As of next month, officials in the Canadian province of New Brunswick will require video game retailers to be licensed. The move is intended to keep violent games away from younger players.

As reported by local newspaper the Times and Transcript, the new regulation will make it easier for inspectors to ensure that the game shops are complying with ESRB ratings at point of sale. DVD sellers are already subject to licensing in the province. Lisa Harrity, a spokeswoman for New Brunswick Public Safety Department, commented:

We license and regulate the retailers only. Up until now, this did not include videogames... [The ESRB provides] a video game rating system that's used throughout North America. The issue is ensuring that our retailers are complying.

GP: This system would be unworkable in the United States. Here, court decisions have held that it is unconstitutional to base government enforcement actions on a private standard such as the ESRB ratings.

While the addition of rating summaries may head off some of the ratings-focused legislation currently under consideration by Congress, the reaction to yesterday's ESRB announcement was distinctly mixed.

GameSpot's Brendan Sinclair writes that some of the new summaries contain plot spoilers:

Consumers using the content descriptors to make decisions about games they will play themselves should be wary... The ESRB write-ups can also include details of plot twists and other spoilers. One line from the Resistance 2 write-up... reveals a significant plot detail from a climactic moment of the game. Fallout 3 is another title with a key revelation included in the summary.

"The primary goal of our new rating summaries is to give further aid to parents in making informed game choices for their children," an ESRB representative told GameSpot. "The summaries highlight content that factored into to the rating assignment, and the intent is always to have them do so without needlessly revealing 'spoilers.'"

Meanwhile, Joystiq's Alexander Sliwinski screams, too much information!:

The ESRB is going down the BBFC's road of being overly descriptive in its content ratings and thus opening itself up to the inevitable, context-lacking descriptions of things like "implied child rape" and lesbian alien sex...

We're totally going to make a game out of this. Try covering up the game titles and matching them with the content summary blurbs!

Brian Crecente of Kotaku was generally positive about the ESRB's new plan, but had a worry, too:

While the [CoD] World at War description seems spot on, I do wonder who will end up writing these once the system has been in place for awhile. Hopefully not the publishers.

GP: The view here is that the rating summaries are a smart move on two fronts: they provide parents with more information and offer the ESRB a defense against being legislated. Hopefully, they will address the spoiler issue going forward.

Senators Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) have praised a new ratings supplement announced by the ESRB today. Both senators have been harsh critics of the video game industry in the past, lending extra weight to their support for the inititiative, which the ESRB is calling “rating summaries.”

The summaries, which provide additional detail on game ratings, can be accessed via the ESRB website or through sites which host the ESRB widget (like the one in GP's sidebar). The ESRB's new mobile site allows parents to check the summaries in real-time while making game purchasing decisions. The new rating summaries go into effect today and apply to all games rated after July 1, 2008.

Of the enhancement, ESRB president Patricia Vance said:

Parents can always use more help when making choices as to which games are right for their children. With our new rating summaries, which provide exclusive and unprecedented insight into the nature of the content that triggered a given rating assignment, parents will be that much more empowered in making those choices.

Sen. Clinton said:

This new supplement to the ratings is a real gift for parents as we head into this holiday season.  Parents need all the information they can get to make more informed decisions about what’s appropriate for their children.  These new rating summaries offer more helpful information than ever before to help parents to get involved and get informed.

While Sen. Lieberman added:

For well over a decade I have called upon the video game industry to inform consumers about the content in video games so they could make the right choices for their children.  One result was the creation of the ESRB rating system... The ESRB has now taken consumer education one step further with their new rating summaries, which provide a greater level of detail about game content to help parents be even more prepared to make informed game selections for their children.  I applaud the ESRB for taking this proactive step to inform video game consumers.

Also on board are National PTA president Jan Harp Domene and Dr. David Walsh of the National Institute on Media and the Family, a frequent game industry critic.

Check out Far Cry 2's ESRB page for an example of the new rating summaries.

GP: This is a smart move by the increasingly proactive ESRB. The rating summaries certainly can't hurt and the backing of Hillary and Lieberman may assist in heading off a pair of bills presently in Congress which seek to bring "truth" to video game ratings.

In unusually strong language, the editorial staff of video site GameTrailers.com has condemned the ESRB for forcing the removal of Fallout 3 trailers last week.

The comments were made in a podcast released Friday. GameTrailers editor-in-chief Shane Satterfield (left) and staffer "Grumpy" ripped the ESRB which, in addition to rating game content, enforces the industry's advertising standards.

The segment on the ESRB starts just after the 26-minute mark of the podcast. Here's a sample:

Shane: You may wonder why all the trailers ever released for Fallout 3 were removed from GameTrailers.com. Well the reason that happened is because of our good pals at the ESRB.

Grumpy: Wankers! ...I am just absolutely flabbergasted about the ESRB. They're a bunch of bleepwads sitting in Washington.

Shane: Hear, hear!

Grumpy: ...they get publishers to pull video footage. They assisted in getting the Fallout 3 ads taken out of Washington because some dumb bleepwit... on a bus got upset that they were showing images of decimated Washington...

Shane: Never watched a movie before!

