« Resident Evil 5 Announced; Anti-Nintendo Fans Boast | Main | Box Art Evolution »
July 20, 2005
ESRB Balks, Sets Bad Precedent
Last call for a cup of Hot Coffee. The ESRB has revoked the "M" rating for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
Now that the ESRB has revoked the rating, it prompts a ratings restickering effort on existing San Andreas packages to change the rating to "AO" (Adults Only 18+) and a recall on unsold copies that will be replaced with new versions of the game that lack the locked-up Hot Coffee sex content. I have to wonder though, by removing the Hot Coffee content shouldn't that make the game "safe" for the Mature rating? The ESRB rated the game "M" before anyone knew about Hot Coffee. Now that it's gone the game is changed to "AO", meaning that it has been rated based on objectionable content that the revision will not contain. I do not follow the logic in that at all. I've read some reports that unrecalled copies will carry the "AO" rating while the revised version will remain rated "M". That could just create more confusion.
More importantly, the ESRB has shown that it will bow to political pressure. The precedent is set now that all politicians have to do is cause a little media firestorm to make the organization roll over. On the other hand, if the ESRB hadn't responded, these same politicians would have proclaimed it a toothless organization and moved for government-controlled censorship. There really is no good way out of this for video game fans and we have Rockstar to thank for that.
Clinton and her anti-game supporters now know how to make the ESRB
bend to its wishes. Anytime they come across game content they find
objectionable, they will raise a ruckus until the ESRB reacts and
censors the content to prevent further government intervention.
Without actually passing any legislation regarding game censorship,
politicians are now able to censor video games. It's quite the
Catch-22.
My concern is that Clinton and her supporters will not stop at Grand Theft Auto.
There are many games out there over which Clinton and friends
would surely blow a gasket. I don't want them interfering with Resident Evil.
I fear that the censorship and political crowing are just beginning. I do not like where this issue is going.
Posted by MattG on July 20, 2005 at 07:10 PM in Microsoft, Politics and Law, Sony | Permalink
Comments
Whilst it is, seemingly, a regular occurance for programmers to leave unfinished segments in a game, these are commonly and constantly found. You're right Matt, Rockstar have acted irresponsibly here.
More to the point though, why does this issue keep coming up again and again? Why haven't people accepted yet that the majority of gamers these days ARE adults?
Posted by: -al | Jul 20, 2005 10:01:36 PM
I must admit, it's almost too bad that Rockstar's games are as good as they are, since they (in this issue and previously) come off as representing the sweaty-palmed 14-year-old element in gaming that's done a horrible job of defining what a 'mature' game is these days. The political perspective of video games as a children's toy is definitely a big problem; it's also a big problem that the dominant voice in the industry is that a game is 'mature' when it has things in it that amp up the rating. These two problems feed off each other, which is also bad.
The movie industry clearly illustrates that we shouldn't censor these 'adult' elements; four of the top six movies on IMDB have an R rating (Godfather I and II, The Shawshank Redemption, and Schindler's List). But this doesn't excuse the game developers from concentrating on the elements at the expense of real maturity, which really doesn't need to push up the rating to succeed.
I would blame this contingent of gamers and developers with more balls than brains for lots of things, from political trouble to the vast deficit in women gamers; Rockstar is an awfully good symbol of it.
Posted by: RPGeek | Jul 20, 2005 10:23:26 PM
"I've read some reports that unrecalled copies will carry the "AO" rating while the revised version will remain rated "M". That could just create more confusion."
It just means they don't have to recall the old stock. Which is handy for them because all the publicity has probably hugely increased the demand for the unexpurgated version.
Regarding the whole ESRB decision: I think it was pretty much the only thing they could do. Their rating system is useless, comparisons to the Comics Code of the 1950s are inevitable.
Posted by: fondue | Jul 21, 2005 5:11:43 AM
Agreed, this pretty bad news. ESRB will clearly just be a political wing now, so the already weak game industry loses yet another voice. Publishers will think twice about not about the content they put out, but about how much control the users will get over it.
As for the rating system. Yeah, it's got problems ... but there's no real evidence it's useless. Well, no more so than any other one. Parents who buy their thirteen year old GTA:SA in the first place ... there isn't a rating system in the world that will work for them.
Posted by: Josh | Jul 21, 2005 10:14:38 AM
What bothers me more is that they have clearly stated that future ratings will also include content that is included on the disc, but not meant to be accessed. Taking this to extremes this would mean that if say... the next Mario game happened to have a zipped, heavily encrypted, non-console readable archive of porn on it then it would require an AO rating.
You're no longer rating the game or the game as it will be played. You're rating something different. Now, an argument can be made that it was included on the disc and thus, access was provided to the content, but it was not intended for use. Anyone who manages to access this knows full well what they're doing and must make a special effort in order to do so. It's not like someone will happen to stumble across it by accident
This bothers me in a special place... the idea of rating something other than the game now. It just doesn't seem right or appropriate.
Posted by: Belgand | Jul 21, 2005 12:07:48 PM
has anyone seen the movie the Neistat Brothers made about the GTA San Andreas hot coffee mod? it gives some perspective on just how blown out of proportion this whole thing has gotton. who are they trying to protect again and from what?
see the movie about the controversy here;
Posted by: Rick_stevens | Jul 21, 2005 1:16:43 PM
Here's the real reason for the controversy: the lobbying groups who are behind this crusade have been trying to ban the GTA series from the get-go. The hypocrisy is that an AO rated game can't (or won't) be sold at most retail outlets in North America, so by making the game get an AO rating, these groups have effectively grounded the retail sales of the game, relegating it to online purchases. They've won a battle in their war against Rockstar.
To me, the game would have always been more appropriately AO rated. I don't really understand why the clothed sex scenes push the game from M to AO when the remaining content of the game is drive-by shootings, ultraviolence, drug trafficking, pimping and the like. I think it's a peculiarly American obsession with sex that is at the root of this issue: we're fine if the player can walk up to a hooker, beat her up with a baseball bat and take her money as he watches the blood spray out of her body ... that's only gonna get you an "M", but if you can actually simulate SEX with someone, well no way buddy, that's an AO. Really hypocritical to me.
So, good on you all you hypocritical anti-video-game groups. You won a round in the war, but only a round.
Posted by: Brendan Ross | Jul 22, 2005 7:25:24 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452033569e200d8344f636353ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ESRB Balks, Sets Bad Precedent:
