Am I the only one who thinks California is right?

[Burst6]

Guys, think hard about this. How often do you encounter underage players on Xbox Live or whatever. Do you really think ERSB is effective?

That doesn't make me think the ESRB failed, that makes me think the parent failed.

But surely then a law would be more effective

a law is useless. the world is not run by laws, but by those who enforce them.

And retailers already enforce the voluntary ESRB policy with an iron fist. Trust me, heh.
This law makes nothing better, and opens the door to Orwellian censorship.

No. Have you even read 1984? "Orwellian censorship" is basically the same as what happened in Stalin's Russia. So, when kids can't buy GTA will the government start pretending Rockstar don't exist? Will they put Infinity Ward into room 101? Will they direct hate everyday toward the evil Activision?

NO, they will make it slightly harder to play certain games.

It's not that extreme. It is a step in that direction though.

It is censorship, plain and simple. It's a useless law that won't really prevent small children from getting violent games, because the parents will buy the game for their children anyway. All it does is label video games as something unprotected by the first amendment. Sounds like censorship to me.

 

[Ashes2Ashes]

Methinks you misunderstand what is in the law. The law seeks to prohibit the sale of violent video games being sold to minors, wherein the definition of a violent video game in the law is a game in which "the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, disemboweling, or sexually assaulting the image of a human being." Oh yes, and "Human Being" in this case meaning a character with "substantially human characteristics." See how dangerous this law is? It could apply to a Mature rated game like God Of War, but it could also apply to a Teen rated title like Uncharted, or even to an E-E10+ rated title like Super Mario Galaxy. Not to mention that a child could still legally buy something like The Guy Game. Might want to rethink your stance a bit.

I wonder if they will ban LEGO games too, after all they depict "violence" towards substantially human characters. Albeit they're humans made out of LEGOs. Of course I'm mostly being sarcastic here, but it falls under the definition given above.

 

[MetroidNut]

Snip.

No. Have you even read 1984? "Orwellian censorship" is basically the same as what happened in Stalin's Russia. So, when kids can't buy GTA will the government start pretending Rockstar don't exist? Will they put Infinity Ward into room 101? Will they direct hate everyday toward the evil Activision?

NO, they will make it slightly harder to play certain games.

For the record, I haven't read 1984; I was using the term "Orwellian" to emphasize that I view an attempt to censor a medium as totalitarian. But, anyway.

My view, and the view of quite a few others, is that putting a legal restriction on the sale of videogames - one not applied to any other artistic medium - is in violation of the First Amendment's promised freedom of expression. Furthermore, I believe that this law, by exempting videogames from said First Amendment, could easily lead to much more dangerous legislature. If videogames are classified on the level of pornography and not guaranteed freedom of expression, more ambitious restrictions with much more severe consequences seem like the logical next step.

To summarize, my problem with this law is that I firmly believe it violates the First Amendment and could easily lead to much worse things.

 

[Necromancist]

I'm really getting tired of this...

I don't live in the US, and I can see why this law looks scary, but it will never pass.

The reason being that it singles out an artistic medium for restriction and possible censorship based on the medium itself, rather than content, thus clearly and directly violating the First Amendment. That and the research that has been done on the subject of video games encouraging violent behaviour is flimsy at best, as has been stated many times before.

I know this because A) Internet, and B) Every other law like this has been trashed in courts for being unconstitutional.

We should still protest the law, of course, but I see no reason to get in such a fuss over the whole thing. Yes, it's a big thing, but it's never going to pass, especially if we keep fighting for our rights.

 

[Kenko]

Simple issue is, while it may become illegal to sell to kids, parents will just buy the game and hand it to their kids. There's no way to regulate it except maybe forcing you to tell the game your age when you make a profile, and even that can be easily faked.

Then the biggest fault lies with weak and pathetic parents looking for cheap babysitting.

 

[Del-Toro]

Interestingly enough, my opposition to the bill doesn't stem from any kind of entitlement complex or the insistence that 'games are art' or even the high nosed drum that Extra Credits is beating, I just don't think it's the duty of the government to raise children and I'm offended that they would even try.

If a parent goes and buys their kid an M-rated game, it's their perogative. Maybe they feel their child can handle it. With everything else kids have access to these days hitting a polygonal whore with a baseball bat doesn't really have the same shock value it had to previous generations. It's like music. Elvis and his swinging hips seem tame now but back when he started off it was really something. It's the same thing only with violence. Wether that's good, bad or neutral is open for debate.

 

[Kaine_Wraith]

Guys, think hard about this. How often do you encounter underage players on Xbox Live or whatever. Do you really think ERSB is effective?

That doesn't make me think the ESRB failed, that makes me think the parent failed.

But surely then a law would be more effective

a law is useless. the world is not run by laws, but by those who enforce them.

And retailers already enforce the voluntary ESRB policy with an iron fist. Trust me, heh.
This law makes nothing better, and opens the door to Orwellian censorship.

No. Have you even read 1984? "Orwellian censorship" is basically the same as what happened in Stalin's Russia. So, when kids can't buy GTA will the government start pretending Rockstar don't exist? Will they put Infinity Ward into room 101? Will they direct hate everyday toward the evil Activision?

NO, they will make it slightly harder to play certain games.

And what if a game company creates games targeted only to adults? We have seen what happens when retailers stop carrying AO games, there are no AO games (with a couple exceptions). With this law retailers will have to decide whether or not to carry games that the government decides "harm children" making the market for them that much smaller.

Going back to the original Orwellian theme, this law could effectively "kill" any game company that does not conform to the governments standards.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Snip

You do know that 80% of kids were found to be turned down to buying M rated games by the ESRB, while they found only 70% of kids turned away from R rated films?

