72 Percent of Adults Support California Game Law - UPDATED

[Cynical skeptic]

Plenty of games are AO in effect the biggest retailer in the UK sells bioshock 2 a game rated 18+ that is legaly enforced and is only purchasable by adults.

plus the law doesn't change the age ratings having violence doesn't make content an AO it only adds a legal check on sales of content not that certain content must have a higher rating

Not to be rude, but you're not exactly aware of what you're talking about.

The EU's R18/18+ or whatever is equal to the ESRB's M rating. The ESRB has a rating beyond that called AO, which is considered a deathknell for any game that may receive it.

When GTA:SA and Oblivion were reclassified as AO because of hotcoffee and the fact breasts actually existed in oblivion (gasp!), the offending editions were physically removed from every shelf of every US retailer. They remained completely off the shelves until new editions of the games were released and re-rated and confirmed to not have the incredibly shitty breast textures or any hotcoffee code.

Fahrenheit (branded indigo prohecy in the US) was censored for US release, as in its EU form, it would've been rated AO by the ESRB. Which would've meant no US retailer would carry it.

Now, its not illegal to sell games to minors in the US or carry AO games, just all retailers have instituted various policies along those lines. Like I keep saying, this law is saying those aren't good enough. That all games must be subjected to the miller test independent of their current rating. Meaning the ESRB, despite all it's efforts to correctly warn parents of the content of video games, is completely meaningless. That since parents continue to "flaunt" the ratings of the ESRB, that all games must be regulated and treated like tobacco or alcohol (... are in the states). That if the till monkey even suspects they're intended for a minor, they are legally barred from making the sale.

Retailers refused to carry AO games because of the "WON'T U PLS THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!" crowd's demented insistence the remote possibility that a parent might not fully grasp that "AO" means "lula, the sexy empire" (really only the actual, factual AO game I can think of) probably isn't appropriate for their 12 year old, and the fact it was on the shelf at all was a corruption of youth, or some bullshit. So, if a law starts branding game after game obscene on a state by state basis, the games that can be made (as the US is, still, the largest market for such things) basically reduces to near zero.

The biggest problem is this law is worded like its simply going to reinforce what the ESRB already does. But thats just a complete load of bullshit spouted by political action groups who, in reality, want all video games banned and kids forced to sit in church several hours a day. For, the miller test, allows them to deem anything that doesn't fully honor The Lord, as obscene.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Plenty of games are AO in effect the biggest retailer in the UK sells bioshock 2 a game rated 18+ that is legaly enforced and is only purchasable by adults.

plus the law doesn't change the age ratings having violence doesn't make content an AO it only adds a legal check on sales of content not that certain content must have a higher rating

Not to be rude, but you're not exactly aware of what you're talking about.

The EU's R18/18+ or whatever is equal to the ESRB's M rating. The ESRB has a rating beyond that called AO, which is considered a deathknell for any game that may receive it.

When GTA:SA and Oblivion were reclassified as AO because of hotcoffee and the fact breasts actually existed in oblivion (gasp!), the offending editions were physically removed from every shelf of every US retailer. They remained completely off the shelves until new editions of the games were released and re-rated and confirmed to not have the incredibly shitty breast textures or any hotcoffee code.

Fahrenheit (branded indigo prohecy in the US) was censored for US release, as in its EU form, it would've been rated AO by the ESRB. Which would've meant no US retailer would carry it.

Now, its not illegal to sell games to minors in the US or carry AO games, just all retailers have instituted various policies along those lines. Like I keep saying, this law is saying those aren't good enough. That all games must be subjected to the miller test independent of their current rating. Meaning the ESRB, despite all it's efforts to correctly warn parents of the content of video games, is completely meaningless. That since parents continue to "flaunt" the ratings of the ESRB, that all games must be regulated and treated like tobacco or alcohol (... are in the states). That if the till monkey even suspects they're intended for a minor, they are legally barred from making the sale.

Retailers refused to carry AO games because of the "WON'T U PLS THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!" crowd's demented insistence the remote possibility that a parent might not fully grasp that "AO" means "lula, the sexy empire" (really only the actual, factual AO game I can think of) probably isn't appropriate for their 12 year old, and the fact it was on the shelf at all was a corruption of youth, or some bullshit. So, if a law starts branding game after game obscene on a state by state basis, the games that can be made (as the US is, still, the largest market for such things) basically reduces to near zero.

