Submitted by nightwng2000 - September 27, 2006 at 11:27 am -0500216.48.44.103
So....
Right now, to be rated by the the ESRB, it costs, what did someone say? Around $5000?
If such a bill passed what would it effect?
Right now, the independants who sell or distribute only online aren't always rated by ESRB. Would this bill only apply to publishers of software ONLY sold in brick and mortar retailers? Or would it require all others to have their material rated by the ESRB?
Whether it requires everyone or only sales in brick and mortar retailers, wouldn't the cost of having to rate games go up since more personnel would be required to play so many games all the way through?
And if this requirement is made by the government, wouldn't that mean that the government's Small Business Administration would have to, if not at least be heavily pressured to, require grants to be offered to individuals who wish to sell their small company or individually made games just to get rated by government requirement?
If not, I foresee possible arguments of discrimination in certain quarters since requiring, by government order, to have games rated and making the cost impossible for small business or individuals to make.
And not to mention higher taxes if grants are made.
And discrimination accusations if grants are limited and made only to some and not to other individuals/small businesses.
Maybe it does sound extreme, but there was already talk about how expensive it is now. I could easily foresee the cost tripiling from government requirments.
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:13pm GRIZZAM PRIME: Lunatic: Nope. Ever fading if I'm not mistaken.
Posted 07/23/08 at 08:05pm LuNaTiC: is there a way to view old shouts? sorry if its a noob question.
Posted 07/23/08 at 07:07pm gamepolitics: momma didn't raise no sock puppet
Posted 07/23/08 at 06:15pm Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Jack is a repressed man. Don´t be surprised...
Posted 07/23/08 at 06:07pm GryphonOsiris: So Jack admitted paying for gay porn... all I can say is wow... just wow...
Posted 07/23/08 at 05:09pm lumi: to the case, and he's been on 60 minutes once!
Posted 07/23/08 at 05:09pm lumi: GP, you should mention you'll be filing a legal injunction against him if he doesn't comply. Phoenix Wright will be attached
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:32pm Alteffor: You should add a section to the site for anything Jack CC's to you. It's always entertaining to read the stuff he writes.
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:31pm Matriculated: Does anyone know when the Supreme Court reaches their decission?
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:04pm Freyar: I demand to see this letter! (Not that I have any grounds to demand on.)
Posted 07/23/08 at 02:53pm gamepolitics: JT called me a "sock puppet" in an e-mail to Hal Halpin... i gave him 24 hours to retract it, LOL
Posted 07/23/08 at 02:46pm Haggard: Might want to take a look at what Anthony Horowitz wrote about GTA IV in the Telegraph, article seems to have been taken down
Posted 07/23/08 at 01:05pm Silencets: Beutiful. I always did wonder about Jacko Wacko
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:24am Matriculated: So Jack (an anti-gay activist) PAYED for gay porn
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:22am Matriculated: [i]...and purchased membership.[/i]
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:21am Matriculated: [i] few months later, as part of his ongoing campaign against Kent, Thompson followed links to gay porn on Kent's website[/i]
Posted 07/23/08 at 07:40am sortableturnip: Jack's at it again: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2008/07/jack_thompson_faces_permanent.php
Posted 07/22/08 at 11:22pm PHOENIXZERO: Ugh, that CNBC program "Play to Win" is it? Is on again...
Posted 07/22/08 at 09:34pm ZippyDSM: todayin zippy land:after spending 8 hours working on my AC unit yesterday it finally died today. theres go 300$ I don't have...tin trailers are ovens in the summer >>
Posted 07/22/08 at 09:17pm Cheater87: http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/news/132121.20080723.Saints-Row-2-uncensored-in-Australia/
Right now, to be rated by the the ESRB, it costs, what did someone say? Around $5000?
If such a bill passed what would it effect?
Right now, the independants who sell or distribute only online aren't always rated by ESRB. Would this bill only apply to publishers of software ONLY sold in brick and mortar retailers? Or would it require all others to have their material rated by the ESRB?
Whether it requires everyone or only sales in brick and mortar retailers, wouldn't the cost of having to rate games go up since more personnel would be required to play so many games all the way through?
And if this requirement is made by the government, wouldn't that mean that the government's Small Business Administration would have to, if not at least be heavily pressured to, require grants to be offered to individuals who wish to sell their small company or individually made games just to get rated by government requirement?
If not, I foresee possible arguments of discrimination in certain quarters since requiring, by government order, to have games rated and making the cost impossible for small business or individuals to make.
And not to mention higher taxes if grants are made.
And discrimination accusations if grants are limited and made only to some and not to other individuals/small businesses.
Maybe it does sound extreme, but there was already talk about how expensive it is now. I could easily foresee the cost tripiling from government requirments.
nightwng2000
NW2K Software