Leland Yee, Parents Television Council React to FTC Ratings Report

May 9, 2008 -

We've got additional reactions to yesterday's report by the Federal Trade Commission which gave high marks to the video game biz for its enforcement of ESRB ratings at point-of-sale.

A spokesman for State Senator Leland Yee (D), architect of California's contested video game law, remarked:
 

The Senator is pleased and commends retailers for significantly improving on the latest FTC study.  Clearly retailers are much more cognizant of the potential harmful effects of ultra violent video games and are not selling such games to minors in as great a number. 

With that said, it is imperative that the industry does more to prevent the sale of adult oriented games to children. Twenty percent of minors can still easily get their hands on games that are inappropriate for them. That equates to hundreds of thousands of children who are potentially in harm's way. The Senator looks forward to continuing his efforts and working with the various interested parties to end the sale of extremely violent video games to children.


Meanwhile, Gavin McKiernan, National Grassroots Director of the Parents Television Council, lauded GameStop for its 94% enforcement record, but said that, as a whole, the video game industry needs to do better:


 

The PTC continues to applaud the work of GameStop and its efforts to keep adult products out of the hands of children.  While it is good news that the rest of the industry has improved as well, without GameStop the industry as a whole is still failing 24% of the time and that is not acceptable. Failing one out of four times does not merit praise. Our kids deserve better.

Since GameStop has been able to have such widespread success it begs the question as to why the rest of the retailers still lag so far behind. Legislation, like the bill proposed by Representatives Terry and Matheson, will hopefully be the extra incentive the retail outlets need to do a better job than allowing children to purchase adult content one out of every four times they try.

 

Comments

I love how at firt they prais stuff like this, but there's always a "BUT..."

Yee:
Twenty percent of minors can still easily get their hands on games that are inappropriate for them. That equates to hundreds of thousands of children who are potentially in harm’s way.

PTC:
While it is good news that the rest of the industry has improved as well, without GameStop the industry as a whole is still failing 24% of the time and that is not acceptable. Failing one out of four times does not merit praise. Our kids deserve better.


No, it's not good enough for them. Never will be good enough for them. Unless the rate is 0. But that's unrealistic. It's never going to happen. Why don't they realize that?

*Agrees with Shoehorn O'Plenty*

ONOZ Gamez sell to minors!

FTC: Well, it's waaaay less than any other media form.

But...but...um...er...well, it's 25% if we ignore one of the major sources!

FTC: I...guess? But-

ONOZ TEH CHILDRENZ

First!

1 out of four isn't good enough? What's the R movie rate? And maybe that one out of four should have a *gasp* parent with them.

Its almost like every success has to be taken with a tablespoonful of salt these days...

I'm easily reminded of what parents do at report card time. You know, no matter how good your grades are, one low grade and they completely forget the good ones.

"in harms way"

:facepalm:

Since GameStop has been able to have such widespread success it begs the question as to why the rest of the retailers still lag so far behind.


Quick answer: "The other retailers stock more than just games, so it's not their specialty!"

Mr. McKiernan, got out and get a clue.

He was doing really well until he spoke his second sentence. If he had just said, 'I'm happy that the retailers are improving, but there is still much work to be done to keep MINORS from purchasing mature rated MEDIA, without PARENTAL CONSENT.' He would have been fine and I think I'd be floored.

Black Manta,
I tried saying that in a more detailed and sarcastic way, but it seems to be stuck in limbo.

:: sigh ::

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

They lament that M rated video games can be purchased by 1 out of 4 "underage" kids and completely fail to mention the results from other forms of media. With Yee it's because the man is a hypocrite and with everyone else it shows a complete inability to look at the subject rationally and an uncanny ability to ignore clear evidence.

Yeah! We were right! They completely failed to notice that the other forms of media had much worse rates, completely failed to DO anything about the other forms of media, failed to mention what the previous numbers were, cherry picked statistics (if we remove the nations largest video game chain, then the number goes up!), and then continued to push their own agenda.