Grumpy: Exactly. It's a futuristic, post-apocalyptic game. I am so sick of this nanny state... they are not a government organization. They are a body made up of unqualified nincompoops... unfortunately, they're taking the nanny state to the nth degree... They make the FCC look like a bunch of broad-minded, non-censorship individuals... It sucks that Bethesda had to pull all this Fallout 3 stuff, because it was bleeping good media...

Shane: All age-gated...

Grumpy: ...nobody could get at it. But because some little toe-rag at ESRB decides to get pissed off about something, all that good work is gone... Good job, Bethesda. It sucks that they have to kowtow to the ESRB...

Shane: I hate the ESRB... The week before that we had gotten an exclusive on a trailer... suddenly we get a call... and the publisher is telling us to take it down because of the ESRB... The ESRB can only regulate media that the publishers send us. Anything that we create in-house, as GameTrailers, they can't touch... we'll make our own violent-as-hell trailer that they can't do anything about. So we did. We put it up, it was huge... then we get a call from publisher X [who said] "...the ESRB is putting pressure on us and so that bleep is going to run downhill to where we can't work with you guys unless you do what the ESRB says" ...they are like the frickin' Mafia... These people have totally gone like a frickin' power trip...

GP: Thanks to GP reader Yukimura for the tip.

UPDATE: The ESRB has declined to comment on this story.

If you thought being permanently disbarred would cause Jack Thompson to ride off into the sunset, guess again.

The ex-attorney is currently seeing fire and damnation in Bethesda's recent recall of Fallout 3 trailer videos. A rambling letter from Thompson to the Federal Trade Commission accuses the ESRB of duplicity in the enforcement of its advertising guidelines:

The ESRB’s [advertising] Principles and Guidelines are not intended to protect the public.  They are obviously intended to protect the video game industry from the public backlash prior to a hyperviolent game’s commercial release.   The ESRB, by allowing such violence in games but not in the advertising is institutionally mandating the cloaking of a game’s real content from the public in advertising.

Thus, the ESRB is actively using its “watchdog” muscle to intimidate game developers into participating in the ESRB’s long-standing shell game by which it has tried to hoodwink Congress and the American people into thinking that the video game rating system is working, that the ratings are reliable, and that minors are being protected from the sale of “Mature” games... 

And, even though Take-Two has zilch to do with Fallout 3, Thompson cannot resist taking a shot at the GTA publisher:

Take-Two, for example, knows that if it adhered to “truth in advertising,” most of its Grand Theft Auto games never would have made it out of the warehouse.  Take-Two has figured out how to collaborate with the ESRB in this shell game by which false advertising cloaks the real nature of their games until the games are released, and then it is too late...

 

Bethesda’s only sin was that it advertised truthfully what its game Fallout 3 is all about.  The ESRB’s idiotic but telling response has fashioned a noose that I expect either the FTC or Congress to slip around the ESRB’s neck...

Full letter after the jump...

Sites which host game footage were advised by Bethesda yesterday that they must take down any trailers for Fallout 3.

With the highly-anticipated, M-rated game launching today, the move is ill-timed, to say the least. Maximum PC cites an e-mail from Bethesda VP Pete Hines:

In connection with ESRB's advertising guidelines, you are instructed to remove immediately any of our Fallout 3 trailers from your website, pending further notice.

Meanwhile, Edge Online speculates that a Fallout 3 trailer which shows an adversary's head exploding in slo-mo, might be at fault.

The ESRB maintains and enforces guidelines for game advertising. The content rating organization has occasionally intervened with game trailers in the past.

Kotaku reports that the violence level in Midway's upcoming Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe has been toned down in order to earn a T (13 and older) rating from the ESRB.

If so, the move is clearly intended to boost sales, since an M rating would make some parents think twice about buying the game.

With Midway in dire financial straits, it's hard to argue with the decision.

Some gamers, however, are lamenting the fact that a very stylistic fatal move involving the Joker has been edited. You can check out the Joker fatality in the video at left from this year's Leipzig game conference.

From Kotaku's Michael McWhertor:

[MK vs DC has] been changed up a bit, toned down to just slightly less than awesome to secure that highly coveted T-rating that Midway and Warner Bros. are so adamant about. In the latest build, Joker still whips out his prank gun, a "BANG!" flag unfurling. Unfortunately, you won't see the follow up of Joker shooting someone in the face; that actually happens off screen now, the headshot safely out of sight...

Sure, it's disappointing — Joker's original finishing move was one of the best we've ever seen — but the game would simply not exist with an M-rating.

Sega, publisher of the upcoming MadWorld, is working closely with the ESRB on the bloody game's content, according to a report on MTV Multiplayer.

Sega's goal, of course, is to avoid a sales-killing Adults Only rating. It's more or less a given that black-and-white (and red) MadWorld will be tagged with at least an M rating in the United States.

Of the cooperation, MTV Multiplayer's Patrick Klepek writes:

Sega is working closely with the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to ensure the game receives just an M rating, they told me. The ESRB receives new builds on a regular basis and Sega notes their feedback. Sega wants them to feel “part of the process” of developing “MadWorld” and isn’t looking to surprise them...

 

But don’t let the ESRB’s involvement make you nervous; “MadWorld” is plenty violent right now. It looks like “Sin City” was bathed in a bucket of blood.

