “fake” ratings of 17+ on Manhunt 2, that they actually bought it for their kids. Or allowed it to be played in their house under some kind of weird assumption that 17+ doesn’t actually mean 17+. (this excludes any parent who read the description/ratings, and decided that their kid was mature enough to handle it)
Just so I can slap them.
Can i Slap them right after your done...this makes you wonder what kind of crap these idiots are going to pull once gta 4 is close to release..and god help anyone who attempts to keep me from buying that one...
Playing each game in its entirety is economically infeasible. The length of some games can be 60-70 hours and the average reviewer may not have the skills to finish the game in even that time. Requiring actual play of all games would push out release dates by possibly as much as a few months, this is not reasonable as every day a game does not ship is a day that a game company is not making money. Many smaller game companies can go out of business this way in a matter of weeks or even days!