What good would Californias law do? The only way to totally make sure parents don't buy the game for their kids is to ban the mature games from being purchased period. You see the problem this law would cause?

Making campaigns to inform parents of what the ESRB rating really means and that "video GAME does not mean it is ok for m child" would do a LOT more good.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

They are wrong, if for no other reason, in that such a law would almost certainly be in violation of the Supremacy and Commerce clauses of the US Constitution. They are also wrong because such a law will almost certainly result in the content of future games being altered as a result. They are also wrong because similar media (books, movies, music) is not controlled by such a legal system.

 

[ninja51]

Kids already CANT get M rated games without a parent. Its a bullshit law that will hurt the industry by making it riskier to even sale and make M rated games, and the people making it have no clue that a system like it, that is actually even more strict than movies (kids sneak into R rated films ALL the time)

 

[JeanLuc761]

There is a reason. I am not saying videogames should be singled out, however I can tell you that kids are heavily influenced by the media they consume. Just talking to a child should make that obvious. You wouldn't let a kid watch Saw, or play God of War.

I fully support the idea of keeping kids away from violent material if the parent feels the child is not ready for it. However, that should always be the parent's job, not the government's.

My father allowed me to play my first M-rated game when I was four years old. I was raised on them as much as I was raised on Spyro the Dragon. I haven't turned into a sociopath, I just have a love for gaming. One of the very basic reasons for this is because everyone learns the difference between fantasy and reality at an extremely young age. If we didn't learn that, we'd be in major trouble.

If parents are concerned about what their children are exposed to, then it's time for them to stop being lazy and actually saying "NO!" to the child when he asks if he can pick up the new Call of Duty. I can't tell you how many times I've had a parent come up to the counter, hand me an M-rated game, and tell me "no" after I ask "Are you okay that this game is rated M for Mature for violence, drug references and sexual content?"

Guess what? 99.5% of all the parents who say they don't approve buy the fucking game anyway. And, because they're too lazy to enforce things, they want the government to do it for them. That. Is. Wrong.

 

[Orry]

They are also wrong because such a law will almost certainly result in the content of future games being altered as a result.

Doubtful, there are already places where legislation such as is being proposed exists, the Nova Scotia Film and Video Act requires stores to not sell games that are either not rated or rated as something older than the customer(yes, that means a 12 year old isn't allowed to buy a game rated teen)

 

[Ih8pkmn]

I agree that violent games should not be sold to children, but the way California's doing it is over the top.

 

[AngelOfBlueRoses]

I had a huge rant typed up, but then I realized how stupid this thread is and figured that it simply wasn't worth it because what goes in one ear, only seems to go right out the other.

 

[Brikson]

The law could pass and nothing changes besides some stores getting fined when a minor manages to get a hold of some violent game. That's of course assuming American's act rationally to this kinda of thing. I'm sure a few of the more unstable gamers will cause a commotion. Then the media will bring this to everyone's attention. Then stores like walmart will stop selling games due to an uninformed public over reacting to things they mostly don't understand. Sure as hell hope I'm wrong about that though.

 

[Samus Aaron]

NEVER EVER use that phrase in your fucking title!!!

Sheesh, "Am I the only one..." is just a figure of speech. I don't understand why some people take that so literally. It just serves as an introduction to a point. Of course one person is never going to be "the only one;" there is no need to point that out.

OP: There's meat to both arguments. Still, I'm leaning against California. While maybe 18+ games should be illegal for minors, and maybe not, I'm not willing to concede that violent video games can result in violence in order to support Cali's stance.

 

[Zeromaeus]

1. No. You are NEVER the only one. EVER.

2. I think California is wrong in the way they're going about this. They're trying to classify video games as something less than art and obscene, and thus not protected by the First Amendment. If video games were to be classified like this, they would be open to censorship and outright ban rather than simply being put behind the counter.

3. We have the ESRB. GameStop employees will ask for your id if you look remotely underage when you buy games rated M. The problem here are the parents who buy their spoiled little fucks (this is my rage speaking) games that they shouldn't be playing. Will what California is doing change that? No.

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

The main problem with this bill is not that it would prevent minors from buying video games that contain mature content, but that for the Government to be able to do that, it has to be able to state that video games are not protected by the first amendment. This is something that we do not want.

Additionally, the bill would also turn the ESRB into a legal entity- again, this could cause problems, such as governmental bias in game ratings. Also, your R-rated movies example is not proper here- the MPAA, which rates the films, does not hold any legal standing, and not letting people under 17 into R-rated movies is an industry standard, not law. This is much as how gaming exists now. The only difference is that it is harder to sneak into an R-rated film than to get one's hands on an M-rated game.

 

[Negatempest]

So basically it's a Convention?
(Like a rule thats not really a law)

Well since that's the case I still don't see the problem, it's merely enforcing a penatly on people for failing to keep to the expected standards, I figured that was what laws were supposed to be for.

I haven't heard about the "not hitting shelves" thing, if that is true then that's certainly worth worrying about.

See, it's ALOT to explain and i'll try to make it short. Yes there is a "law" trying to be passed that forbids the sale of "M rated" games to minors. Its telling you one side of the story.

The full scope in footnote scope is this:

Games would be judged by the California law on the subject of what is considered "Harm to human or human-ish life forms" can be regulated as instant "M rating". Thus games like Halo, Team Fortress 2, and even World of Warcraft can and most likely would be considered "M-rated" under the new law if it passes. Thus developers would have to be careful of what they make or lose heavy profits. This also means retailers face the risk of getting HEAVILY fined for "accidental sale" and may believe that video games on their store shelves is TOO much of a RISK.