gamepolitics: ESA Responds to Congressman's "Truth in Video Game Rating Act"

Game Politics (

gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-08-10 06:59:00

Entry tags:

cliff stearns, congress, doug lowenstein, esa, esrb, hr5912, jim matheson, legislation, mike mcintyre

ESA Responds to Congressman's "Truth in Video Game Rating Act"

Last week, GP was first with the news that Congressman Cliff Stearns (R-FL) had proposed HR 5912, the so-called "Truth in Video Game Rating Act."

Gamasutra and other sites are now reporting that ESA boss Doug Lowenstein has responded by way of an official statement.

"We share Chairman Stearns' commitment to the continued effectiveness and accuracy of the ESRB's ratings system," Lowenstein said. "However, as introduced, we do not believe his legislation will serve consumers and parents."

Specifically, Lowenstein criticized the bill's requirement that games be played in their entirety during the ESRB rating process. According to the ESA president, such a requirement "means that the only people rating games will be professional gamers with the skills necessary to play through games that can take more than 100 hours and who are not likely to be representative of the mainstream American parent."

Lowenstein added, "According to a Kaiser Family Foundation survey, parents said that among all entertainment rating systems... the ESRB ratings are the most useful. It is not broken. Neither is it perfect and we are always exploring ways to ensure it retains the respect it has earned from American families. We look forward to working constructively with Chairman Stearns and his colleagues on these issues in the weeks ahead.."

(29 comments) - (Post a new comment)

grls_r_gamers_2
2006-08-10 11:53 am UTC (link)

"Specifically, Lowenstein criticized the bill's requirement that games be played in their entirety during the ESRB rating process. According to the ESA president, such a requirement 'means that the only people rating games will be professional gamers with the skills necessary to play through games that can take more than 100 hours and who are not likely to be representative of the mainstream American parent.'"

If you can get through to them, it'll be a miracle. But still, you get a cookie for trying!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	mayby sageoflightning 2006-08-12 01:03 am UTC (link)
	Mayby they could do both, have a pro gamer plays thru the game using some kind of DVR tye device to catch clips of stuff that will be reviewd by the panel later? (Reply to this) (Parent)

	It's as almost as if he reads GP. lightwarriorr 2006-08-10 11:57 am UTC (link)
	He pretty much said exactly what you all been saying about gaming needed to be played in their entirety. And for that second paragraph I agree... It's not broken and no one is perfect....It's a system that worked all through my years....it just pisses me off these people attack the ESRB and think it's a broken system just because a few errors. (Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: It's as almost as if he reads GP.

zero_beat_x
2006-08-10 02:34 pm UTC (link)

I agree completely. It seems that nowadays, if a person corporation makes a mistake - even if it's their first mistake - the only solution is to have them sued into oblivion. Look at Hot Coffee. Before that, things were going pretty smoothly. Could've been a bit better, but it was going well. After Hot Coffee hit, suddenly games are the equivalent of serial killers, rapists, terrorists, and Satan.

There's such a thing as being too strict.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	chenry 2006-08-10 12:25 pm UTC (link)
	that'd push release dates back a while. "Got a rating for that game yet?" "No! Shut up, i'm trying to level up so I can beat this Dungeon Boss. Sheesh!" (Reply to this)

Canned resposne, nothing new

yukimurasanada
2006-08-10 01:22 pm UTC (link)

As much as I like that the industry is responding to that ill concived load of crap, I wish they'd stop playing nice nice and start hitting back. Doing somerthing other then rehashing the same statement over and over and over.

Perhaps what they shoudl be saying is this.

We share Chairman Stearns' commitment to the continued effectiveness and accuracy of the ESRB's ratings system, however, wasting taxpayer money on unconstitional laws that the courts have struck down time and time again is wasteful and couter productive. Were certain the american people would have there money spent on more important things, and we intend to share with them just how much money there goverment is wasting on this attempts to circumvent the first amendment"

Thats just a sample, but I'm tired of the ESA playing defence.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Canned resposne, nothing new bustermanzero 2006-08-10 03:34 pm UTC (link)
	Hey, this isn't the most idiotic law people have proposed. A canned response to this isn't a big shock. Now, if another one like the Louisiana one pops up, SEND IN THE HOUNDS! UNLEASH THE BEAST! RALLY THE MARINES! SUMMON THE GIANT MECHAS! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Games played in their entirety? cryptic_persona 2006-08-10 01:53 pm UTC (link)
	I know its stupid to think that you can play games in their entirety before reviewing them but if they were to get professional gamers who do have the skills to get through games much faster than the average gamer why not just have people on the ESRB who review the games watch as the game is played. (Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Games played in their entirety?

jabrwock
2006-08-10 03:18 pm UTC (link)

I know its stupid to think that you can play games in their entirety before reviewing them

Not to mention the fact that Hot Coffee wouldn't have been found EVEN IF the ESRB HAD played GTA:SA all the way through. Because it needed external tinkering of the files to access that particular minigame.