The biggest problem is this law is worded like its simply going to reinforce what the ESRB already does. But thats just a complete load of bullshit spouted by political action groups who, in reality, want all video games banned and kids forced to sit in church several hours a day. For, the miller test, allows them to deem anything that doesn't fully honor The Lord, as obscene.

AO adults only
18 anyone over 18 is an adult

an M is the same as a 15 certificate which also applies to movies,

GTA:SA was pulled from Wallmarts shelves because of the D.C sniper event at the time and the game containing a sniper missions and after 3 weeks the game went back on the shelves because gamestops sales jumped with out the large company competing.

Capatlism wins, pornography isn't art but you can bet hollywood is jealousy of the money that industry makes

 

[Cynical skeptic]

AO adults only
18 anyone over 18 is an adult

an M is the same as a 15 certificate which also applies to movies,

GTA:SA was pulled from Wallmarts shelves because of the D.C sniper event at the time and the game containing a sniper missions and after 3 weeks the game went back on the shelves because gamestops sales jumped with out the large company competing.

Capatlism wins, pornography isn't art but you can bet hollywood is jealousy of the money that industry makes

Like I said, they're different but pretty much equal. Your 15 is equal to the ESRB's T, your 18 is equal to the M, then in perfect american fashion, they created AO as an equivalent to the MPAA's NC-17 or X. Theoretically, X and NC-17 are completely redundant, but parents can still say their kids can see R movies or play M games.

This law is all about saying, "you, as a parent, have no rights to determine how your children are raised. My kids are stupid, therefor yours are too."

 

[matt87_50]

I'm from Australia.

so I have lots and little sympathy for you guys at the same time...

in Australia, sales of violent games is already restricted to minors, in that there is a rating where children 15 to 18 cannot buy a game without a parent.

if the game is only suitable for people over 18, it is BANNED ALL TOGETHER, for children AND adults.

we had a similar poll that said "90% of parents are against introducing an R18+ rating for games"

A rating, that would allow games only suitable for adults into our country, as children would be BANED from buying them, even in the company of an adult.

as introducing an R rating would obviously mean that games clearly meant for adults would no longer be watered down in little technicalities, so as to get an MA15+ rating, thus making what are still at heart very MATURE games available to CHILDREN, it is clear that there are only two possible reasons for this poll result.

A) its full of shit.

B) parents, games stores, and authorities are just TOO lazy to implement the restriction, and thus feel it is easier to just blanket ban 'naughty' games all together.

so yeah, you guys got it easy!

but I am still sympathetic because the Californian law is still only intended for the same reasons the more heavy handed (and retarded) censorship in Aus: because hoards of lazy parents always seem to find just enough energy to complain and blame everybody but them selves.

in this case, legislating it will make absolutely NO difference. because unsupervised kids will still find a way. (for one: it starts with 'P' and ends in 'Arrr' ) You already have the ratings, so responsible parents can already make an informed decision. I fail to see how legislating it will make any real difference.

oh: for starters, one bad reason to legislate: again demonstrable by my retarded home of Oz: all games have to have a rating, this will soon include iphone games... so any bedroom programmer releasing their game for $1, or free, will have to pay hundreds of dollars in fees to have their game rated by the government.

 

[sephiroth1991]

In Manhunts defence the people you kill are trying to kill you and most of them are neo-nazis

OT:This is bad news but also shows that parents are stupid to think that they can't stop a child to play these games. I have been playing games since i was 4 one of my first games was Duke Nukem and i havn't gone on a killing spree.

 

[Nateman742]

At first the 72% figure gave me pause for thought, but then:

"A survey of 2100 adults..."

If the Supreme Court knows anything about the use of small surveys, this won't go over too well. Of course, if violent games do end up being banned, underground companies will still thrive, and the games we know and love will just make a roaring comeback like comic books. It'll all happen in the span of twenty years, and the current gamer generation will laugh when it does. Besides, we have the internet, and this situation reminds me of the WMG trying in vain to control copyrighted music on Youtube. It's just not going to happen if millions of people with power to change the world are up against you. Time to think up a new plan, gentlemen.

And you just know that whoever took all that footage was having a hell of a lot of fun.

EDIT: On the subject of parents not raising their children, take a look at education. If a child misses months and months of school, the parents get in trouble, not the school. I'm not saying that parents should be punished for buying inappropriate video games because frankly that's stepping far over boundaries moral and otherwise, but it is parents' responsibility alone to control this, and they have to accept the consequences of their own actions. In any case, kids find ways of getting around rules and you can't stop all of them no matter how hard you try. It's not the end of the world. Get over it.

 

[Dastardly]

This is priceless.

I want:

1) The government to step in and do my job
2) By forcing the video game companies to do my job
3) Because I'm too lazy or disinterested to do my job.

Newsflash: You wanted a baby, not a child. Tough luck. He's yours now--raise him.

 

[odanhammer]

I know a pre-teen who is 13 currently , he has been playing games like 50 cent and gta as soon as his mother can purchase them

So you're willing to trash the First Amendment because this kid's mother is a failed parent?

The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

What does it have to do with banning the sale of violent video games to minors?

Even still this was created in a time before video games or TV's , prehaps an update to reflect this generation would be a good idea.

Most of the world has already put a ban on the sale of games to minors and i know in places like Michigan that you need I.D to buy such products already.

You making a point that would suggest its ok for children to also buy guns , beer , and take up smoking since they can go buy a pack , while also going to the strip club on friday nights with there allowance to shove down some girls g-string.
Your also saying that its ok to have sex with a minor and take them to a R-rated movie, that its ok.

All of those things are against the law in the USA , so if its not OK to do it in real life then why is it ok for them to buy a video game that allows them to do such things in a game.

 

[curelightchild]

To quote the article:

"A survey of 2100 adults from across the U.S. found that 72 percent were in support of California's attempt to ban the sale of "ultraviolent" videogames to minors, the group said."

2100? Really? That's it? That's not NEARLY a large enough sample. Maybe if you took that poll in just California. Of course the percentages are going to be high. If 3 people voted on something and 2 said 'No' then the percent of people saying 'No' to that question is really high. If we're talking "across the U.S" I would expect at least 10,000 people to have been polled. That's a decent sample. Then you have enough people that the few extremes (on either side) will cancel out and you'll get a realistic answer.

As far as I'm concerned this is bogus.

 

[Nateman742]

I know a pre-teen who is 13 currently , he has been playing games like 50 cent and gta as soon as his mother can purchase them

So you're willing to trash the First Amendment because this kid's mother is a failed parent?

the first amendment was created before the invention of video games or even tv , let alone before the though of a game where you can go around running people over with a car.. oh wait they didn't know about cars then either.

My point being that laws change and are reviewed , why not make adjustments to reflect on this generation.
If i believed that every violent video game on the market that was played by a young child would have a parent at the other end explaining the game to them as well as teaching them the difference between Good and Bad, i still would say they don't need those types of games.

Question being then , do you think everyone has the right to bear arms? or that freedom of speech is allowed anywhere you go ? Children should be playing tag and going to school to get a good job- Not getting touched by there creepy uncle , while playing GTA and ending up flipping burger at minimum wage.

Yes, everyone has the right to bear arms. Freedom of speech is allowed anywhere. This does not mean that there won't be consequences for firing a gun in a bank or mouthing off to a policeman in riot gear, but you can absolutely do it. The police have the right to arrest you if they think you are endangering others or disturbing the peace, but that is entirely separate from owning a gun or speaking in the first place.

Also, touched by their creepy uncle? Foodservice? Where did that all come from? Is there something you need to tell us?

 

[Drazeric]

Wow, this is bullshit! Its not up to the government to choose the games "appropriate" for their children...like they wouldn't think twice about letting their kids go to an R rated movie or watching a show with alot of sexuality, but when it comes to games they say they cant control it? Like the FUCK! Its just bad parents trying to push the blame to someone else yet again instead of owning up to it. On a side note how many people have come home from work/school or whatever and just wanted to loose your shit on something,I know I have. Then you boot up your system and been totally relived after. Another good point is that the only people that would go out killing people after playing video games are already unstable as is and they are just looking for something to blame because lord knows its not their fault. For example I grew up watching slasher flicks/horror, but I dont run around wearing a goalie mask wielding a machete gutting innocent naked cheerleaders.