At this point, it's obvious that they are lying about "for the children". But that begs the question, "What are their real motives? Why are they NOT attacking movies when it is so much easier for children to get their hands on R rated movies?"

I think the answer is obvious. They are being bribed.. ahem, I mean lobbyed by the MPAA to ensure the continued sale of R rated movies and R rated movie tickets to children.

I think someone should ask them point blank about it.

"Clearly retailers are much more cognizant of the potential harmful effects of ultra violent video games"

No, retailers are probably getting sick of you pestering and criticizing them. It is more about the "potential harmful effects" you cause there companies since their are few sources that cane site any link between violence and video games, and many other studies that prove no linkage.
Before you go "over the top" saying how this isn't good enough, look how much better an industry you criticize is doing in comparison to industries which have been around of decades more (movies, porn, drugs, etc) at keeping content out of minors hands. Jesus!

@ Tom

Actually, it is 1 in 5. The 1 in 4 was a hypothetical if they remove the largest seller of games.

In other words, it's like a teacher saying "Yes, your GPA is 3.5, but lokk at this. If we take out your A's then your GPA falls to 2.7. I really expected better of you. We will have to call your parents."

Translated as:-

'dammit, my main argument is shot down, i'll now reenforcement my point by labeling games ultra violent, and ignore the Hollywood violence machine since they fund my party'

Seriously,

1 out of 5 underage still buys M rated games....

And they think that they are in harms way.

NEWS FLASH!!!!

There is NO REAL LINK to Videogames and Violence, no matter how harmful these poiliticians try to use their words, my view still stays that if they don't bother at least playing Videogames, then they have NO IDEA what sort of harmful effects they are doing to their vote in this years election.

Also, we all should be proud that we are all doing our part as gamers, to continually try to make our vioce heard even though our voices are still shallowed out by those who are ignorant but at still in power in the White House.

Twenty percent of minors can still easily get their hands on games that are inappropriate for them.


Last I checked, the stat was that 20% on average could do so at all. Not that 20% easily could. They still have to come up with the cash, and the transportation, and have a store near them that's lax about checking ID. Not easy. Do-able, but not easy.

Yee is potentially the biggest asshat I've read about. Nice qualifiers in his statement.

PTC, get a clue. Every other modern media is "failing" more than video games, yet your continued focus is on the scapegoat, because it's a new target for your foolishness.

All of this asshattery still labors under the FALSE presumption that vdeo games have ANY negative effect. NONE has been proven, on anyone. In fact, there is just as much 'proof' that video games are good for us.

~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

"without GameStop the industry as a whole is still failing 24% of the time and that is not acceptable."

They just love skewing results...
All things considered, the ones really pushing the percent higher were Hollywood Video and Circuit City... if not for them the percent would be much lower... and i think it's more fair to not include Circuit city and hollywood video than it is not to include gamestop as the former two are not nearly as big for game retail. i mean if we took those percentages and also calculated into how much games those retailers supply to the consumers, Gamestop would hold much more weight, if you get what i'm saying... really, i don't even know if there's a hollywood video near me, much less people who go to hollywood video and circuit city to buy games... really, it's a comparison between one of the largest retailers and two of the smallest (for games)

well, atleast Lee and the PTC aren't trying to take credit...

Yee seems to be a person who just can't admit he's wrong. Also, like all the other nanny state/moral high horse groups, he still blames the industry for everything, which is akin to blaming a farmer because a person didn't cook their food properly and got sick as a result.

"Clearly retailers are much more cognizant of the potential harmful effects of ultra violent video games and are not selling such games to minors in as great a number."

Why is it retailers that are responsible for this? Maybe it's parents who have copped on a bit and stopped buying these games for their kids? On top of that, what potential harmful effects? Any harmful effects of violent video games are imaginary, not potential! They have not been proved, and any study that has claimed to show them so far has been heavily flawed.

"With that said, it is imperative that the industry does more to prevent the sale of adult oriented games to children."

No. It is imperative that parents and others acknowledge the fact that video games are not just children's toys and that they need to monitor what they buy for them, as they would with movies/books, etc.

"Twenty percent of minors can still easily get their hands on games that are inappropriate for them."

A kid who badgers his gullible/ignorant/lazy parent into buying it is one of these minors. How are the retailers supposed to stop that? Point blank refuse to sell the game to an adult?

"That equates to hundreds of thousands of children who are potentially in harm’s way."

Again, they are not in harm's way. There are no proven harmful effects from violent video games, potential or otherwise.

"The Senator looks forward to continuing his efforts and working with the various interested parties to end the sale of extremely violent video games to children."

What has he done that has contributed to anything? Sponsored an unconstitutional bill? Spread lies about games never once trying to back up his statements with facts? Place the blame for kids playing inappropriate games in the wrong place? Wow. Keep it up Senator, you're doing such a great job...

"While it is good news that the rest of the industry has improved as well, without GameStop the industry as a whole is still failing 24% of the time and that is not acceptable."

Parents failing 24% is not either, but I suppose the PARENTS Television Council won't be quick to criticise them...

"Our kids deserve better."

Better what? Better educated and informed parents? Better treatment, as in not assuming they are complete idiots who can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality?

"Legislation, like the bill proposed by Representatives Terry and Matheson, will hopefully be the extra incentive the retail outlets need to do a better job than allowing children to purchase adult content one out of every four times they try."

For Jebus' sake, won't they ever learn? LEGISLATION IS NOT THE ANSWER! It's funny how he complains that failing 1 time in four is terrible. Last time I checked, legislation just like these idiots are trying has failed 9 times out of 9!

testing... I think it ate my last comment, but I wanted to test before I resubmitted it...

Hmmm... it doesn't like something about my post, third times the charm, I'll try leaving out the link to the article, but that kind of ruins it...

Kotaku had a link to an article where the interviewer had actually played the game, and called the PTC spokesperson on their misinformation:

Have you played the game?

“I’ve actually played ‘Grand Theft Auto IV,’ and it’s right in keeping with previous versions. The series continues to lower the bar and this is the first game that has an alcohol content warning. You get points for driving drunk in this game.”

You know that’s not true, right? The game doesn’t have points.

“If nothing else, it’s a rewarded activity. Necessary for advancement.”

I don’t think so.

“But there’s an alcohol content warning and a scene of drunk driving, correct?”

Yes. Did you play that part?

“No, no. I didn’t get that far.”

"Great job guys, keep up the goo...

**Error.. undefined function. Error. Error. Resume Program: /Constitution_Eviseration_1765. Please contact your local System Administrator.**

...Epic Fail! Submit to the Ministry of Love."

Something tells me if the retailers had a 99% success rate, these critics would still condemn them for the 1%.

@ Al Wesker

Of course they would. Nothing is ever "good enough" to the PTC.

"Clearly retailers are much more cognizant of the potential harmful effects of ultra violent video games"


err no.. they are just aware that an M rated game probably isnt appropriate for minors. Just like Terminator isnt appropriate fora 10 year old.

Nothing to do with 'harmful' effects. (which STILL havent been proven, but hey apparently that doesn't count for anything)


i hate they way they take a fact, and then pretend they know what a store manager is thinking. look its easy to do..

"Clearly retailers are much more cognizant of the potential harmful effects of ultra violent video games when inhaled or imbibed. Grinding paper manuals and snorting them is clearly becoming more noticed and the toxic/hallucinigenic effects of licking cd's are becoming more well known."


no.. that wasnt what was said atall. it was made up. completely based on nothing more than opinion. geez. gets me so mad.




and as for the "“While it is good news that the rest of the industry has improved as well, without GameStop the industry as a whole is still failing 24% of the time and that is not acceptable.” comment..

WTF?

err... yeah ... lets look at the contraceptive pill. While its good news that it is effective 99.9% of the time, When we ONLY use the statistics where people got pregnant (originally 0.001%) then the contraceptive pill is failing 100% of the time and that is not acceptable...


wtf... lol. i just cant think of a sensible response to a statement based on statistics where they actually say they ignore any statistic favorable to the game industry, and then are suprised they get a bad result. lol wtf?? did these guys n gals ever do basic math?. idiots.



''“Twenty percent of minors can still easily get their hands on games that are inappropriate for them.”

again.. why substitute in the word 'easily'? the report doesn't show that. For all they know some of the kids may have had fake IDs etc. Plus where does a 13 yr old get like £50 from to buy a game? Save up his pocket money for 4 months and then uses his fake ID to buy it. And then not be spotted by a responsible parent. wow couldnt be easier.

Plus why still pick on the games industry!? what more do they want?? the rate of improvement over 5 years has been UTTERLY FANTASTIC!. the movie industry has been around for what 50 years now, and it still sells to underage kids what 40% of the time? but that isnt worth pursuing instead? honestly. Gotta give credit to the poster that made the point that even if there was only a 1% success rate in buying underage, they would still not be happy. totally true.

Hundreds of thousands of kids are in harms way? I didn't know video drove cars and barreled down the express way and/or sidewalk. You'd think they couldn't get a license seeing as how they can't reach the pedals, reach the steering wheel, see, breath, or have a cognitive thought. Hey, they have that last one in common with Yee and the members of the PTC!

Seriously, video games do NOT harm children. I've never heard of a child being attacked by a video game. Even IF we assume that every school shooting in history was caused by video games and nothing else, that only shows games having harmful effects on about .00001% of children (and that's being generous with the percentage). A crisis, that is not.

It's impossible to lay the blame for anything squarely on video games. Even if you believe that video games have harmful effects, you have to assume that all forms of media also have harmful effects. This means that book you read last night, the movie you watched last week, even the songs you listened to in your car this morning are all harmful. Add in the influences of friends, family, your local customs and values, the economy, and a hundred other factors, and you can't pinpoint games as a cause. Even if you removed all video games today, I doubt there would be any change 10 or 20 years from now. Except in the economy.

If memory serves, someone here once used various statistics to prove that even with a 40%+ failure rate underage children were actively buying M rated games a fraction of the time. I think it was in the single digits or lower. I wonder what this new data would say. So why don't they acknowledge that underage purchasing of M rated games is not as big a deal as they make it out to be?

@ mogbert:

Oh I know what the real numbers are, but these fools are complaining about their imagined "1 in 4" number. It's another example of, as you very effectively pointed out, their abuse of statistical data and their propensity to completely ignore facts.

re: "video game industry needs to do more"

What!? The retailers who are still failing to enforce video game ratings are NOT part of the video game industry. The only retailer that is did better than any other retailer in history.

What the hell do these people want? It's like no matter what, it's always video games' fault.

i was quite pleased with the FTC report, which shows that the game industry is more progressive about self-regulation than any other entertainment industry in the WORLD.

"Blah blah industry industry must do more to cleanse thur ebul"

Retailers =/= Industry, you ninnies.

Notice that Yee once again goes only after Video Games, and makes no mention of Movies. Wouldn't want to bite the hand that feeds him, when he's working his little anti-game agenda.

Leland Yee sucks at math and statistics. Taking the 20% success rate from the stings and applying that to the total population of kids under 17 is both disingenuous and foolish.

The reason he only mentioned videogames, and not movies or other stuff, is because either GamePolitics is quoting him out of context or this is a response to GamePolitics e-mailing him and asking him specifically for his thoughts on the improvement in enforcement for VIDEOGAMES. Remember, GP only reports on videogame-related matters - even if Senator Yee went on a five-paragraph rant about poor movie enforcement, it still wouldn't be posted here because GamePolitics is about videogames, not movies.

@ Gelmax:
Seeing as the FTC report is titled "Undercover Shoppers Find It Increasingly Difficult for Children to Buy M-Rated Games", it would seem the main focus of the report is on games, and thus the responses of the Senator and the PTC are not out of context at all.