Same with ES:Oblivion's nudity patch. Playing 100% of the game wouldn't have found it...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Imagine if you will...

durlock
2006-08-10 03:35 pm UTC (link)

An RPG being rated under this system...Hell, let's even go with a recent one.

Tales of Symphonia.

Now if they're to go through the game 100%, and I do mean 100%...that would involve the following.

1.) Getting all nicknames.
2.) Fighting all Monsters.
3.) Watching every ending. (8 of them!)
4.) Getting all items, weapons, foods, little 'dolls'.
5.) A hell of a lot more crap I haven't mentioned.

I've played through the game twice...and I'm easily at 160 hours...and I still haven't even fought all the monsters or seen all the endings...I think these people need to be shown a few screen caps of a regular gamer playing through an RPG.

Hell, get them to go through Chrono Trigger and re-rate the game in this stupid system.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Imagine if you will...

barfo
2006-08-10 04:47 pm UTC (link)

Even more so think about how to rate Spore, where the actual content of the other creatures/races/whatever you meet etc is supplied from a database of all players playign the game, and the content of your own creature is determined by what you design yourself. There is literally no meanign to the concept of "playing it in its entirety" since there is no practical way to define "entirety".

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Imagine if you will...

barfo
2006-08-10 05:04 pm UTC (link)

For that matter (and im sorry about double posting) how do you play a sports game in its entirety? Sure you can play a game or a season or a career to X years but does that mean you've finished it? How do you know when playing as a team that you've seen all the content? (Taking the example of american football,) On any given play there are an infinite possibilities of what content you could see, do you have to see a run of every possible length before you have seen the enitirety of the running plays, because youd also have to see runs to every possible location of every possible length and from every possible running back of every possible team. Even if you want to define entirety as seeing every possible animation of the game once, it would be quite a job to take careful enough notes to infer that one had likely seen them all in such an open ended, user-input controlled game.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

dkh
2006-08-10 03:55 pm UTC (link)

What a goddamned cop out. How patronizing.

Saying that they'll not be representative is insulting. The point is that parents deserve to know what IS there, not that they deserve to know what's within their own personal ability level to reach.

The ESA should speak to parents with both the understandings of professional gamers AND the understanding of parents.

They might as well tell parents that Diablo 2 has no Cow Level.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

barfo
2006-08-10 04:40 pm UTC (link)

"Saying that they'll not be representative is insulting. The point is that parents deserve to know what IS there, not that they deserve to know what's within their own personal ability level to reach."

Lowensteins point is that the current system (having developers themselves submit the most rating-defining content from the game along with safeguards and checks to make sure that they dont mislead the system and huge fines if they do so) does report the full content of what is in the game, while the proposed "improved" solution is actually inferior as it wouldn't even do that (not while also simultaneously being representative of parents reviewing). Neither his plain english nor his subtext implies that he is thinkign that parents do not deserve to know about the entire content of the game, he is just pointing out how the Law of Unintended Consequences applies to this particular ill-conceived provision in terms of it meeting its stated goals.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

This makes no sense

mcfly0612
2006-08-10 04:01 pm UTC (link)

Wheats, grains, cereals and other foods are allowed a certain percentage of rat feces in them. This is something that affects everybody because everybody eats. One incrediably diffcult to access sex minin game gets through the cracks and suddenly video games are these diabolical tools designed to corrupt our kids. To me this says it's alright for us to eat rat s#*! but we can't play violent video games. This makes no sense at all.

Tell you what Congressman Cliff Stearns, you make sure that there is not an ounce of rat feces in anything first, then work on games. Sound good?

(Reply to this)

ESRB

nightwng2000
2006-08-10 04:24 pm UTC (link)

What's so unfortunate is that few ever mention that there are OTHER resources for parents to use.
The ESRB ratings (indeed, ALL industry rating systems) are great for flash card views. The "harried parent" that Leland Yee refers to will get the quick, general view of a game from a single letter and short content description. In this, the ratings are sufficient. The descriptors don't say how many times a content occurs in a game. Just that it does. As a general flash card, that's sufficient.

But a fully informed parent won't limit themselves to just the ratings systems. They'll look elsewhere for that info.

Some might call them PSAs, but I think a free DVD, put out by the National PTA would be a major help to the uninformed parents. The DVD should not only explain the different industry rating systems, but also inform parents of other, private rating systems available for parents to use. It should also inform parents about other resources parents can use to educate themselves about various media. It should give parents the knowledge of the available tools so that they can make their own decisions, without being dictated to by other individuals, organziations, or government. Once parents are aware of the various resources, they will eventually focus on specific resources for future reference. I think such a DVD (or even downloadable videos for free) could be made available not only through local PTAs but available in various parenting magazines and other ways. Frankly, being independant of the industries, it would make such DVDs and videos more of an educational tool than mere PSAs.

nightwng2000

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: ESRB marbledog 2006-08-10 04:51 pm UTC (link)
	They could even (dare I say it) supervise their children, so they could actually see what's in the media that their kids are consuming. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ESRB

nightwng2000
2006-08-10 10:32 pm UTC (link)

The problem with supervising is the same problem with suggesting the ESRB play each and every game all the way through.

I've played games that I get into and it takes awhile to get through to a decent stopping point (usually RPGs). Others you can play for a few minutes and you're tired of it.

But when you're not interested in the genre someone else is playing, you can loose interest quick.

Knowing about a game in advance will give a parent a better chance of trusting their child to play without looking over their shoulder the entire time. I know enough about what my son is playing that I just check on him every so often. I know if the game is going to be frustrating, or has music that he may not do well with (yes, there is some music that revs him up more than others), or if the content he may not be able to handle well enough yet (I know HIM, so I know what will affect or not affect him). I don't blame the games or music or anything. I know him, so I know what and how something will affect him. And what I don't know I learn by letting him try out. In those cases, I usually check on him more often.

But it does take an informed person to know what can or cannot be good for one's own child. And I don't make judgments as to whether that same game may be inappropriate or not for someone else's child. I just tell those other parents to become informed and make an acceptable match based on what they know of their own child.

nightwng2000

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ESRB

barfo
2006-08-10 05:54 pm UTC (link)

I somewhat disagree with the supressed premise of an implied value judgement against parents who use only the ESRB ratings (and perhaps was unintentional on your part and an artifact of quoting arguments from Yee who tends to denigrate anybody who does not agree with his narrow view of the world). The great advantage of ESRB is that it is far and away the most objective of the private ratings agency, while most of the other ones bring a very hefty slice of bias to the table which limits their usefulness except to people with a strong concurrence of world view. The private ratings guys in california (PSV) have a very vested profit interest in promoting their own ratings which can be very easily seen in how they constantly try and denigrate the ESRB, and most 'family friendly' or religious inspired review or ratings sites (that ive seen, hardly an exhaustive list) seems to apply their particular narrow ultra-conservative outlook in ways that make them sort of worthless in informing the average parent (for example rating cartoon magic or references to spirituality in like a japanese RPG as as harmful to kids as the ultraviolence from a GTA or something).

While i think its great that such people have reviews sites they can read that highlight their key concerns in informing their purchase (much as hardcore gamers have review sites catering to their concerns to inform their purchases), it merely confuses the issue when such sites (or the PSV guys) try and market their reviews as "ratings" (especially if we ever get to the point where they are pushign to be requred to be on the box, etc etc) because it dillutes the impact of the single ESRB rating. So while i think its a good idea what you suggest as far as putting out a DVD to let less computer literate parents (as it would be simple ot find a plethora of resources just with a well performed google search) know where they can get more specialized reviews and content info, I think its a bad idea to presume to put those other guys on the same level as the ESRB - let the ESRB rate the games since a quick overview is what a rating should be, and let anybody who wants start a service reviewing games in order to tell their readers more info that may be of use ot them. However, perhaps there are specific other ratings of which i am not aware that actually are sufficiently unbiased and general interest enough that they should be mentioned in the same breath as ESRB, and i just dont know about them.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ESRB

nightwng2000
2006-08-10 10:36 pm UTC (link)

Oh, there's no problem with a parent using ONLY ESRB ratings. If they've looked around and seen that ESRB ratings are sufficient, then fine. Parent's know their own children better than knowing other people's children. So, they may actually be able to blanket their own child with "my child can handle T rated games in general but not M rated games". Or they may say "my child can't handle blood and gore games but can handle violent games". Or make blanket judgments on language and so on.

I'd just like to give parents their own choices for what they will feel is best for them, versus what another parent will feel is best for them and their children.

A matter of preference.

nightwng2000

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	OT, but... terminator44 2006-08-10 05:26 pm UTC (link)
	Was anyone else unable to acess LJ this morning? (Reply to this)

shihtzu
2006-08-10 07:19 pm UTC (link)

Never mind the inanity of the phrase "play through a game in its entirety". Games are not movies. They're machines of potentiality, many of which are based on random behavior. If the ESRB never encounters an enemy that only appears one out of a thousand times you walk through a particular area, did they fail to play through it in its entirety? What about open-ended games like SimCity or Warning Forever? Does the law specify how many species in Spore the ESRB has to create before they've "seen everything"?

Maybe I'm just being philosophical. Still, law is supposed to be about nailing down specifics, and here the specifics are slippery.

(Reply to this)

	thefremen 2006-08-10 10:41 pm UTC (link)
	I was able to contact Staerns! He replied in his best New England accent: "Well excuse me for being retarded!". Seriously, this is just designed to destroy the ESRB since gamers will be rating the games, parents won't trust it, critics will tear them to shreds, and it will end the ESRB. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	gamepolitics 2006-08-10 10:50 pm UTC (link)
	Stearns (R-FL) (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	No dennis, enmitywithin 2006-08-11 12:23 am UTC (link)
	I believe it is Stearns (ROFL) (Reply to this) (Parent)

	thefremen 2006-08-11 12:51 am UTC (link)
	Odd thing is I read that name over and over to make sure I was writing it correctly and then I did that. I blame my T-mobile Sidekick for having no spellcheck. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Stupid question(cheating to rate a game)

zippydsmlee
2006-08-11 01:56 am UTC (link)

Heres a DUmb Q that crawled and died in my head

SO if the ERSB has to look over every part of a game,and the Devs made cheats to help this prossess go faster wouldnt this halve the time need to look thru games?

Cheats like GOdmode,inf ammo,magic,helth,money,ect,ect All class/all convo mode to go thru every quest and convo in one run?

After all they are pouring over content not gamepaly.

But then the current setup is not broken ,however to add soemthign like the net play warning,they should add a mod warning,this game is modable and rateings and experainces might change,simple BS to pretect games like Oblivion from being rerated beuse soemone likes free soild plastic boobies.

thinking of whitch I need to find thos nunde hacks for DOA vollyball :P
now theres a game witch almsot comppletely flew under the nadar.

Nadar=Nudity,bonceing breasts,cleaveage,ect radar *L*

realy has anyone with a desent rep complained about the game? 0-o

(Reply to this)

finaleve
2006-08-11 02:37 am UTC (link)

Agreed. It can take from 4 hours (A katamari game can really be beaten in 4 hours...maybe even a DS game) to over 80 hours (I know final fantasy can, I remember back in the day when the timer would turn red when you've gone over the 99hr limit).

If anything, they should have something like the public product test facilities (I used to go to them when I was younger) where they would have there applicants come in and try out new products, and get paid like 20 bucks (for foods normally) to around 100 (for non food products like shampoo).
Take that concept, and apply it for gaming. Have people apply, giving information like what systems tehy own, what genres they like, there age, things like that.
Then, when a new game comes in to test. Have the people come in, pick up the game and a fill out, test the game for at least 3 days or so, fill out the form and then return. Then they are paid.

Of course, i guess the problem would come in as to how they would get the money. But the idea is there...

(Reply to this)

In case this passes

father_time89
2006-08-11 03:16 am UTC (link)

There is a way that game-developers can make it easier on the ESRB if they have to go through the entire thing. I've heard they do this while testing games, the trick is to give the ESRB game a special copy where everything is incredibally easy, let's say for example the game they need to review is god of war, well then now if you hit the hydra about three times it loses about 1/4 of it's health that would make play times a lot shorter, and of course for the real game you would make the hydra tougher or the blades of chaos weaker whatever the case, would it be wuithoholding content if the Hydra took 50+ hits to kill instead of the 12 hits it took in the ESRB version? No of course not, no one would be able to say otherwise with a straight face. Of course you can do other things to make gameplay go quicker for the Esrb like super-fast characters or whatever. Yes I bet some game would probably still take a while to complete even with "pathetically easy mode" but still it's a start.

(Reply to this)

(29 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

LJ Labs

Store