09
But, think of the children?
Posted under Thrillhouse17, XBL Radio by Thrillhouse17
This past Monday, August 6th, US District Judge Whyte ruled against bill AB 1179, which had been passed in California, October 2005, calling it unconstitutional. This bill would have placed severe restrictions on the sale and rental of certain violent video games to minors, and offenders would have faced fines of up to $1000.
Join me in doing your best Arnold:
“I signed this important measure to ensure that parents are involved in determining which video games are appropriate for their children. The bill I signed would require that violent video games be clearly labeled and not be sold to children under 18 years old. Many of these games are made for adults and choosing games that are appropriate for kids should be a decision made by their parents. I will vigorously defend this law and appeal it to the next level.”
So the ESA, and in turn gamers everywhere, can count this as a victory, right? Well, in a sense. The distribution of video games is going to continue unchanged, with no federal or state regulation — but is this actually going to hurt the quality of games in the long run? I’m going to announce something that conflicts with the typical gamer viewpoint: I’m all for the restriction and controlled distribution of interactive entertainment. Just take this ride with me, and pretend that I make perfect sense.
There are problems with the way games are currently handled and viewed by the public. It’s understandable, as we’re still in the “Wild West”. Video games are relatively new, and are finally being noticed and accepted as a legitimate form of entertainment and revenue. As all mediums before it (cinema, music, comic books), it’s struggling with social hurdles. The timing’s right. For roughly 30 years games have been slowly improving technologically and crying to be taken seriously by the masses, and they’ve almost gotten their wish. This 7+ billion dollars a year industry needs to be controlled and given guidelines, not just to appease media hungry politicians and PTA moms, but in order to qualitatively improve the medium and expand its appeal.
The largest problem with the video game industry is public perception. Children are still seen as the primary customers, which is why when sexually explicit or sadistically violent games are released politicians cry out “Protect the children!” (The day a politician replies “no” to this I’ll give you a dollar). Despite the fact that they are grossly misinformed (the average video game buyer is 38, the average player is 33 and has been gaming for 12 years), the intentions are just. The ESRB does an excellent job rating and describing content, but if no one enforces and regulates who gets what, what purpose have they served? If Little John 12-year-old is still able to freely purchase the M rated “Shoot to Kill”, then what has the ESRB done to help? I know, and agree, that parent’s should take interest in their child’s lives and oversee what they play. But sadly for most of America, and the world, this simply isn’t the case. The public sees games as for kids, remember?
Daddy, he’s trying to jump over her but can’t quite make it. Now he’s chainsawing…
Then one day Little John gets mad at his locker buddies at school. He does the unthinkable, and guns them down. The public, scared and confused that an innocent child performed such a horrific act, wants to know how, what and why. How could he, what made him, and why did he? All are answered when a copy of the M rated “Shoot to Kill” is found among his belongings. We’ve all seen this happen, it’s nothing new. The problem is that like it or not, situations such as these affect the game industry, and us. The ESRB has a rating of AO, but as you know none of the three major console holders will allow a game with that rating. They simply can’t afford to become the public’s target, accused of inspiring who knows what violent act and corrupting our nation’s youth. Manhunt 2 is currently in retail limbo fighting the AO rating, despite the fact that it is both the creator’s, and our, First Amendment Right to play it.
“The Act regulates video games, which, even though mere entertainment, are nonetheless protected by the First Amendment. Expression is not outside the protections of the First Amendment ’simply because it is base and malignant.‘ ” - US District Judge Whyte
This is why this industry needs to show its maturity and allow regulation. Be willing to embrace the M and AO rating and admit that we’re not for kids, not targeting kids, and don’t want kids playing our product. Pass federal regulations (enough of this state by state mess, which would only create 50 different rule sets to abide), simply flat out deny minors of purchasing violent and sexually explicit video games. Doing this would:
1) Prevent video games from being society’s scapegoat. If minors are no longer able to purchase inappropriate games, then games can no longer be blamed for their violent actions. This would:
2) Publicly permit the three console holders to allow AO rated titles. They could proudly appeal to all demographics. Manhunt 2 could be released, maintaining the original artistic integrity, and reach its intended audience. How ridiculous is it that a console manufacturer restricts your gaming choices? It’s like purchasing a DVD player and it not letting you watch unrated movies or porn. (And guess what? The 360 and PS3 are also DVD players, so you can watch people doing it on your kid toy console!) This would:
Why not? NC-17, Unrated DVDs and Porn make billions yearly.