As GamePolitics reported in August, Sega is similarly working with the BBFC on smoothing over MadWorld's path to a successful U.K. release. It's unclear, however, whether MadWorld will see release in other violence-sensitive markets, including Japan, Germany and Australia.

Although MadWorld is not scheduled for release until March, the game has already been the subject of at least one call for a ban.

If the entire front cover of a video game box was covered by an age rating, do you think parents might notice?

A post over at GoNintendo shows what might be a new trend of plus-sized game ratings in Germany. An illustration at GoNintendo shows poor SpongeBob mostly obscured by the game's USK (Germany’s software rating organization) rating.

Curious, we checked out Nintendo’s German website and browsed through over three hundred games. We found only two that had the enlarged USK ratings: Wario Land and a math game for the DS. The rest were no larger than your run-of-the-mill ESRB, PEGI, or BBFC rating. 

Unless they've been playing too much real-life beer pong, GamePolitics readers will likely recall the recent flap over the Wii-ware title formerly known as Beer Pong.

Released this week with an E rating, the renamed Pong Toss from JV Games sparked earlier protests from educators as well as a call from Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (D) for the ESRB to re-rate the game as Adults Only.

Time has now bellied up to the bar to offer own examination of the Beer Pong controversy and finds that it was predictable given concerns over binge drinking:

Perhaps, in retrospect, JV Games should have seen this coming. After all, drinking games and video games may be two of college-kids' favorite pasttimes, but they are also a source of constant complaints from their middle-aged parents...

 

The controversy isn't entirely surprising. The point of beer pong is to get your friends drunk... Last fall, Georgetown University banned beer-pong... The University of Pennsylvania, Yale University, University of Massachusetts at Amherst and Tufts University have also banned drinking games.

 

The anti-pong activism strikes JV Games' [co-owner Jag] Jaegar as somewhat fruitless. As long as students "have access to alcohol, they will create drinking games out of any activity," he says. More to the point, if students have access to alcohol, they'll drink it — no games necessary.

The ESA, which represents North American video game publishers, has released its 2008 Annual Report.

Ben Kuchera of Ars Technica provides a nice summary of the business and legislative highlights.

In reading the ESA report, we were most struck by the sheer volume of legislative efforts directed at video games on both the state and federal level. Many of these we were aware of and reported on here at GamePolitics. A few others flew under the media radar. Here's the state list:

• Colorado: The ESA persuaded the Denver transit company not to ban M-rated game ads on buses
• Connecticut: tax incentives were approved for video game production
• Delaware: legislation directed at point-of-sale died in committee
• Florida: approved financial incentives for game development
• Indiana: game legislation died in committee
• Massachusetts: game legislation is stalled in committee
• Mississippi: game legislation died in committee
• Missouri: game legislation died in committee
• New Jersey: game legislation died in committee
• New York: 2007 bills passed Assembly & Senate, but a joint version was not finalized (in 2008, however, NY adopted a less restrictive video game law)
• New Mexico: "No Child Left Inside" act would have levied a 1% tax on games but failed to pass
• North Carolina: video game legislation carried over into 2008 session
• North Carolina: tax incentive bill introduced (but recently defeated)
• Oklahoma: bill requiring written notice to buyers that games contain violent content carried over to 2008 session
• Oregon: video game legislation stuck in committee
• Puerto Rico: video game legislation carried over into 2008 session
• Puerto Rico: tax on games to fund recreation programs stuck in committee
• Tennessee: legislation introduced to study effects of violent media
• Texas: tax incentives passed for game devs (although ESA report fails to mention content restrictions on such funding)
• Utah: video game legislation died in committee as did a resolution urging the state A.G. to file amicus briefs in other states where the game biz was challenging legislation
• Wisconsin: a 1% game tax is under consideration

On the federal level, the ESA cites four bills introduced in both the House and Senate. Also mentioned are the Annual Video Game Report Card issued in Washington, D.C. by the National Institute on Media and the Family as well as presidential candidate Mitt Romney's "ocean of filth" TV spot decrying mature content in games.

The ESA also recounts a number of parental awareness partnerships forged by the ESRB with state elected officials.

As GamePolitics reported last month, Sen. Thomas Duane (D) was the lone member of the New York State Senate to vote against a video game bill that was eventually signed into law by Gov. David Paterson. The measure, sponsored by Sen. Andrew Lanza (R) was approved by a 61-1 margin in the New York Senate.

An enterprising GP reader who happens to be a New York resident (and who wishes to remain nameless) wrote to the State Senator regarding his stance on the legislation:

Dear Sen. Duane

 

...I would like to congratulate you on your lone opposition vote on the above referenced bill... As informed citizens are aware, this law addresses none of the issues associated with video games, redundantly mandates provisions that are already in place such as per product industry ratings and console parental controls, establishes yet another toothless advisory committee, and likely constitutes a violation of the First Amendment...

 

I welcome government efforts in the form of education for parents, but do not welcome intrusive government efforts to usurp parents' role as arbiter of their children's exposure to mass media.

Dear Mr. [GP reader]:

 

...Senator Duane shares many of your concerns about S.6401-A.  He recognizes that there is already an effective, voluntary [ESRB] rating system in place... and that parental controls are available on all current video game consoles.  Parents should determine which games their children have access to and the marketplace should decide which games sell and which do not.  

 

Like you, Senator Duane questions this bill's constitutionality and points to the fact that similar bills have been struck down in other jurisdictions.  He regrets that he was the lone voice in dissent on this matter.

GP: It's great to see gamers involving themselves in the political process and even better to see an elected official who writes back with something more than a form letter.

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) yesterday introduced a bill in the United States Senate which would:

...prohibit the distribution or sale of video games that do not have age-based content rating labels [and]  prohibit the sale or rental of video games with adult content ratings to minors...

The full text of the bill, S.3315 is not yet available on the Senate's legislative website. Thus far the bill has no co-sponsers. The measure has been referred to the Senate's Committe on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

GamePolitics has received unconfirmed word that Wicker's bill is the Senate version of the Video Games Rating Enforcement Act introduced in the House by Reps. Jim Matheson (D-UT) and Lee Terry (R-KS) earlier this year.

Wicker, a longtime Congressman, was appointed to his Senate seat by Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour on New Year's Eve to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Sen. Trent Lott. Perhaps not surprisingly, Wicker is running for election. He must face Mississippi voters in November in a special election to fill out the rest of Trent Lott's term.

(note: this PTC secret shopper survey is not related to the one conducted by Baltimore's ABC-2 that GamePolitics has reported on over the past couple of days)

Watchdog group the Parents Television Council has issued a secret shopper report in which video game retailers fared noticeably worse than in results issued by the Federal Trade Commission in April.

Overall, the PTC claims that game retailers sold M-rated titles to underage buyers 36% of the time. As reported by GamePolitics, the FTC's secret shoppers succeeded in buying M-rated games at only a 20% rate.

As in the the FTC study, GameStop and Best Buy did very well, according to the PTC. Both retailers sold to underage buyers just 8% of the time. Circuit City (60%), K-Mart (50%), Hollywood Video (50%) and various local and regional stores (47%) compiled the worst results.

PTC president Tim Winter (left) was harshly critical of the video game industry in the PTC's press release:

...a disturbing percentage of video game retailers are failing to prevent America’s children from purchasing violent and sexually graphic video games.  Any failure rate is problematic, but the failure rate we’re seeing is downright pathetic.  Similar to age restrictions on alcohol, tobacco, pornography and other products that are potentially harmful to children, parents deserve a reasonable expectation that age restrictions for adult entertainment products will be enforced at the retail level.

 

It is outrageous that retailers are not exercising greater responsibility, and even more absurd that there are no meaningful consequences for those retailers who ignore their industry’s own age restriction policies... 

 

The video game industry would have us believe that the 1/5 failure rate as reported by the FTC is acceptable and that parents need not worry.  Our analysis shows a 1/3 failure rate.  Perhaps the retailers felt the pressure was off after the FTC’s report was published... While we applaud Game Stop and Best Buy for their commitment to abide by their corporate age restriction policies, the other retailers should be ashamed and must act immediately to improve.

Winter also used the report as a platform to support new legislation introduced by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS). The bill targets video game ratings. GamePolitics coverage of the bill is upcoming.

Here is the data on various retailers as issued by the PTC (updated, as Blockbuster was left off of their original version):

MCVUK writes that Entertainment Software Association CEO Michael Gallagher (left) endorsed the Pan-European Game Information (PEGI) rating system over that of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) during last week's state-of-the-industry speech at E3 in Los Angeles.

From the MCVUK report:

As part of his keynote speech, Gallagher was critical of the Byron Report’s highly controversial backing of the BBFC system – and made it clear that the Entertainment Software Association believes it was the wrong way to go.

MCVUK is referring to this section of the Gallagher speech:

Friends and allies across the globe are facing their own challenges. Our success as a business and entertainment medium has caught the attention and the interest of foreign regulators and governments. Earlier this year we saw the release of the Byron Report, which praised the ESRB's work with retailers to help enforce sales restrictions to minors. We are now seeing a robust debate between the BBFC and PEGI. And while this is a European question requiring a European solution, our American experience proves that industry self-regulation is the best way to provide parents the information they need to make appropriate purchasing decisions.

Frankly, we're not reading Gallagher's remarks as expressing criticism of the Byron Review, although the ESA head's preference for self-regulation is clear. On the other hand, it would be natural for the ESA to back PEGI, as its UK game industry counterparts, including publishers' group ELSPA, have expressed a clear distaste for handing game rating responsibilities over to the BBFC.

We've got a request in to the ESA for clarification on Gallagher's view. In the meantime, you can read the full text of Gallagher's E3 speech here.

Q: Who sponsored New York's video game law?

A: There were two identical versions, one in the NY State Assembly and another in the NY State Senate. The Assembly version (A.11717) was sponsorsed by Assemblyman Joseph Lentol (D, Brooklyn). The Senate version (S.6401-A) was sponsored by Sen. Andrew Lanza (R, Staten Island).

Q. How was it voted on in the legislature?

A. The Assembly version was passed 137-1. The Senate version passed 61-1.

Q. How did the bill get to be law?

A. After approval by the Assembly and Senate, Gov. David Paterson (D) signed it into law on July 22nd.

Q. Is this the same legislation that former Gov. Spitzer was favoring before his hooker incident cost him his job?

A. No. The bill under consideration last year would have made selling an M-rated game to a minor a felony crime. There is no such provision in this law.

Q. What does the law require?

A. The law requires:

• Video games sold by retailers in New York State which have a "standardized" and "commonly used" (e.g., ESRB)  rating must display that rating on the outside of their packaging.
• New console systems sold in NY State must have parental controls
• A 16-member advisory council, appointed by the Governor, will a.) study the relationship between violent media and youth violence b.) evaluate the effectiveness of the ESRB rating system and make recommendations concerning it c.) study the potential of creating a parent-teacher violence awareness program to identify and assist potentially violent student

Q: Does the law apply to games sold online as well as in retail stores?

A: No. Although Sen. Lanza's website initially claimed that it did, a reading of the legislation shows that "mail order" businesses, which under NY law include online retailers, are exempt from the rating requirements. GamePolitics contacted Sen. Lanza's staff, which said that the online comment was a mistake and does NOT apply. The law applies ONLY to so-called "brick and mortar" retailers.

Q: Are the current ESRB ratings & content descriptors sufficient to meet the requirements of the law?

A: Yes. As long as a video game available at retail displays an ESRB rating and its associated content descriptors (and they already do), the retailer is in compliance.

Q. What about small publishers or independently created games which are not submitted for an ESRB rating?

A. As long as they are sold via online, no problem. They aren't required to be rated.

Q. Are used games subject to the law?

Is New York's video game law necessary?

Is it constitutional?

Dr. Michael Rich, Director of the Center for Media and Child Health at Harvard Medical School, and Adam Thierer, Senior Fellow at the Progress & Freedom Foundation in Washington, D.C., squared off on the Bloomberg network to debate the merits of the New York law signed last night by Gov. David Paterson.

Thierer believes the law is unnecessary and will be struck down as unconstitutional. Dr. Rich worries about the training abilities of games in relation to violence and wants social science injected into the game rating process.

GP: We agree that the New York law is unnecessary. However, if the video game industry doesn't challenge it - and it's not at all clear that they will - then there will be no finding that it is unconstitutional.

So, why wouldn't the game biz challenge the law?

Because it has no effect on their bottom line. The content ratings and parental controls mandated by the law are already in place. While the industry might argue that the state is compelling this sort of speech, it's an argument that exists in a somewhat theoretical realm. In practice, the industry is already meeting the requirements. Game publishers and retailers would rather do business than argue the finer points of constitutional law. Moreover, for the game biz there's a political downside to fighting this part of the law. Doing so would be tantamount to saying, "Yes, we have ratings and parental controls, but we might want to take them away someday." Such a position would not be comforting to parents and would provide ammunition to critics. 

The law's mandated advisory council on video game violence enjoys First Amendment rights of its own. People, government bureaucrats included, are free to study and discuss whatever they like. Besides, the video game publishers and retailers will occupy two of the 16 seats on the advisory council.

As to Dr. Rich, while he may have desire to include social science in game ratings, that is not part of the New York law. The statute gives New York no power whatsoever over the ESRB rating process.

And, we note, the announcer gets it completely wrong in his opening when he says that the law includes "tough fines for retailers who sell adult games to kids." There's nothing like that in the legislation.

Adam Thierer lays out his position in detail at the Technology Liberation Front.

Baltimore's ABC-2 conducted a ratings sting recently at local retail stores. In the first segment, the station said that Best Buy had a perfect record, turning away the station's 15-year-old secret shopper in all three of his attempts to purchase Devil May Cry 4, Bioshock and Call of Duty 4.

Target, however, did very poorly, not stopping the young man on any of his three tries at its stores. When informed of the chain's poor showing, Target rep Sonja Pothen told ABC-2:

While it's unfortunate to learn about the findings from this study, it sounds like we have an opportunity to encourage these stores to conduct training we've outlined regarding our video games sales policy.

ABC-2's results at GameStop and Wal-Mart are to be aired in a second segment.

There is a good deal of buzz this week surrounding video game-oriented legislation passed overwhelmingly last month by the New York state legislature. New York Gov. David Paterson (left) must decide by July 23rd whether he will sign the bill into law or let it die.

In a story broken by GamePolitics on June 24th, we reported that the NY State Senate passed, by a 61-1 vote, Sen. Andrew Lanza's bill which:

• requires that games carry a rating
• requires games consoles to have parental controls
• establishes a 16-member advisory council on media violence

While the various segments of the video game industry have taken no unified position to date, the Binghampton Press details opposition to the bill from some unusual corners.

Grover Nordquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform, said:

This is a feel-good piece of legislation that really doesn't so anything.

GP: That's certainly true (see: NY Video Game Bill Barks, Doesn't Bite)

Robert Perry of the New York chapter of the ACLU, added:

This bill would have the state regulating constitutionally protected speech. The courts will not permit that.

GP: Since the bill doesn't restrict content or sales based on content, we're assuming that the ACLU's Perry is referring to the requirement that games be labeled with a rating, which they already are on a voluntary basis.