Certainly misguided, but not out of context. ;)

Look at the other numbers in that report. 35% were able to purchase R-rated movie tickets at a theater, 47% an R-rated DVD, 51% an unrated DVD, 54% a PAL (parental advisory label) music CD. And going through the list lower in the report, the worst case for M-rated games (Hollywood Video, 40%) in less than half as bad as those for any other medium.

Without a doubt, little Timmy is going to have a rough time getting his hands on Manhunt 2. But the unrated edition of Saw? Don't forget the popcorn, kiddo.

This is madness.

@ Gelmax:

Yee has never gone on any rants against movies or any other forms of media. In fact, he has actively claimed that games are far worse then movies because their interactivity draws players in despite evidence to the contrary. He has shown an ignorance of even the MPAA ratings system when he implied that a movie theater owner has the right to take a child accompanied by their parent from an R rated movie.

One might wonder, regarding Yee, why he was so willing to take nearly $80k from the gambling, casino and alcohol industries when alcoholism and gambling addiction have such a profoundly negative effect on children across his state. One could go so far as to suggest that the very parents who are allowing their children to play the games that Yee despises so much might have become so irresponsible in part due to the impact of those industries that Yee accepts funding from.

What does the PTC have to do with games anyway?

Are you KIDDING ME?!

I dont know what angers me more, that he still snuck in the little comments saying the games harm children, or that he only praised himself for the progress made by the industry.

"Clearly retailers are much more cognizant of the potential harmful effects of ultra violent video games and are not selling such games to minors in as great a number. "

No Jackhole, they are cognizant of politicians attempts to fine/jail those who do sell these PERFECTLY SAFE games to those who want them.

Oh Leeland, why must you be such a moron?

"Legislation, like the bill proposed by Representatives Terry and Matheson, will hopefully be the extra incentive the retail outlets need to do a better job than allowing children to purchase adult content one out of every four times they try."

Yes, on a side note...how are these legislators doing at keeping alduterers and pedophiles out of governement positions? Oh my, this pie-chart doesn't look good.....

"without GameStop the industry as a whole is still failing 24% of the time and that is not acceptable."

Lemme guess, anything less than absolute 100% means the system has completely failed.

Twenty percent of minors can still easily get their hands on games that are inappropriate for them. That equates to hundreds of thousands of children who are potentially in harm’s way.


Err, that's 20% of the children who tried to buy the game for themselves, not 20% of all children. According to the ESA, parents buy 91% of the games. Which means that roughly 20% of the remaining 9%, or 1.8% of the total, would be kids who might be buying M-rated games on their own.

One point eight percent!

Tom, games ARE far worse than movies precisely because of the interactivity. It's common sense. What's being debated is whether media affects children at all - if it does, then games are definitely a lot worse. There's no contest. Not just because of the interactivity, but because movies tend to portray violence as "bad" through various techniques that I'm not really going to bother to note here because it's completely off-topic.

Additionally, it's perfectly within the rights of a movie theater to remove a child from an R-rated movie. After all, the MPAA rating system is currently just a guideline, and theaters can go above and beyond the guideline when they feel it's appropriate. It's perfectly within the rights of theaters to, for example, ban everyone below the age of 30 from viewing R-rated movies. It just wouldn't be a particularly popular move.

Vinzent, it's not the job of legislators to keep adulterers and pedophiles out of government positions. It's the job of voters like you and me. Additionally, games are not proven to be completely safe. As a gamer myself, I think it's far too early to say that they have no effect whatsoever on the development of children, especially the modern generation of games.

Kurisu, that's absolutely right. As long as the number of children able to buy these games is higher than 0%, there is room for retailers to improve. The chance of getting killed in Russian Roulette is only 16% (1 out of 6), after all, but you probably wouldn't want to play it anyway. So why does 20% seem like nothing?

Illspirit, do you have any hard data to support that number? Has the ESA done any studies or tests that you can cite to support that? Because it honestly seems to me like you're just taking these real numbers and combining them with made-up numbers to make them seem insignificant.

So is there anyone left these days that thinks Yee is reasonable?? I think the last year or so has shown he's worse than Jack in many ways, mainly because he's in an actual position of power.

