StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Bill aims to treat violent games like adult mags.

So what do you think? Good idea or bad idea?

And it's things like this that keep the games out to my hands, hands that can't get any crazier as it is and need some better blowie upie. Damn idiots.

emneh. First off its Cali so its doesn't affect me. Secondly I don't really mind if they want to make M-rated games for M-aged audiences only.

What's wrong with making certain games R-rated so that only an adult can buy them? Seems reasonable enough to me.

Personally, I think it is bullshit. There is no causual relationshop between violent games, and violence. Not only that, but it is none of the governments business to determine what a person can view or play. That is, and should be, up to the individual, and their parant, if applicable.

Alright.

I fully support the restriction of games that merit the A Rating being only sold to those with ID. A Rating, you say? The rating system did, at one point, include a rating for adults only. If I had control, this would be instituted for games like Postal 2.

I have no problem with making sure this rating system is enforced, since parents clearly can't pick up the slack of actually raising their kids(Hint: If you are letting the computer raise your kid, it's not the computers fault).

I object to the fucking morons and their arguments, but hey, sometimes you take the bad with the good..

Darth Wong wrote:What's wrong with making certain games R-rated so that only an adult can buy them? Seems reasonable enough to me.

I agree. The rating system was never meant to be enforced like the ratings on movies, but rather a suggestion at content (much like the Parental Advisory stickers on music). The idea was that discerning parents would have an idea of what was suitable for their children and what wasn't. But since some parents don't pay enough attention to what their kids are playing, this bill seems like a good idea.

SirNitram wrote:I fully support the restriction of games that merit the A Rating being only sold to those with ID. A Rating, you say? The rating system did, at one point, include a rating for adults only.

Actually, the Adults Only rating still exists (I'm pretty sure, anyway), but so far, it's only been used on sexually explicit games, and has never been used for a game strictly because it was violent. From what I've heard, Manhunt would have been a prime candidate for an AO rating, but apparently tits damage kids much more than graphic violence.

SirNitram wrote:Alright.

I fully support the restriction of games that merit the A Rating being only sold to those with ID. A Rating, you say? The rating system did, at one point, include a rating for adults only. If I had control, this would be instituted for games like Postal 2.

I have no problem with making sure this rating system is enforced, since parents clearly can't pick up the slack of actually raising their kids(Hint: If you are letting the computer raise your kid, it's not the computers fault).

I object to the fucking morons and their arguments, but hey, sometimes you take the bad with the good..

I believe such a rating still exists, but some places refuse to stock such games, and having such a rating would hurt sales, so designers try to tone games down until it's only an M rating. But, that's just a theory of mine.

Gerard_Paloma wrote:I agree. The rating system was never meant to be enforced like the ratings on movies, but rather a suggestion at content

Really?? When I first saw a rating-system on a computer game case, I immediately equated it with those on VHS movie cassettes.

Gerard_Paloma wrote:Bill aims to treat violent games like adult mags.

So what do you think? Good idea or bad idea?

I don't know, I've watched violent movies and things since I was like 6 years old(I remember watching terminator when I was 6) , and almost never hurt anyone, just 2 twice when I was in 3rd grade.

Simon H.Johansen wrote:

Gerard_Paloma wrote:I agree. The rating system was never meant to be enforced like the ratings on movies, but rather a suggestion at content

Really?? When I first saw a rating-system on a computer game case, I immediately equated it with those on VHS movie cassettes.

Nope, they're not the same. On an R rated movie (both at theatres and on DVDs), below the rating, it says, "Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian." And the NC-17 rating says, "No one under 17 admitted."

However, on an M rated game, it simply says, "17+." The ESRB merely suggests you should be over 17, whereas the MPAA requires it.

In the UK this is moot.

Games can already be submitted to and rated by the BBFC, which gives them the exact same ratings a film with the same content would get, and carries the same legal weight.

The teacup-typhoon that is Grand Theft Auto is neatly avoided by it carrying an 18 rating, proclaiming to all that children are not it's intended audience.

Gerard_Paloma wrote:Bill aims to treat violent games like adult mags.

So what do you think? Good idea or bad idea?

So what? Kids can steal them from their uncle's secret stash when he's drunk? :p

In all seriousness, if this'll take some heat away from video games, I'm all for it. I mean, don't some stores already have this in place? If the parents won't buy it for them, the kids probably wouldn't be able to buy it either. (This might mean a massive upswing in piracy, though ... but then, stealing has always been more accepted in this country than violating people's moral standards :p)

I think that the ratings should be changed. Currently, M is anything a little too strong for a T rating, up to anything a little too weak for an AO rating. They should break it down further (like in the Canadian film system, 14A and 18A instead of R). That way, my mom would let me play Halo.

Where can I find UK ratings for games, anyway? EDIT: I want them, 'cause they have ages in the ratings, and are more comprehensive.

I have no problems with it... if their parents are fine with them getting the games, their parents can buy the games for them.

As long as they don't actively try to keep M+ rated games away from the whole public, it's fine I suppose.

No wonder everyone wants to kill Bill.

Slartibartfast wrote:No wonder everyone wants to kill Bill.

Bad pun, bad pun....

The British ratings seem to work OK.

Slartibartfast wrote:No wonder everyone wants to kill Bill.

Why does everyone want to kill me? Its just not fair!

Bill Door wrote:The British ratings seem to work OK.

Slartibartfast wrote:No wonder everyone wants to kill Bill.

Why does everyone want to kill me? Its just not fair!

They're all just morticidal maniacs. I blame the video games.

Rating games is fine. Like I read a label at my age.

The gist is this: If they do this, they put the responsibility for children gaming into the PARENT'S hands. So there's NO FUCKING WAY the parents can blame the video game industry if little Johnny goes and takes a shotgun to his school and wipes out the 3rd grade.

It helps protect the companies, and that is good for those of us who like GTA3.

I'd support this if more developers took themselves seriously.

The OFLC in Australia has banned a few games, notably the ones that are just plain stupid such as BMX-XXX and Postal2.

Why? Because there is no redeeming feature.

Max Payne 2 got an R-18 rating - why? Because its a goddamn mature game! And the developers made it that way.

SoF2 got a M-15 rating because of gore, lots of gore.

If there was a reason for as game getting a high rating other than developers catering to the tit and arse crowd or just making a highly detailed damage engine, I'd be all for a lot of these classfication changes. But as long as developers keep aiming firmly for the lowest common denominator, little Billy who shot someone because he played Pong is still going to be the face of gamers in the press.

"Yee also plans on introducing a bill that would require retailers to put mature-rated games on a separate shelf from games rated for teens or general audiences.
Violent video games are among the most popular. In 2002, the carjacking crime fantasy "Grand Theft Auto" was the biggest-selling title in the industry"

Note the "fantasy" word, if kids can't suspend disbelief, they should be put into special schools.

Meest wrote:Note the "fantasy" word, if kids can't suspend disbelief, they should be put into special schools.

No! It's Television and the gamemaker's responsibility to teach kids what's real and what's not! We parents are too busy planning which game company to sue next!


Doesn't apply to all, but yeah.