 

[curelightchild]

I know a pre-teen who is 13 currently , he has been playing games like 50 cent and gta as soon as his mother can purchase them

So you're willing to trash the First Amendment because this kid's mother is a failed parent?

the first amendment was created before the invention of video games or even tv , let alone before the though of a game where you can go around running people over with a car.. oh wait they didn't know about cars then either.

My point being that laws change and are reviewed , why not make adjustments to reflect on this generation.
If i believed that every violent video game on the market that was played by a young child would have a parent at the other end explaining the game to them as well as teaching them the difference between Good and Bad, i still would say they don't need those types of games.

Question being then , do you think everyone has the right to bear arms? or that freedom of speech is allowed anywhere you go ? Children should be playing tag and going to school to get a good job- Not getting touched by there creepy uncle , while playing GTA and ending up flipping burger at minimum wage.

If we start saying the First Amendment needs to be changed for "blah" reason, no matter how valid, how long until the Amendment is gone all together? Yes the founding fathers didn't know about video games - but video games like all forms of media/art should be protected. To steal some thunder from "Extra Credits", the problem with this isn't that violent games will get in kid's hand. I don't think anyone here would tell you that we want 10 year olds playing GTA.

The problem is that if laws banning/restricting video games pass then video games will be treated like drugs or porn. That will kill the industry. Great games will never be made because it will be too hard to meet the standards. Look at the credits for a game like Dragon Age. Games like Dragon Age won't be able to exist anymore, because publishers won't give the developers money for a project that might break the law. So all of those people (and trust me that's ALOT of people) are all of a sudden looking for new work.

Also, to my knowledge, movies aren't regulated by the government. How is it the movie industry with all of it's blood and violence can regulate itself, but not the video game industry? DVD sales of movies like 'V for Vendetta', '21', and just about every 'James Bond' movie aren't restricted. Why do they get more freedom then video games?

 

[orangecharger]

This poll clearly shows once again, parents giving more control to the government, because they refuse to be parents. Grow up, it's not the government, or societies job to make sure your kids acquiesce to your rules. That's your job.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Winner winner chicken dinner!

 

[Senaro]

I agree that parents need to step up. I asked a man at a gaming store if he was really intending to buy Gears of War 2 for his 5 year old, asking him if he knew what was in it. He just said "Oh yeah, it's cool, he likes that stuff." This law isn't going to stop anything. The majority of places already forbid the sale of M-rated games to minors anyways. On that note, I see nothing wrong with the law itself, it certainly can't do any real harm, but it's not going to change anything.

 

[curelightchild]

You making a point that would suggest its ok for children to also buy guns , beer , and take up smoking since they can go buy a pack , while also going to the strip club on friday nights with there allowance to shove down some girls g-string.
Your also saying that its ok to have sex with a minor and take them to a R-rated movie, that its ok.

All of those things are against the law in the USA , so if its not OK to do it in real life then why is it ok for them to buy a video game that allows them to do such things in a game.

Yet no one has a problem with them buying a movie and watching people they respect do all of those things. Hypocritical much?

 

[zenoaugustus]

You making a point that would suggest its ok for children to also buy guns , beer , and take up smoking since they can go buy a pack , while also going to the strip club on friday nights with there allowance to shove down some girls g-string.
Your also saying that its ok to have sex with a minor and take them to a R-rated movie, that its ok.

All of those things are against the law in the USA , so if its not OK to do it in real life then why is it ok for them to buy a video game that allows them to do such things in a game.

Yet no one has a problem with them buying a movie and watching people they respect do all of those things. Hypocritical much?

No, what's worse is, it can be EDUCATIONAL in BOOKS, watching someone be killed or tortured or whatever, a book where there is no choice as to what happens, but because video games are INTERACTIVE and can present you a choice, suddenly everyone will make the wrong choice and become hostile because of it.

Fuck all this shit.

 

[rossable]

This poll clearly shows once again, parents giving more control to the government, because they refuse to be parents. Grow up, it's not the government, or societies job to make sure your kids acquiesce to your rules. That's your job.

+1! the lack of responsibility in this potential law is insulting to everyone. if the judges are smart they would know this and rule accordingly. a precedent telling parents to be parents would be nice for a change.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

"Sexually violent" games?

"In this game I attack Hugh with a chainsaw, in a very attractive, sensual, sexual way of course."