@ PHOENIXZERO

JT took credit for this report as well.

Yee has proven one thing beyond a shadow of a doubt with this statement. Just as it is with JT, the only person who knows best for your kids is not YOU the parents who brought them into this world, but Leland Yee. Leland Yee knows best. Leland Yee knows that those FTC numbers are misleading cuz they're from the same gov't he represents.

Leland Yee knows best. Trust Leland Yee. The gov't would never lie to you.

Oh and BTW all you zombies who need someone to tell you how to live your lives... Leland Yee isn't backed by ANYONE in the entertainment industry.

...Yeah that's right. No one in the MPAA, ESRB, or any other group involved with media endorses him. So why does he spout such venom at these media industries? Simple. Because they don't give him money to further his political power.

However if you wanna follow a guy who's all about saving the environment by banning "ultra violent video games". You found your man.

@Gelmax

True, but if their job is to protect the children, shouldn't they be removing adulterers and pedophiles out of the seats of power and putting them in jail instead of covering up for them or going easy on them when the media finds them out?

It just seems odd to me.

@ Gelmax

Show me some evidence, any evidence, that backs up your claim. Please, I would love to see it. "Common sense" has been proven wrong time and time and time again throughout history. To use it as the basis for your argument is ignorant. Here's a study done by the BBFC that shows that gamers are far less emotionally invested in games and game characters then movies and movie characters: http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/stories/20070417.html If that's the case then it would suggest that games would have less of an impact then movies due, in large part, to their interactivity.

Your contention that the techniques by which movies present violence as "bad" - techniques that you imply are completely absent in video games - assumes that the children who are, by your own admission, the crux of the issue, will understand the moral messages that accompany the representations of violence thereby making violent movies somehow more worthwhile then violent games. Is that a valid assumption? I would suggest that by the time a child develops enough to understand the context of violent actions in movies they are also able to differentiate between fantasy and reality. If that's the case then they would be able to make that differentiation no matter the context - in fact, because they will be less inclined to be emotionally attached to the characters in video games they could well be more likely to understand video games as fantasy. In that case you could argue that movies would be worse for children.

At any rate, the point is moot. Your initial comment suggested that Yee's comments might have been taken out of context and that he might have similarly come out against other violent media. That is not the case. If you bothered to do any research on the topic you would have realized that.

Finally, a movie theater could not suddenly say that no one under 30 is allowed into R rated movies. That you even imagine that to be true suggests that, again, you haven't bothered to do any research. Once you're dealing with adults you can't deny service based solely on age - it's a category that's protected from discrimination. What you're suggesting is paramount to saying that theater owners could ban black people from R rated movies. Legally it's the same.

When you have a child accompanied by a parent or legal guardian you have the same issues. A theater owner couldn't ban that child or, even worse, kick that child out because of their age. There certainly are reasons why they could kick that child out, but assuming that they are accompanied by a parent or legal guardian age is not one of them.

As to some of your other comments - the number will never be 0%. To imply that retailers must be taken to task until they reach that 0% mark is to live in a fantasy world. Also, to compare video gaming by a minor to playing Russian roulette is... well, stunningly absurd, really.

Also, why are you taking illspirit to task for not backing up his information when you yourself make baseless claims without once citing anything other then "common sense?"

How typical of a slimeball organization like the PTC.

There is not going to be a 100% success rate. The PTC wants legislation no matter what. You can't reason with them. What you can do is tell them to go f--- themselves by making thier products more violent and graphic. Also I'm predicting that in the next few years when our generation starts to be the one in power, the game industry will go right back to where they were almost a decade ago. Look at movie theaters! Right after Columbine when ALL of the entertainment industry was under fire, they made it a national policy for carding for R-rated movies. I was able to buy tickets to R-rated movies when I was 13! And that was only 4 years after Columbine. Now that it's only the video game industry that is under fire, movie theaters could care less and movie studios continue to churn ever more violent fair every year. Why is that hollywood is allowed to get away with so much yet if a 14 year old buys GTA it should be a crime.