3) Prove once and for all that games are not just for kids, but for all audiences. I may have a TV, but after the kids are done watching Mr. Rogers I’m going to watch some UFC. Just because it caters to the younger crowd doesn’t mean that it’s only for the younger crowd.
4) Improve the quality of games. The M and AO rating don’t simply allow more blood and boobs, they pave the way to truly complex and morally gray stories. The Passion of the Christ and Schindler’s List are both powerful, economically successful, and critically lauded films. Imagine the video game equivalent to those films. It is entirely plausible given the rate of technology’s advances. How powerful would it be if you were a character witnessing and experiencing the Holocaust’s horrors firsthand? Games have the possibility of telling powerful, interactive stories in a way that cinema cannot. Movies are also regulated, distributed in a way so that content reaches the appropriate audience.
5) Make, and force parents into being parents, yet let them choose what is best suited for their child. Gov. Schwarzenegger said “Many of these games are made for adults and choosing games that are appropriate for kids should be a decision made by their parents.” Not allowing the sale to minors would only empower parents, giving them control on what content enters their homes. If parents feel that their children are mature enough to handle violent content, then they can purchase the product for them. The choice is theirs.
This industry has amazing potential that is being hampered by social stigma. Seems that in order to be fully accepted into mainstream society it’ll just have to adhere to rules other mediums have been following for years. We’re almost at that point anyway. I’m still being asked for ID before purchasing any M rated game (although I’m sure it’s mostly due do my youthful good looks). Just take the next step, carve the line in the sand, and benefit because of it.
You can stop pretending I make sense now. Educate yourself.
Great article Bro..but I think to add to that half of the problem is the fact that many parents simply do not care. I was at my local Gamestop when a child no older than 8 walked in and asked his grandfather to buy him scarface. As he went to the counter the Gamestop employee described the content of the game and discussed how the content was not suitable for a minor. The grandfather looked at the kid and said sorry buddy I cant buy you this we better call your mom first. I thought wow thats great…until not 5 min later the same grandpa and kid walk back in and purchase scarface saying his mom said it was o.k. for him to have it. Awestruck I talked to the gamestop employee after the grandpa walked out the store and he told me…Dude it happens all the time.
So it does not matter what rules or laws you have in place unless you make it illegal to sell and or purchase M or AO rated games for a minor. Just like you cant buy beer,or porn, or cigs for the wee ones you should get in trouble for doing the same. But if you do that you step on the big brother line and whos to say whats right for my kids.
As a parent of 4 kids I could go around this subject all day, but what it boils down to when it comes to games, sex, drugs, all that stuff. As a parent how active are you with your kids, do you use games to pacify your kids or do you sit with them and play? Who do your kids talk to? Where do they go?
Its o.k. not to be your childrens friend all the time. Its ok to tell them no. I personally dont think most people should be parents I hear way to often how much trouble kids are as opposed to how much joy they bring. Its a crazy world we live in. But the bottom line is parenting…its all about parenting. Not the laws or rules but the time you take to teach, mold, and love your children. What do you say when you allow a young child to play Scarface? Tell me what redeeming factor can a child take away from that game. none……unless you wishes for your child is for them to become chainsaw wielding drug lords…..
Gui - Obviously you aren’t the typical uninformed parent, as you help host a gaming show. You know what’s violent, you know what’s appropriate, you know what you child should be playing. If every parent was informed and active, then there wouldn’t be a need for regulation. The problem is that there are plenty of parents, like the one you described, that are simply clueless. To them every game is on simple footing, they are just toys for kids. Well, they aren’t!
The easiest comparison is the movie industry. There are movies for each age group and demographic. You have your Disney animated movies for the younger audience, and you have your bloody action saga Kill Bills for the adults. Now imagine no ratings, no regulations, no controls. Little Johnny 12 year old is allowed to simply waltz in and sit down in front of the projector. Parents would be outraged. His violent actions would be blamed on the movie. Studios would quickly backtrack, stop producing this adult entertainment, and all we’d have are animated Disney flicks. This is what’s happening with the gaming industry. Since there is no way to control who gets what, AO rated titles are not permitted. We’ll never have our Kill Bill.
So what if the Government steps in and says that minors are not allowed M and AO rated titles? This is done with cigarettes, alcohol and porn - yet they are 3 of the most lucrative industries in the world. Is this being too ‘big brotherish’ and denying you freedom of choice? No, it is simply regulating the content, ensuring that you engage in age appropriate activities, and giving older gamers the freedom to engage in entertainment that is better suited to them.
No laws are perfect, and a widespread ban to all minors will not be flawless. There would undoubtedly be some seepage, but there is with cigarettes and alcohol as well, yet those are still illegal under certain ages.
The longer the this legal stalemate continues, the more it will hurt us.
True…very true but what I am saying is we live in a society that wants to blame everyone but themselves. Parents need to be liable for there actions. If you know you might pay a fine or do jail time for buying your child an M or oa game I bet you parents would think twice before making an idiotic purchase.
Gui J your on the wrong track in saying that a parent should get jail time if a minor plays a M rated game. For example I’m 16, and I am perfectly fine playing an M rated game. Now your saying my parents should go to jail for buying me that game? The point is it depens on the minor. Now someone like me that is mature enought to put the violence into contexts should be allowed to play mature games. The simple answer is there is no simple answer. Parents won’t get informed enought to know what the hell they are buying. Sorry but the best way for me to convay my point is if I speak to you. Typing this out simply doesn’t show my anoince with this whole topic. So if you want to debate me on this topic or any video game topic try and catch me on Xbox Live via a friends request
Wow. Great arguments here. I agree with both Gui J and Thrillhouse.
In a perfect world, all parents would watch their children’s activities and act like parents. However, I’ve witnessed a world where some parents abandon their children, while others flat out reject them. It is true that too many parents consider parenting a chore instead of a blessing. That’s why responsible beings should only have children. Alas…that is not the case in this country or the next.
The only flaw in Thrillhouse’s agrument is a legal fallacy. The United States Congress cannot mandate INTRA-state commerce. That would completely destroy state rights and a precedent such as that could lead to further degradation of state rights.
Since we live in a democracy, it is important that each state maintain the right to govern it’s own citizens. Thus…we have state courts and on occassion maybe a district judge dealing with these video game laws.
Judge Whyte’s decision to disallow regulation of said type is constitutional correct; however, that doesn’t mean another judge in another state won’t set precedent for gaming law regulation elsewhere.
Congress can however regulate INTER-state commerce in situations of dispute or even for utilitarianistic purposes. Since video games are sold locally in stores, they can’t really do anything to prohibit that.
The only reason drinking and driving are limited are ultimately due to nationally understood standards for the percepted age of an adult. State laws only further buttress these points by introducing bills and passing laws which limit alchohol sold to minors and when a person can legally drive.
If you notice…gambling is illegal in some states and not in others; however the national age adherence of an adult is still strictly upheld. Prostitution of sorts is allowed in Nevada; yet, the national age adherence is still taken into account.
What a person can do is one thing…but what a person can buy is completely different situation. That’s why a national mandate can never be made. It’s up to the states to find a way to control this if regulation is indeed the answer.
I, just like Gui J, think it’s the people that should regulate themselves. If we wait on states to do such things, it will take maybe decades.
I applaud Gamestop and other stores that make that attempt to stop children from buying violent games, but ultimately, it is the parents fault. A child under the age of 15 is not going to have the cash USUALLy to walk into a store and buy a game for themselves. It’s the parents who buy these games and give them to their children.
Instead of worrying about law, how about issuing public awareness commercials instructing people to watch out for what their children play.
Put pressure on actual retailers to make parents sign waivers when picking up said violent games which would then indemnify the publishers and the store if Little John decides to go M-14 crazy at school.
WE NEED TO PUT THE BLAME where it belongs…on the people that buy the games for their kids.
Force your 16 by that time your either a rotten kid or you got your head on straight. Tell me what information is good enough to validate a purchase of scarface for an 8 year old.
Force - I was 16 once, and thought I was fully mature and completely grown up. Well I wasn’t. A lot changes between the ages of 16-20, and you continue to develop. The point of this article wasn’t to discuss at what point are you considered an adult. Currently the legal cutoff is 18, right or wrong, so I simply chose to maintain that precedent.
Liti - Alcohol, Tobacco, Porn, Gambling Age are nationally set to 18 and 21. In theory it could be done to video games as well. (NC-17 is nationally recognized and respected.)I think that it needs to be done at the federal level in order to avoid 50 different scenarios. What if in Illinois you couldn’t buy porn until you were 18, but in Iowa you could at 15? You’d get a lot of state-line jumpers, kids would be getting their hands on adult material, and everything would fall apart. I know that it isn’t as simple as “do it”, as there is a lot of red tape, but in a perfect world, in which everything makes sense, it could and should happen.
I also think FORCE it would be way to harsh to put jail time if someone purchases an adult game for a minor but I hate to say this, we live in a world where 80% of our population is idiots. Unless you make x-treeeeeem laws they wont think less about it. Parents used to be able to spank there kids if they were being bad, but a few idiots can not know the difference between spanking and beating the crap out kids ..now you cant touch your kids without the fear of going to jail. What will happen is it will be illegal to buy an M or ao game for you kid so it forces dumb parents to now take a look at what there kids are playing out of fear for going to jail. It only takes a few idiots to ruin it for everyone including your parents force, who may be very involved in your life. But in the end if strict laws stop one bad kid from playing something that there not supposed to, and if in the future it prevents another school shooting in a place that you may in or your children, is it worth it? I think so……
Jail time might be a bit harsh. California proposed a 1000 dollar fine, which I think is plenty incentive. Now, if you were to fine not just the parent but the retailer as well, then I’m sure that keep things in line. When I worked retail, if I were to sell alcohol to a minor the store wouldn’t get fined (they’d lose their liquor license), I personally would have been fined, which was plenty incentive to ask everyone for ID.
Besides, the average gamer is over the age of 18. This wouldn’t be as detrimental to the gaming industry, or cause as big of a headache, as you think. It would simply keep those too young from playing inappropriate games. It would let M and AO titles become mainstream. It would make the public aware that games are not toys. I only see benefit from it.
I work in a Shop in the UK (im not upto date with your amments, consitutional things but…) While this is a Good idea to stop kids playing games they shouldnt be, its not going to work, the ammount of 15 & 18 games mums/dads buy for there kids is silly when you explain that GTA is 18 it involves killing people, banging hookers, handing drugs and stealing cars.
they say stuff like “Hes friends got it”, “He’ll be ok” or give you a dirty look as if to say “how dare you tell me what i can and cannot buy for my child”.
Its just politians trying to win votes, if they really cared they would look into how it works in other countries and devise a way that would really work
No couple in the world should be allowed to have a child untill I interview them first.
First off the comparison of video games to Alcohol, Tobacco, Porn doesn’t really line up that well. Yes Gui J there should be a more critical law against the sale of violent game to kids, but if you start leting the politians define what “violent” it’s bad news. For example Halo 3 from what I played in the beta it doesn’t really warent a M rating. Granted I know none one your want kids play Halo over Xbox Live. There is a posoblity of this back fireing. Think, if parents were fined for buying a M rated game for a minor, posibly, no stores would carry M rate game knowing about 50% of their sales would be cut. Like I said the is no simple answer. In Califonia there is a law that restrics the sale of M games to minor. That is where Gui J argument comes in say that the kid asks the adult to buy the game. The only way is to inform parents, and we know that is imposible. No there is no valid reason to buy Little John Scarface.
I have to say I saw a similar thing to what GUI J witnessed at my local EBgames. The clerk (actually I think she’s at least an assistant mgr) very carefully explained to the mom what the content of GTA was but I believe she bought it anyway. While I see the points made in the article, I’m not comfortable with games being regulated more than other art forms (eg. books, movies) as it compromises their 1st amendment protection. Ultimately we have to get back to personal and parental responsibility. Game boxes clearly spell out the rating and why the game got that rating and in the case of online enabled games note the fact that the rating is invalid to a degree when the user is online.
Add A Comment