Derek Hunter of the Media Freedom Project said:

The bill is unnecessary. The video-game industry is praised as the best at policing itself. They have a great ratings system.

Adam Thierer, writing for the Tech Liberation Front, calls the bill "unnecessary, unworkable, and unconstitutional" in an open letter to Gov. Paterson.

Meanwhile, Jason Della Rocca, executive director of the International Game Developers Association, has apparently issued an alert to IGDA members based in New York, calling upon them to contact the Guv in opposition to the bill.

The key piece of the puzzle will be whether the ESA decides to challenge the law's constitutionality. The game publishers' trade group, busy with E3 this week, has not said what it plans to do in that regard. Their most likely response will be to wait and see whether the Governor signs the bill into law. In the meantime they have urged VGVN members to write the Governor in opposition.

Comments made by the Entertainment Merchants Association, however, give the impression that video game retailers believe they can live with the law's provisions:

The bill is unnecessary and seeks to solve a problem that does not exist. But we do not anticipate that video game software retailers will have a problem complying with its requirements. (It is important to note that NY law already requires DVD packages to display the rating of the movie.)

Earlier this week GamePolitics reported on Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's concerns over upcoming Wii-ware title Beer Pong.

Blumenthal criticized the game for encouraging underage drinking and slammed the ESRB for not assigning Beer Pong (since renamed to Pong Toss) an Adults Only rating.

Shelly Sindland of Connecticut Fox News affiliate WTIC-61 has a video report, including additional comments from the A.G.

 Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (D) charged today that the ESRB is "under the influence" when it comes to depictions of alcohol use in video games.

His comments were prompted by Beer Pong, from JV Games. As reported by GamePolitics, the title has previously come under fire from education and substance abuse organizations. In response to those concerns, the game has recently been renamed as Pong Toss (although JV's website still lists it under the original title).

Blumenthal, mentioned as a potential gubernatorial candidate, issued a press release calling on the ESRB to change the rating of Beer Pong from T (13+) to what the AG refers to as "adult" (presumably the ESRB's Adults Only rating). The A.G. is quoted in the press release: 

The rating T 13+ -- suitable for teens 13 and older -- is absolutely inappropriate. The video game rating board is under the influence -- rating frat party video drinking games suitable for minors. Even as JV Games agrees to alter its Beer Pong video game, both it and the rating board stubbornly deny the damaging influence of alcohol depiction in video games.

 

The ESRB astonishingly downplays and dismisses alcohol depiction in rating the suitability of video games for minors. Parents have the first and last say over their children’s games -- but they deserve to know all of the facts. The ESRB, claiming to consider age suitability in its ratings, has a moral and ethical responsibility to consider all potentially damaging material in the products it rates.

 

This issue is urgent because the 'Frat Party Ganes' promoted by JV Games may soon offer others in this planned series.

ESRB spokesman Eliot Mizrachi responded to Blumenthal's criticism of the video game industry rating board in a statement:

Although we respect Attorney General Blumenthal’s right to disagree, the fact is that ESRB’s role is not that of censor.  Our job is to impartially and consistently label content about which there may be a diversity of views so consumers can make informed choices for themselves and their families. 

 

‘Pong Toss’ involves nothing more than players tossing virtual ping-pong balls into plastic cups, which hardly qualifies it for our most restrictive rating of AO (Adults Only 18+)... 

In addition, GamePolitics has obtained a copy of a June 12th letter from ESRB President Patricia Vance to Attorney General Blumenthal on the Beer Pong issue. It reads in part:

While the assignment of ratings does require that judgments be made about the age-appropriateness of different types of content, it would be improper to assign ratings solely based on the depiction of behavior which may be understandably discouraged by society at large. To illustrate, many car racing games require players to barrel down city streets at high speeds – illegal behavior that certainly should not be encouraged... Still, none of this changes the fact that racing games... tend to be rated E... That actions in a game might, in the real world, be associated with minimum age requirements or be generally discouraged does not, in and of itself, relegate that game to the most restrictive ESRB rating category, Adults Only. Such contextual elements are weighed in the ratings process, however...

 

This title is being made available solely as WiiWare, which means it will not be available at retail, but may be downloaded, for a fee, directly through the Wii console. WiiWare games, available by the hundreds, rarely have marketing or advertising associated with them, and typically draw scant attention. Given this, our concern is that a greater number of consumers (including the age group about which you are most concerned) will be made aware of this game and resolve to play it as a result of publicized statements of advocacy groups and others. Ironically, this is likely to result in more rather than less consumers being drawn to this game, particularly those very minors all of us seek to protect.

Dr. David Walsh, president of the National Institute on Media and the Family, is the subject of an  interview in the July issue of Game Informer.

The politically-connected Walsh, whose organization delivers its Annual Video Game Report Card each holiday season, is described by the magazine as "one of gaming's most thoughtful and reasoned critics." He dishes on a number of topics, including:

• ESRB ratings (watchdog-ish, cautiously supportive)
• his criticism of the Grand Theft Childhood book (disagrees with its premise)
• his thoughts on video game legislation (opposes censorship)
• Jack Thompson (publicly distanced himself from Thompson)

Regarding legislation, Walsh told GI:

I'm not in favor of censorship. Once we delegate to the government what we can and can't say and freedom of expression - and video games are a form of expression - that's a very slippery slope. I think government can have a role. I think the role they've been playing is the "bully pulpit" to raise awareness.

