I'm not surprised with any of it. A large problem, which we are always harping on is that parents don't parent their children, they befriend them. And the saddest thing is most kids, when they grow up end up hating their parents for it. They need and want parents not friends.

I grew up in Pensacola. On the beaches we used a red, yellow, and green flag for the safety of the beach. Green was safe, yellow was potentially dangerous conditions be cautious, and red was don't swim. People didn't get it, even though it's based off the stop light. Then they added the black flag to "clarify" everything.

What parents really don't get is that M *means* M. It's the same as PG-13 vs. R ratings for movies... studios do everything they can -- but only as much as they have to -- to get into that T/PG-13 bracket. The games/movies may still have plenty of questionable content, which is why they're T and not E.

I'd love to see the ESRB adopt the MPAA's rating scheme, just because it's familiar. Parents have respect for an R rating... they don't understand that an M rating is the same thing.

I've never really understood what was so confusing about the ratings. What information is it exactly that parents "want and value" from ratings? A simple yes or no answer to "should I let my kid play this game?"?

@xzero87

Legislation would make a lot of morons happy. It will give them a warm fuzzy to know that other people's children won't be playing those horrible murder simulators.

Any parent who uses a ratings system as a tool to help them to parent is by definition not doing his or her job. Ratings only tell what the rater's opinion is as to the game and that rater has probably never met the children his rating is supposed to protect. It's kind of like asking an alien with six arms and two heads to design a car seat belt for a human when he has no idea what a human looks like or what a car is.

In short, game ratings are like attaching hot air balloon guy lines to a bicycle - they're intended (by folks who have no idea what they're doing) to increase safety but in practice they're useless and extremely dangerous.

Parents who don't play videogames perhaps don't understand Videogames in the first place,

therefore it is harder for them to know what the ratings are.

There are some parents who do play videogames with their kids and do know what the ratings are.

But the real thing is, there are some parents who grew up in a world without Videogame ratings and movie ratings.

Change and acceptance takes a while to adjust no matter how good it is to understand,

In other words, parents are just lazy about the ratings most of the time. Who knew?

I just feel bad for the kids.

If the parents are either too lazy or too stupid (confusing T with M when there is the description under the letter, wow WTF) then what can we expect from the kids in terms of grades.

[...] wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptContinuing to dig through Cheryl Olson and Lawrence Kutner’s excellent Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games, we note the authors’ finding that parents often ignore video game ratings: While [parents] were aware of the ESRB rating system, they didn’t always pay attention to it… [Some parents] looked at the artwork on the packaging or spoke with a store clerk… Several had M and T ratings confused… Some relied on their children’s own judgment… [...]

Maybe they just know their child can handle it?
I was playing Mature games at 10... didn't effect me in the slightest.
*twitch* ;)

This is the part that got me:

[Parents expressed] frustration that they weren’t able to get the information they wanted and valued from the ratings…

Wait, so when a movie is rated "R", that is enough information, but when a game is rated "M for Mature 17+, Blood, Intense Violence, Partial Nudity, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Alcohol, Use of Drugs" (the label of GTAIV)...
THAT isn't enough information?!?

I think the problem is that it is too much information and parents don't want to read all of that. So they filter it out. The parents complain that they don't get the information from the rating, not because they aren't lead to the water, but simply because they won't drink.

I think it's time for JT to start suing parents for giving M rated games to children...

Oh wait, he can't... he's going to be disbarred this summer.

If you can't tell (by SIMPLE reading) the difference between "T" and "M" then you should have your children taken away. End of Story.

It's a classic case of "My kid's better'n yours!" Parents trust their own "lil angels," but not others. "My child would never do that!"

The major problem is how parents don't play games, so they don't know how to analyse them. When a parent isn't sure whether a movie is appropriate, they just see or rent it first, then judge if it's okay for their kid. But with games, parents don't play, so they don't understand.

America: Because why blame yourself when there's other people

"Almost all of the parents we spoke with agreed with the age categories of the ESRB ratings - but for other people’s children, not for their own."

