Is the ESRB useless?

[dudeman0001]

I'm a bit hesitant to post since my last 2 threads epic fail'd.
Anyways, as we all know, the ESRB is a rating system for games, designed to show which games are appropriate for younger consumers.
But a while ago I was in an arcade when I realised that it was full of heavily violent video games and so are most other arcades, and in fact I almost always see young children playing said games...so doesn't that kinda defeat the purpose of having this rating system?
Not to mention almost everyone I know in my class, has either played or owned a GTA game by elementary school, whether they even like video games or not. Besides, most parents don't understand the rating system or completely ignore it.
I personally think the ESRB is still somewhat useful, although for me it's been more of an inconvenience than helpful.

 

[Worgen]

its about as effective as movie ratings, meaning only effective if you pay attention

 

[TheNumber1Zero]

something along the lines of this already exists,and sadly no,otherwise halo would not be populated by racists midgets,would it?

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Only if they limit your experience, ie if you're 12 and your mother won't buy you the game.

 

[quiet_samurai]

I think alot of those Arcade games were around before the ESRB, I could be wrong though, I never really payed attention to it because it was never a problem for me.

 

[walls of cetepedes]

Of course it's useless. Why, today I got my mother to purchase left4dead for me, as I am only 15. Just shows how crap it really is.

However, there has to be some kind of system in place to protect them from the media.
[sup]Assholes...[/sup]

 

[TaborMallory]

Ratings are nothing more than guidelines. It's up to the consumer to follow them.
I wouldn't say they're useless, but they certainly deserve more attention than they have right now.

 

[KissofKetchup]

No. They provide a form of defense against Nazi mother bears like Nancy Grace who want to take out the violence in video games and make them not fun.

 

[j0z]

The ratings are only as effective as the parents.
Wow, I think I should put that in that wisdom thread.

In other words, the ratings are about as effective as a letter opener against a tank.

 

[QuirkyTambourine]

I think that the ESRB, at least in my mind, has as much authority as the monarchy of England. Not bashing, but think about it; They have no real authority (where my comparison to the queen stops), they just give suggested audiences for the games.

It's when nutjobs like Jack Thompson who try to make their word law that really turn me off the idea of a rating system. Parents should know when to let their kids play the more mature games, not the government. They have enough to worry about.

Edit: Fixed my wording a bit

 

[Internet Kraken]

I did a report on this once. The ESRB is an effective rating system, however the main problem is that many people don't use it. They either don't understand it or they just ignore it.

It's only useful for the people that use it. So the solution to the problem of young children playing inappropriate games is to encourage more parents to pay attention to it.

 

[Warped Pixel]

Well really if the kids are determined to play the games chances are you won't stop them with a rating system as with movies. But it does its job of atleast letting parents know what exactly the game they are buying involves.

 

[paragon1]

It gives us something to point at to the anti-gaming crusaders and say "See we're responsible."

 

[Matu Flp Krwfe]

ESRB is a means to guage content, not police the play habits of children. That is the job of the parents.

 

[Haydyn]

Both the ESRB and the G-R movie system are not useless, but extremely flawed. For instance, When I was about 13 I was able to watch Little Miss Sunshine (rated R), but still had to turn my head during the sex scene in My Super Ex-girlfriend (PG-13). Looking at Halo 3, there's nothing in that game that should require an M-rating. It's a standard shooter in which you shoot and kill people. All ratings do is inspire fear in parents who are too busy drinking and cheating on their spouses to know what's actually in the game. My mom said she didn't like L4D just because of its fucking cover.

Here's an idea: If parents want to protect their children, then why don't they actually experience the games themselves, or maybe do some in depth research on the game?

 

[DaMan1500]

I think the ESRB is important. It lets consumers make informed decisions about what they want to be exposed to. What's not okay is the ESRB trying to prohibit people from buying certain games, which is where most of the gamer frustration comes from. But overall, they seem to do a good job.

 

[Mako144]

Well, I like to think that it at least provides some buffer against lawsuits since it can give parents a vague idea about whether or not a game is suitable for their kids. I don't know how much it costs the industry to keep it around or if it would be completely worth it, but a since a well placed lawsuit or two could put a developer out on the streets I'm sure many of them can appreciate a shield (or at least thier lawyers can).

 

[L3m0n_L1m3]

It's only effective if your mother actually cares. If she's like most mothers, it could feature nudity and she would still let you buy the thing.

 

[Vuljatar]

The ESRB's use is to protect games from our borderline-fascist government. If it weren't for the ESRB, the "think of the children" nutjobs would have implemented a similar system that is legally enforceable. (Of course, every store treats the ESRB ratings like they are law, so we're in almost the same place anyway.)