As to Thompson, Walsh said:

Extreme positions create a lot of heat but very little light. Television and talk radio love extreme positions. So there are folks out there who do not hesitate to take positions that they can't defend. You get the these food fights going on that talk radio loves, but don't really advance our knowledge and understanding whatsoever. It got to the point where I had to publlcily distance myself from Jack Thompson. 

Distance himself, indeed.

The high-profile split with Thompson came in October, 2005. The story was broken by GamePolitics, and set Internet tongues wagging for days. Read Walsh's letter breaking ties with Thompson here.

Scott Miller, head of 3D Realms, told Next Generation that he views the upcoming E3 Expo as "irrelevant".

3D Realms, of course, owns perhaps the most vapory vaporware game property of all time, Duke Nukem Forever. Of the long-awaited DNF, Miller commented:

Development is swimming along nicely. Seriously nicely.
 

But E3 show-goers won't be seeing Duke. Miller told Next Gen:

It's just that we view E3 as irrelevant nowadays.  In fact, I wasn't even aware it was coming up.

GP: It's a safe bet that Miller is not a favorite of the video game industry establishment these days. Readers may recall that in 2007 the 3D Realms boss got into a bit of a nasty exchange with ESRB president Patricia Vance.

The Coalition of Entertainment Retail Trade Associations has issued a press release declaring June to be “Entertainment Ratings and Labeling Awareness Month.”

CERTA, which includes the Entertainment Merchants Association, a trade group representing video game retailers, hopes to remind parents to check ratings on movies and video games as well as parental advisories on music.

The steep decline in sales of M-rated games to underage buyers reported this morning by the Federal Trade Commission is a clear victory for the video game industry on both the political and public relations fronts.

Taking a victory lap is the organization responsible for operating the video game industry's rating system, the ESRB. Via press release, ESRB president Patricia Vance commented on today's FTC report:
 

Video game retailers have clearly stepped up their efforts to enforce their store policies, and they deserve recognition for these outstanding results.  We commend and applaud retailers for their strong support of the ESRB ratings, and will continue working with them to help ensure that these levels of compliance are sustained if not further increased.

The ESA, representing US video game publishers, declined to comment, referring us instead to the ESRB.

Bo Andersen, president of the Entertainment Merchants Association, a trade group representing a number of video game retailers, also weighed in. For retailers, the report is a mixed bag. They scored superb numbers on game rating enforcement, but were criticized by the FTC for sales of R-rated and unrated DVDs to underage buyers. Andersen said:
 

Retailers don’t want children to be able to purchase or rent video games and DVDs that their parents do not want them to have. As a result, they have made real and significant investments in enforcing the voluntary video game and motion picture ratings in their stores. The FTC’s latest ‘undercover shopper’ survey demonstrates that these investments are producing strong results... While we are pleased with the progress that has been made in ratings enforcement, retailers still are not where they want to be as an industry.

On the consumer side, Hal Halpin, president of the Entertainment Consumers Association, remarked:
 

This is an extraordinary accomplishment from the nation's leading interactive entertainment retailers, as it clearly shows their increased commitment of keeping mature-rated games out of children's hands. Perhaps most impressive is the incredible reversal in their failure rate over such a short period of time and with a comparatively new rating system.

This is truly a vindication for video game merchants who have been falsely damned by anti-game advocates and special interest groups, who now don’t have a leg to stand on.

GamePolitics also offered several high-profile game industry critics and watchdog groups an opportunity to comment. So far we've not heard back from the Parents Television Council, the National Institute on Media & the Family or California State Sen. Leland Yee. There was one critic we did hear from, though...

Despite the eye-popping retail enforcement numbers, anti-game activist Jack Thompson refused to give credit to the video game industry. Instead, he credited... Jack Thompson:
 

I'm more than happy to take credit for the improvement. The threat of legislation has improved performance, not some altruism on the part of the Strauss Zelnick's [or] the industry. To America's parents: Jack Thompson is delighted to have helped.

Of course, Thompson would have been all over the FTC numbers had they been unfavorable to the video game industry. Classy, Jack...

UPDATE: Dr. David Walsh of the National Institute on Media & the Family has now weighed in. NIMF claims a bit of the credit as well:
 

The results of the [FTC's] latest undercover survey are good news for retailers and the [ESRB], but most of all for parents... With its consistent pressure on the video game industry, [NIMF] played a significant role in improving ratings enforcement and education. Similar to our... Video Game Report Cards, the FTC survey shows that specialty retailers, such as GameStop, continue to lead in enforcement and the rental companies need to step up their efforts...

Full Disclosure Dept: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics…

A Minnesota Congresswoman has thrown her support behind the Annual Video Game Report Card issued this week by Dr. David Walsh and the National Institute on Media and the Family. 

Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) stood with Walsh on Tuesday while the NIMF executive director introduced this year's Report Card to the media. Also on hand were Senators Joe Lieberman (D-CT) and Betty Klobuchar (D-MN).

Speaking of the NIMF effort, McCollum said:
 

The gaming industry has clearly failed to learn its lesson here: The pattern of inappropriate content hidden in Grand Theft Auto and Manhunt is a violation of parents’ and families’ trust.

The first step to controlling inappropriate content is for the industry to earn that trust back.

To convince us they’re serious about protecting our kids from age-inappropriate content, the gaming industry should quickly embrace this Report Card’s recommendations to adopt a clearer, more universal ratings system, to always disclose content unsuitable for children, and to never market clearly adult games to younger audiences – either overtly or through hidden content revealed in convenient online "leaks."

McCollum, who parried with ESRB president Patricia Vance at NIMF's 2006 Video Game Summit, also announced this week that she will co-sponsor the Video Game Violence and Sexual Content Act of 2007. That bill, introduced by Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA) in July, would require the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to report to Congress on the effectiveness of the ESRB content rating system.

Rep. McCollum's full remarks here.

Dr. David Walsh (left) of the National Institute on Media & the Family issued his 12th Annual Video Game Report Card this morning. In doing so he criticized the video game industry for "an ominous backslide on multiple fronts."

Flanked by a pair of U.S. Senators (Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota) as well as  Congresswoman Betty McCollum (D-MN), Walsh awarded an overall grade of C to the game business. The report card explains:
 

Assessing the performance of the gaming industry this year is a difficult task... Console manufacturers, for the most part, seem to understand the importance of making games safe for kids. Microsoft included a timer feature that allows parents to limit their children’s video game playing time, a praiseworthy innovation...

Some software makers made great games that pushed the edge of the envelope in creativity and storytelling. Others, once again, dredged the well of poor taste, with titles like Rockstar’s Manhunt 2 and Eidos Interactive’s Kane & Lynch: Dead Men.

Some game makers also found creative new ways to market adult games on kids, a disgustingly familiar practice over the years. Too few game makers disclose when illegal versions of their games are stolen from their facilities and leaked on the Internet.

Some explanation of "creative new ways to market adult games on [to?] kids" is needed. That's quite an accusatory statement. What games? What companies? What strategies?

The same applies to the statement about leaked games. Is NIMF referring to the notorious Manhunt 2 leak? If so, that was disclosed immediately - by the people who leaked it. In fact, on those rare occasions when a game is leaked, it's always big news in the online game community. Explain, please, NIMF...

National retailers, who did so well on last year's Report Card, got slammed this time around. Big box stores slipped from an "A" to a "D". Meanwhile, game specialty stores moved in the opposite direction, jumping from last year's "F" to a respectable "B". Rental stores, however, flunked. Such dramatic jumps - in either direction - seem a bit odd.

The general category of "Retailer Policies" earned a C+:
 

We were surprised by this year’s surveys... that showed one out of three retailers does not educate its employees on the ESRB ratings. That’s a significant drop from last year. Even more shocking was that only 30 percent of local retailers provided families with information on the game rating system.

The ESRB also received a C+ but, as expected, NIMF did not let the Manhunt 2 controversy pass unnoticed:
 

The Manhunt 2 rating debacle shows that the ESRB needs to change its procedures to close a gaping loophole that some game publishers are all too eager to slip though. The ESRB rating should be based on all of a game’s content and code, locked or unlocked, blurred or unblurred. A game’s rating will be meaningless unless serious steps are taken to prevent games from being unlocked.

NIMF also took the opportunity to renew its call for a universal media content rating system. The Halo-in-church controversy came in for a mention as well:
 

Libraries, schools, churches and other pubic institutions should follow the game’s rating and only allow games appropriate for the age of the youth. By promoting M-rated games, they are undercutting the ESRB’s rating system and undermining parental credibility and authority.

Also included are the results of a lengthy Harris poll on the role of video games in the lives of children. Read the full Report Card here (26-page pdf)...

Opinions on the ESRB’s Adults Only rating have flown fast and furious ever since Manhunt 2’s release was at least temporarily halted by the AO rating the game received in June. Finger-pointing and charges of censorship have been directed by some toward the ESRB, the Big Three console manufacturers, and video game retailers.

GameDaily Biz recently sought comment on the AO controversy from several industry notables as well as Hal Halpin, head of the Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA).  While the ESRB and ESA played “ask your mother, ask your father” and console manufacturers refused to explain their “no AO games” policies, some folks were willing to step to up the plate:

Representing game developers, the IGDA’s Jason Della Rocca:

 If you think that the political fallout from Hot Coffee is fading, think again.

The GTA San Andreas scandal not only continues to be a public relations thorn in the side of the video game industry - it's also an inviting target for politicians.

Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) is no stranger to the Hot Coffee affair. In July, 2005, just as the publicity over the incident was peaking, Upton proposed a resolution in Congress ordering the Federal Trade Commission to look into Hot Coffee. The motion passed 355-21, leading to the FTC's June, 2006 report on the scandal.

Upton, however, was not pleased with the FTC's findings, saying:

"I guess I thought the FTC would have had some more teeth than they apparently have... I'm not at all happy... In essence there are no consequences. None... I would like to have thought that (Take-Two and Rockstar) would have been able to be fined for millions of dollars for the trash they put out across this country."

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.