Is the PTC funded by gamestop now? I'm almost suprised they didn't suggest something to pre-order or ask if we had any trade-ins.

@Loudspeaker

I know, I made mention of it turning into a big circle jerk for everyone trying to take credit for the improvement.

Gelmax,

You are incorrectly assuming that interactivity somehow makes video games more 'dangerous.' This is patently false.

It has been proven that people (even young children), differentiate play violence from reality. The interactive nature of video game lends to this natural distinction. Film and other static media do not.

I'm not saying that film is worse than video games, I'm saying that your assumption is grounded in your opinion, gut feel, or common sense, if you will, and not reality.

Media has very little effect on people, even children, unless they have absolutely abysmal parental involvement.

~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightAE: some devs here in Oklahoma got accepted to make WiiU games. They are college kids who haven't graduated and are making games out of their dorms. They deserve it too.10/24/2014 - 6:25pm
MechaTama31CMiner: Raising such a concern now would get you branded as a GGer regardless of whether you're actually waving the flag or not.10/24/2014 - 6:19pm
Andrew EisenMore on how Nintendo runs the eShop today (no parity clause, no concept approval, devs can run sales when they want, indies don't need an office): http://www.develop-online.net/news/nintendo-eshop-has-no-parity-clause/019921110/24/2014 - 6:13pm
Papa MidnightAndrew Eisen: https://www.reddit.com/r/eyebleach (Seriously. If you ever need pictures of kittens, and the like).10/24/2014 - 3:58pm
Andrew EisenDammit, now I'm all depressed. I must find pictures of kittens.10/24/2014 - 2:38pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.businessinsider.com/shooting-at-pilchuck-high-school-in-marysville-washington-2014-1010/24/2014 - 2:15pm
Andrew EisenIn case anyone was wondering, Nintendo's eShop no longer does that "you don't make money until you've sold x units" thing. http://www.develop-online.net/news/nintendo-no-minimum-sales-needed-for-eshop-revenues/019921010/24/2014 - 1:52pm
MaskedPixelanteGOG needs better web developers. Someone dug into their countdown timer, found numbers using fonts from Indiana Jones, Star Wars and Monkey Island, and pretty much confirmed that LucasArts is coming on Tuesday.10/24/2014 - 1:43pm
Papa MidnightI've seen glowing reviews for Bayonetta 2 so far.10/24/2014 - 1:17pm
Andrew EisenI'm not picking up Bayonetta. Today. Tomorrow's not looking good either. I'll get it eventually though!10/24/2014 - 12:23pm
Infophile@MP: No it doesn't. You're a terrible human being for completely unrelated reasons. (/snark)10/24/2014 - 12:15pm
MaskedPixelantePicked up Bayonetta 2, which according to Polygon means I am now a terrible human being.10/24/2014 - 11:58am
Matthew Wilsonofcourse not he did a video on the new civ game just yesterday.10/24/2014 - 10:32am
Papa MidnightYou think a bit of cancer surgery would keep The Cynical Brit from railing about bad PC ports? Not a chance! :)10/24/2014 - 10:15am
Matthew Wilsonmight be a bit soon only becouse he got out of cancer surgery last week, but ask his email is public.10/24/2014 - 9:56am
Papa MidnightHell, set up a Google Hangout or Skype call, and I'll be happy to join in.10/24/2014 - 9:34am
Papa MidnightBring Totalbiscuit on SuperPAC for Saturday!10/24/2014 - 9:32am
CMinerThere is no journalism/ethics concern that you've raised that would be made weaker by not raising it under the umbrella of GamerGate.10/24/2014 - 9:32am
CMinerNeo: You want to start some healing? Stop using the GamerGate hashtag. Even if you don't believe that it originated with harassers, you have to see that it's been irrevocably tainted by their actions.10/24/2014 - 9:31am
MaskedPixelanteGOG has a four day countdown to their next publisher. All hints suggest Disney, but no guarantee it'll be LucasArts.10/24/2014 - 6:58am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician