I can understand some of the complaints put onto the table here. I also agree with some of the counter points.
The ESRB is awesome, that is solid fact. It's put some structure to what games are published and has made it so America can have a wide veriaty of games. This can clearly be seen with consol games in the early 90s which were, for the most part, games that would only be rated T these days. Now we have a library as diverse as the people who play games. But, much like film, and what I can only imagine was the same evolution process, there needs to be restrictions to certain content for particular viewers.
However, I do agree that the ESRB needs to have clearer guidelines as to how games get their ratings. They certainly give a vague description of the consensus of experts, but there is nothing stopping them from making some terrible mistakes in the process. The other thing the confuses me is the ages on the higher ratings. Why are M games rated 17? Some of the content is grosely over what most children should be allowed to see, while other games barely cross the threashold of T rating. I think it would be more suitable for M to be rated 16+ (Halo), then have the adult rating come into play more often at 18+ for truly horrific games (Gears of War).
