SupSuper
2 Oct 2006, 18:35
On the latest "parents want someone else to do their job" and "politics clearly wanna replace the ESRB", we have Senator Sam Brownback, trying to pass a bill that demands the ESRB must play through games in their entirety, before rating them.
“The current video game ratings system needs improvement,” Brownback said, “because reviewers do not see the full content of games and don’t even play the games they are supposed to rate. For video game ratings to be meaningful and worthy of a parent’s trust, the game ratings must be more objective and accurate.”
Brownback’s measure would mandate the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to administer the requirement for a complete play-through before rating.
“Game reviewers must have access to the entire game for their ratings to accurately reflect a game’s content,” Brownback added.
http://gamepolitics.com/2006/09/27/brownback-proposes-game-ratings-bill-in-senate/
At first this seems all fine and reasonable, but there are big flaws in this train of thought:
1. The ESRB would have to take as much time as QA testers to play through a game to check for everything, which would delay game released tremendously just to get them rated. Even regular gamers can take months to play through really elaborate games.
2. With most games these days, it's impossible (or nearly) to play through their entirety. MMOs, procedurely generated, downloadable content, user-created content (which is the main cause for this whole controversy anyways), random generators, mods, sandbox games, easter eggs, etc. The list goes on and on, and ESRB can't simply check every single piece of content that becomes available. Plus a game's rating would become completely dependent on the user modders, which would probably push most games to M or AO ratings. :p
3. Quit trying to f*** with ESRB, you don't pick on any other content-rating system and they already have it hard enough as it is. :mad:
“The current video game ratings system needs improvement,” Brownback said, “because reviewers do not see the full content of games and don’t even play the games they are supposed to rate. For video game ratings to be meaningful and worthy of a parent’s trust, the game ratings must be more objective and accurate.”
Brownback’s measure would mandate the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to administer the requirement for a complete play-through before rating.
“Game reviewers must have access to the entire game for their ratings to accurately reflect a game’s content,” Brownback added.
http://gamepolitics.com/2006/09/27/brownback-proposes-game-ratings-bill-in-senate/
At first this seems all fine and reasonable, but there are big flaws in this train of thought:
1. The ESRB would have to take as much time as QA testers to play through a game to check for everything, which would delay game released tremendously just to get them rated. Even regular gamers can take months to play through really elaborate games.
2. With most games these days, it's impossible (or nearly) to play through their entirety. MMOs, procedurely generated, downloadable content, user-created content (which is the main cause for this whole controversy anyways), random generators, mods, sandbox games, easter eggs, etc. The list goes on and on, and ESRB can't simply check every single piece of content that becomes available. Plus a game's rating would become completely dependent on the user modders, which would probably push most games to M or AO ratings. :p
3. Quit trying to f*** with ESRB, you don't pick on any other content-rating system and they already have it hard enough as it is. :mad: