Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) has sponsored legislation in the United States Senate which would require the ESRB to play games in their entirety before assigning an age rating.
Brownback's Truth in Video Game Rating Act (S.3935) would appear to be the Senate version of a House bill of the same name proposed by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL).
“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.
The bill would also direct the FTC to define parameters for describing video game content as well as defining what kind of behavior by the game industry would break those rules.
Brownback also would have the Government Accountability Office (GAO) evaluate the efficiency of the ESRB system as well as the potential for establishing an independent rating body with no ties to the industry. Universal systems spanning movie, TV and games would also be looked into.
The conservative Brownback has been very active on video game issues in recent times. He worked with Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT) on game-related bills such as the recently-passed CAMRA legislation and held committee hearings on video games in the Senate earlier this year.
Full text of Brownback's new bill is not yet available. We'll post it when it goes up on the Congressional system.
Comments
Perhaps if we gamers lobbied for a government agency that would regulate/censor sinfully comfortable suits and the inheriently sexual metaphor of golf balls dropping into holes. Perhaps then they would understand what is inheriently wrong with their legislation... but probably not.
It's the game industry's fault, really. It's a healthy industry; it should be throwing more money at these guys! A hefty pile of campaign donations will do wonders for your cause in the senate.
What ultimately gets on my nerves is that it seems the government doesn't even exist for any reason except "for the children". And not only that, but those without children have to pay a non-breeder tax. How much money does the government spend each year "protecting the children" from made up threats? And now they want to have another one, because that's ultimately what this bill comes down to. Not only that, but they'll want ME, not the parents, to pay for it.
The only benefit I see is that it'd require a huge staff to do what this bill wants, so maybe I'll be able to get a new job, but they'd probably just outsource it to India or China anyway (after paying Haliburton a large contractor fee).
Wait for the specific language of the bill before you demolish it with your arguments people.
A stupid bill. Won't help at all. Anything like an MMO will already just say, "Game expeirience may change during online use." And will continue to say that, likely. Like in Animal Crossing DS. The ESRB won't have to play through the ENTIRE game literally, finding EVERY SINGLE Easter Egg. Another attempt at censorship without even understanding what's going on.
...oh, and as for the "Hot Coffee" thing, Rockstar et al never even flinched. So where's the super-heavy fines when someone really DOES screw up?
That way they could just put the code through any text editor and search it for profanity. They could also just look at all of the images and maps and graphics and see for themselves where the nudity is.
I was trying to make that a lot more sarcastic than it came out.
I know already that that is a ridiculous requirement that is probably against some sort of law.
I would love to hear a more enlightened person's point of view regarding my thoughts.
Have fun reading, Senator.
Obscenity has a three part definition under U.S. law. To find a matter "obscene," the jury is required to apply contemporary community standards to satisfy a three-part test:
(1) that the work as a whole is an appeal predominantly to prurient interest;
(2) that it depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way;
(3) that the material, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
An appeal to "prurient" interest is an appeal to a morbid, degrading and unhealthy interest in sex, as distinguished from a mere candid interest in sex. This three-part test is a result of rulings by the United States Supreme Court in 1973 and 1976.
As a result, Hot Coffee and other such mods/ester eggs could be ruled as obscene and therefore their distribution could be limited by the US government.
------
I also am forced to agree with the points made by others saying that Brownback obviously did not understand the first thing about video games when he proposed this bill that is patently impossible to act out. I also agree with Wybaar's commentary on the hypocrisy of the Congress, who, as is widely known, fails to read the full text of every law swet before them. (*ZING*)
1.It has already been mentioned modern RPGs are long enough to make this prohibitory and MMOs are never complete and thus could never be played in their entirety.
2. The ESRB can not take into account user made content that affects the rating of a given game (ex. Nude patches).
3. It involves government agencies in affairs outside their jurisdiction and purpose.
4. It is a gigantic slap to the face of the industry who did come together and rate the content of the games (which is far more than lazy parents who won’t sit down and pay attention to what their kids are listening to/watching/playing deserve).
The guy after my last post, this is only by a few senators, not the majority.
We do need to make a stand. I have met numerous people, who if not held accountable, choose to disregard, ignore, or say 'it doesn't apply' to their own rules whenever it is convenient for them, but expect others to abide by what they say.
The first namse that come to my mind for representative/co-ordinator would be Tycho and Gabe of Penny-Arcade.
I will accept comments with my e-mail, "Joshera" from "gmail"
so when we get the next GTA rated OMFGWTFBOOBS!!! and it still sells like hotcakes, what are they going to do then? make the content illegal? put bright orange "do not buy this game" stickers on the box? in the end, it will just make us want the content that much more.
what will they do when making the content illegal doesn't help either? the next version of GTA will outsell san andreas, just like san andreas outsold vice city. no one can stop it.
the jack thompsons of the world exist because of the tons of cash the video game industry generates. hearing that it's a $40 billion a year industry with no landmark precedent makes ambulance chasers like JT drool.
I must say I totally agree that the idea content like user made mods be rated is indeed moronic. It's like banning people from buying video cameras because people film themselves naked on them...
BUT:
Firstly, I also test games... so I DO know how long it takes... but I also know it is not too hard for programmers to include code to skip levels / missions.
I also review games, and often get "retail code", which often includes special 'god modes' to allow the reviewer to get through the game before it's due out. How hard would it be to have "classification code" for submission?
These are just suggestions. I'm sure there's millions of ways things can be done better than they are.
They may mean longer development time and a slight rise in cost, but what is the price of freedom from government interference?
Because this is not going to go away anytime soon, and certainly not because it keeps getting shot down in courts.
Sooner or later someone will work out a way to get past the 2nd Amendment, and that will be bad for all parties involved.
If the ESRB can be seen as doing SOMETHING, isn't that better than sitting back and just fighting court case after court case and losing money?
Secondly, not one single game in Australia has been delayed because of the OFLC. Games are submitted to the OFLC and rated months before their release date. The reason games come out here later than the US is because of publishers and their stupid regioning of the world.
Thirdly, the lack of R18+ in Australia is an ENTIRELY different matter. The OFLC supports an R18+ rating for games, but it is the politicians (Attourney Generals to be precise) who decide if that rating comes into law. In 2002 the AGs met to discuss the introduction of an 18+ rating for games, but all AGs need to be in agreence for things like that to be law, and because the one from South Australia is a conservative Anglican bishop, he refused to vote yes despite being advised to.
An example would be: Food that is packaged with the warning that it was produced along with other products that contain nuts. It's a safety precation to keep the consumer from being harmed and the company from being sued.
I say make the producers responsible for their own products content. And fine them if they don't.
As always...thats just my oppinion and oppinions vary.