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest...

I just finished the book a couple nights ago, it really is probably one of the best written books on this topic I've read thus far.

Also if you look at all the articles and sites it cites, GP was cited once. Ch. 8 17. They also cited Kotaku and Destrutoid. I thought it was kinda cool that not only did they actually speak with children and parents in their study, but they looked at websites and material from a lot of the gaming community as well.

Some relied on their children’s own judgment…

Funny story about that. One of the last times I was in Gamestop, I saw two kids, call them A and B. Kid A was there with his mom, and was asking Kid B which game he should get between two games. One was a T rated game, the other was from the GTA series. I got to watch as Kid B recommended the T rated game on the basis that the GTA game was for 17 year olds and up. The kids looked to be about 12.

@Dan J

It's a matter of copyright that they didn't in the first place. Plus I'd say that the ESRB has the better rating scheme to start with.

My 2 years at Wal-Mart Home Entertainment concurs with this. Parents just DON'T CARE. This is why CCFC, NPTA, NIMF and other watchdog groups are so worrisome - they don't want to protect kids - they want to raise other people's kids with their own morals. Let's be honest, members of these organizations know full well how to use the ratings and keep games out of the hands of their own kids - they just want to do the same for other parents' kids.

and i have to point out This webcoic again...

seriously... I know parenting is hard but... this is just plain ignorance and scapegoating.

I have a friend who monitors his kid's choices of video game. His eldest kid is almost 10 and He let's them play T rated games (i.e. naruto, that marvel fighting game) and i don't see any problem. A bit roudy maybe but not "murderously violent". then again, he himself is a gamer of sorts and with just one command his kids go to bed without any complains. no.. seriously.. i've seen it happen when i was at his place. just ONE command, no questions asked!

Now.. THAT's parenting!

The rating system has big stickers on it, and they are thinking about increasing the size of the sticker in some countries.

There's no excuse for a Parent to not know what they are buying for their kids.

"Most acknowledged that while they might have strict rules at home prohibiting certain types of games, their children might easily play those games at another child’s house…"

My child should not play inappropriate games
I will not buy my child games that are rated as unsuitable for him
My child may play said games at friends' houses
Buy video game anyway, because he would play them regardless ^_^
Whine about how we must protect the children

Logic center overloading... patience with humanity, overheating... administer candy to deal with annoyance buildup...

Speaking personally, My nephew, he's around 14 I believe, maybe 13. Somehow, his Mom has drilled it into his head that he is not to TOUCH games rated above T. No matter what. Which is interesting, when he's over playing games with me, as I always enjoy a good Halo match, and I know that Halo's not that bad. That, I believe is the opposite end of the spectrum, having the rateings as a iron-clad rule set, no matter what.

You know what? This gets even funnier when I think about the fact that my local gamestop now has a sign breaking down what the ratings mean on its counter.

As to the guy advocating PEGI-
I just checked out their ratings. The number symbols are nice, but the other symbols are confusing and space-consuming. "Fear" and "Discrimination" would have to leave. The former is retarded to put on the box, and any treatment of anybody whatsoever can be construed as advocating discrimination. The ESRB system is clearer and similar enough to the MPAA rating to make it recognizable if people pay attention. I find the ESRB system superior in most ways.

The ESRB ratings are awesome.

For those who are wondering HOW someone can get M and T mixed up I can give you that answer...

...It does hurt my brain knowing tech support allows me to gives these answers...

MPAA ratings are: G, PG, PG-13, R...

So then in the ignorant, "OMG you expect me to READ THE LABEL" parent they take the ESRB system...

Ec, E, E 10, T, M

...and see it like this...

E, Ec, E 10, M, T

How? Because it's in alphabetical order as they think the MPAA system is. So the higher the letter in the alphabet the higher the age.

Even if you put an AGE rating right on the box... Say 13+ or something. You'd STILL have parents say the ratings are stupid and misleading with a, "Oh I thought that was a rating on how good the game was." No matter how easy you make a system or how many "problems" you fix based on this demographic of parent they will still shift their poor decisions or socially unacceptable decisions on the system regardless of the situation.

@Loudspeaker

that's an interesting assumption. I guess it's just subconscious that the ratings will make more sense to us if they were ordered alphabetically.

And this is precisely why legislation will accomplish little/nothing.

If a parent buys an M rated game for their kid, I don't care. Last time I checked, I haven't met every kid on earth, so I have no clue what's appropriate for other people's kids. The ratings are a generalized rating system made to inform parents about what games they are buying for their kid. The ratings are not rules. Would I let a little kid play GTA? Probably not. Would I let a kid play HALO? Fuck yeah, everyone should play HALO (Hehheh). My point is that parents decide what their kids are exposed to, not a ratings board, not a cashier at a store, THE PARENTS. But if they buy a game for their kid, they forfeit their right to bitch about it, because they made the choice. The ESRB ratings are not that hard to understand; They're about as clear as clear gets. If you still aren't sure, check online or something. Things have been made as easy as possible, so quit being a bitch. SERIOUSLY.

@ChrowX:
Gamestop employee also, I actually saw quite a number of kids use the ESRB ratings to choose their kids last Xmas, with very little resistance. When any parent asked me for gaming recommendations, I always told them the popular M rated games they should avoid for kids 16 and under (most were 8-14) and they agreed saying they didn't want their children playing those games. Awareness is actually very high, it's just you will always have the clueless person, dumb idiot, or the person who refuses to allow video games to be more than "children's toys"

@xzero87/DarkTetsuya/et. all:
Legislation will do nothing. It never has. It never will. The people who think our government needs to enact legislation are the people who have to depend on the government to wipe their own asses every day because they can't be bothered to do it. Nothing pisses me off more in this country than a bunch of mindless drones attached to the idea that our government should spend billions of dollars each year in special interest crap largely aimed at families so they don't have to lift a finger for themselves. If we cut all the programs that people are scamming and abusing daily we'd have a larger budget for the programs that matter like health care and social security. I don't like people being in poverty and poor like anyone else, but continuing to help them do nothing does not solve the problem either. I don't like politics battles like many, but that's what some parents want to turn this into, when as many have mentioned already, is pure common sense. Violent video games are NOT for children, and video games are NOT just for children, people need to start using their brains a little and this whole issue would be resolved.

[...] According to the authors of GrandtheftChildhood, parents often ignore ESRB ratings on their kiddies games. Why am I hearing crickets instead of shocked gasps of outrage? Oh, that’s right, because I think most of us already knew this to be true. [...]

Gamestop needs to make a sign out of every store saying "VIDEOGAMES ARE NOT JUST CHILDREN, YES, ADULTS DO ENJOY VIDEOGAMES!"
I am sick of parents acting like violent videogames have no place in the world since they think that adults don't play videogames.

Im an information designer and i do think the color coding would actually work with one modiffication go from a super friendly green to a yellowish green, to yellow, to orangish yellow, to orangish red to red, that way by seeing the full color gradient, you can kinda guess which one is much more "dangerous" as for my kids, i guess id have to talk to them but if i considered the facts of me growing up perfectly ok, no hard science on games harming them, and they actually not being scared by the games i think its ok for them to play.

@ZeroDash

Amen to that!
People who cannot read should not have children. Eventually they'll drive down a one way road.

@GRIZZAM 512

what about alien religous zealots?
OMG Halo is Humanist!!!1!!
It discriminates against aliens!

@ian
maybe but it at least gives a baseline of sorts to know what's in a game. it's not completely accurate but tells you a chunk of what the game has.

this ain't perfect, but it's a good thing to have.

I wasn't quite as disturbed as the author about parents letting preteens buy T games. Generally, only 10% of T games should be rated T. 20% should be rated M and 70% should be rated E10.

@Ian Cooper:

Actually, there are specifics within the ESRB that help guide the raters to a rating. The descriptors are a better source. And again, if you're comfortable with having your kids play games like that, then yes, by all means, buy that game for your kids. The OVERALL rating is, indeed, a matter of opinion to some degree, but the descriptors are most assuredly not. The board does have specific points to what's defined as Strong versus the normal descriptor.

There remains people with different views on morality. Some are offended by violence. If they see that on the back of the box, then they probably won't pick up the game. They might say Cartoon Violence (another descriptor) is fine, but just Violence is not.

Then there are those offended by sexual content. That's why there's descriptors that mention Sexual Themes (and Strong Sexual Themes). You can be assured that those people who know about the game won't want that game in the hands of their children.

At the same time, the ESRB is not forcing you not to buy games. They even have an Adults Only rating, but the companies who distribute the consoles these games are often on have explicit rules not to have Adult Only content on their machines. Is that the fault of the ESRB? No.

As I said before, just because there's an M rating on a game doesn't mean that you can't buy it for your kids. The kids might get some difficulty for trying to purchase such a game, but believe it or not, there are actually parents out there who DON'T know what their kids are playing. THOSE are the parents you should be complaining about, not the ones who look at a rating and decide for their own children.

So my question to you is this: how EXACTLY are the ESRB ratings "dangerous"? And don't give the "lazy parenting" excuse because that just holds no water.

@GRIZZAM 512:

It's great to have an open dialogue with your children, but guess what. Many kids end up reaching a certain age where they don't want to talk. And guess what? No matter how hard the parent tries, the kid still won't open up. It happens. It's not bad parenting as long as the parents don't give up... and that usually involves snooping, but at the same time, the parents need to give their kids some kind of privacy. That's usually when the parenting advice suggests the parent be allowed to tear their kid's room apart, but the kid can keep a diary that shall remain private.

Hell, many parents would consider themselves lucky to maintain open dialogue with their children, even through the teenage years. Many good parents, for one reason or another, won't.

Also reading this makes me feel that the authors are just talking about the minority of the parents, or perhaps the bad examples of parents who don't even understand the ESRB ratings, which is kinda sad because I feel that there are some really good parents who do understand it.

Really though, if playing violent video gmes doesn't turn a person in to a killer, why should I care if someone else's kids are playing them? I don't, because it's not my problem, nor is it my responsiblity. I'm not gonna try to be everyone's parent.

It’s great to have an open dialogue with your children, but guess what. Many kids end up reaching a certain age where they don’t want to talk. And guess what? No matter how hard the parent tries, the kid still won’t open up. It happens. It’s not bad parenting as long as the parents don’t give up… and that usually involves snooping, but at the same time, the parents need to give their kids some kind of privacy. That’s usually when the parenting advice suggests the parent be allowed to tear their kid’s room apart, but the kid can keep a diary that shall remain private.

i know someone who open up to his parents from elementary all the way up to...well young adult. he never stopped talking and opening up to his parents about alot of things, from small frustrations... well almost everything. And you know what was the differnce? the parents never stopped being involved in the kids. they were never "too busy" for them. they always spend time with them and lecture them and do stuff together.

the only reason kids don't open up once they hit a certain age is because.. well.. the parents is "too busy" for them. not give them time. always wanted "quality time" with kids but fail to realize that quality time comes from QUANTITY time.

@Ian Cooper

I have to disagree with you here. There's a difference between using ratings to help make a decision and following them blindly. If I know what kind of game a "T" rating denotes, I can use that to make a decision-or at least to get a general idea of what the game is. Personally, I would do more research than that, but it's a good starting place. Using a rating doesn't mean following the associated age limit. It just means that you're aware of what standard the rating serves, and that that information is at your disposal.

@Tbone

Parenting is indeed filled with many challenges and as our world changes, new things come up related to children. Some parents reach the point of giving up when they face new technology that they don't understand. But compared to a salaried job, they actually have it easy in this case.

At work, if you don't adapt to new protocol, you can get fired. As a parent, you just let things slip by and allow unexpected crap to occur. There's no motivation to adapt. And complain when it blows up in your face.

If your argument is, "I choose to be ignorant," then you forfeit your right to complain.