Game industry receives a D+, deemed "beyond repair"
by Ross Miller 
{ Nov 29th 2005 at 6:00PM }
It looks like someone isn't receiving a Christmas card this year.
The National Institute on Media and the Family sent its 10th annual MediaWise Video Game Report out today, and it looks
pretty ugly for the games industry. In fact, they gave the industry a D+, broken down in the following categories:
-
Retailers' Policies: B
-
Arcade Survey: B-
-
Ratings Education: C+
-
Retailers' Enforcement: D-
-
Ratings Accuracy: F
The report suggests the industry is at fault for letting kids own M-rated titles: "some of the blame must be laid at
the feet of an industry which rubber stamps ultra-violent games and refuses to make the proper effort to enforce
responsible retail policies." The report calls the ESRB's rating system "beyond repair," and questions why so few games
receive an Adults Only (AO) rating. It is wise to read the report, even if you do not agree with it, because these are
the kind of sentiments that mainstream media will pick up. How do you feel about this report card?
[via 1up]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
BigKountry @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Ratings reinforcement, ratings accuracy???
How the hell can you be so stupid as to not understand how to read a freakin' rating label on a video game box.
Also, most of AO anything is basically pornographic material. I haven't seen a movie rated AO because of violence. Plus AO games don't sell that well.
Chris @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
I wouldn't say the ratings of games are perfect ... but they aren't worthy of an F. Most games are rated pretty fair for their content. So the 'industry' gets an 'F' for this because a few games fall through the cracks and parents can't read labels?
sdpads19 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
How bout parental enforcement on their kids added to this list. Lets be honest most of the responsibility should lie on the parents!!!
Alkaiser @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
So...how many movies get released with an NC-17?
Yeah, that's what I thought. Next.
Wonderflex @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
somebody seems a little grumpy; maybe you should play some Nintendogs and cheer up.
Wonderflex @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
the above comment is in regaurds to an off topic statement that was removed about how much the DS sucks (thier words, not mine) ...just so you know I'm not rambling about Nintendogs (which I like quite a bit)
Badison @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Silly retailers ha ha ....
Knox @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
But of course, these same people who deem that they are qualified to grade the ESRB don't even know how it works. As the ESRB even stated in it's response to this "report card", the ESRB does infact hand out AO ratings, but since games with that rating are effectivly guaranteed not to sell, they are changed and then resubmitted to gain an M rating. Now the media and Jack Thompson will just have more ignorant and biased "studies" to throw against the game industry.
Nightfire @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Only thing I can see why the "Ratings Accuracy" got an F is because of the Hot Coffee scandle. So that grade is very slanted. And the ESRB made a call to the National Institute on Media and the Family asking if they can work together about the grades but they did not respond back.
The only reason I can see the National Institute on Media and the Family putting these damn things out is just to flat out attack the ESRB. And make the NIMF look good. Even thow the game info they get for their report card comes from a flawed for pay verson of the ESRB called the PSVratings and they use a traffic-light rating system for content info in games.
Knox @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
But of course, these same people who deem that they are qualified to grade the ESRB don't even know how it works. As the ESRB even stated in it's response to this "report card", the ESRB does infact hand out AO ratings, but since games with that rating are effectivly guaranteed not to sell, they are changed and then resubmitted to gain an M rating. Now the media and Jack Thompson will just have more ignorant and biased "studies" to throw against the game industry.
hokku @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Yeah, it's terrible that all the country's preteen kids are saving up fifty dollars by themselves, going to the mall by themselves, and buying M-Rated games by themselves. It's not like the parents are the uneducated ones taking their kids to the store, spending their own money on games where they're too lazy to look at the label.
I tried to buy TimeSplitters3 the day after my 18th Birthday. They wouldn't sell it to without ID. It's funny, I've gotten into more violent R-rated movies without showing ID. I wonder if they got a D- too.
But the videogame industry is different. When judging them, we cannot be restrained buy the simple idea of logic. The people at fault here we should not blame and everyone who does their jobs adequately should be fired.
I miss the days when parents would watch their kids to see if what they were doing was appropriate rather than passing all their responsibilities to a letter on a box then blaming others for their failures.
Remember mom and dad, before you yell at the ESRB for letting violence into your house, why don't you ask Timmy how he bought his game. Oh that's right, he didn't. You did.
S.Beeland @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
What a pile! None of these "family" groups know a thing about video games! The 90's are over and the vast majority of gamers are 18 and older, intelligent adults who have every right to view whatever they want. The only problem with video games is stores like Toys r' Us selling Grand Theft Auto, why don't these "family" groups complain to them? And when, if ever, will the blame go where it belongs - to IDIOT parents who will look at the cover of a game like Manhunt and say "oh, that's okay for little Timmy!"???
Babu @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
They dont really ID for games down here in the great white north. Well, you know, Canada. I live in British Columbia and have lived in Calgary and not ONCE have I been ID'd for a game. I didnt even get ID'd when I went into the local bar last time.
Gotta love Canada!
Rare Hare @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
it's hopeless. if you replaced the ENTIRE cover of the game with a big fat 'M' and 'KILL KILL KILL DIE DIE RAPE FUCK KILL BLOOD DRRRRR' parents would still just be like "oh he sees this kind of stuff on tv drrr..." and buy it anyway.
seriously, what more do they want the ESRB to do? administer a lethal shock to their child if they touch the game disc? yeah, that'll teach 'em..
Jago @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
#4 is a moron...god forbid if he ever has kids.
These grades a load of crap btw...
"Retailers Enforcement"...how is that the ESRB's problem? It says is right in the name "RETAILERS'"! It is the job of the store to enforce the policy on who should/shouldn't be buying certain games.
Plus it is NOT the ESRB's fault that Rockstar did not submit (or take out) the Hot Coffee stuff. To begin with the whole Hot Coffee thing ws blown out of proportion since that content was never meant to be viewed or played by the public anyways.
Will Strinz @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
This article seems powerful and meaningful at first, but it contains very few criticisms that are both direct AND objective. First, the criticisms of retailers arent directed toward the ESRB, Video game developers, or anyone else whos profession involves nothing but video games (hence the video game industry. These findings should be looked at, since it is disturbing that retailers will sell M games to minors, but shouldn't be considered part of the gaming industry. Even so, paralells can be drawn to pornography. People are and always have been able to obtain pornographic media, regardless of restriction, in much the of same ways as minors obtain video games (see: retailer apathy, theft, and the internet), and altough im sure the NIMF is against pornography, the point is that every type of media made illegal to minors suffers from these problems. The Most striking of the criticisms is directed towards the rating system. One would think the arguements here would be something along the lines of "current regulations are not strong enough/inconsistent", but the NIMF simply states that all M rated games have violence/sex now, and that there aren't very many AO rated games. Ignoring the fact that the difference between the ratings is only 1 year, this does not address the problem, since it says nothing about the games being inaccurately rated, just that there are more violent games nowadays.
Though there are many problems with the game industry, this article doesn't effectively show ANY, and Although theres always room for improvement in the game industry, its pretty good right now. The lesson here: when a group with an agenda writes an article, pay particular attention to their data, not the overall conclusion.
BlackYoshi @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Morons with power in the media are a dangerous foe indeed. What stupid garbage.
AJ @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Alkaiser, I completely agree. In 2005 only 5 movies recieved a rating of NC-17, and you can't find any of them on imdb.com.
zenprism @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
The National Institute on Media and the Family obviously hasn't read a report by the American Institute on Gunplay and Genocide (www.AIGG.com). In the report, it is stated that Family groups focus WAY too much on family issues and family topics while wholeheartedly ignoring the mass potential for genocide to fix this whole situation. What good will little Billy be to the cause if he can't take up arms when the time comes?
Mister Joshua @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Leave the country. It isn't going to get better. It is going to get worse. Leave the country now. Don't try to fight it. Just leave the country.
Andrew @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
You have to love the idiocy of conservative america.
Leomar @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Gee I never got a D before. Next time I'll read the writing on the box.
Zyx @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
"The MediaWise Video and Computer Game Report Card provides a snapshot of the interactive gaming industry with a focus on issues related to the welfare of children and teens."
^^ that was copied directly from the actual report itself (which i'm sure everybody who posted comments actually read).
funny how this whole thing got turned into "Reasons Why We Hate the ESRB and Decided to Target Them Explicitly"... but you can go ahead and squash that for a minute
if you look at all the information being presented in the report, you can quickly see that the purpose behind the whole thing is to raise a red flag that says there's plenty of blame to go around for the content kids are generally able to obtain these days.
the report contains (amongst other things):
Student Survey
Parent Survey
Arcade Survey
Retailers' Ratings Education
Retailers' Policies and Enforcement
Game Content and Ratings Accuracy
and just for good measure, for all those who rant about "PARENTS SHOULD KNOW WHAT THEIR KIDS ARE PLAYING"... there was even a section in the report that was titled:
'A Widening Gap Between What Kids Do and What Parents Know'
nice touch, don't you think? it's entirely possible they aren't as out of touch as you think, and that the employees of a non-profit organization that sit down and deal with this stuff day in and day out might actually know what they're talking about when they determine how effective the gaming industry's policies are.
bottom line for the reason kids have games they shouldn't?...
esrb = at fault
retailers = at fault
parents = oh yes... at fault
anybody who can't see this for what it is just needs to put the pipe down. it's an attempt to raise public awareness about a system that is flawed from top to bottom. if you don't have kids, you probably couldn't care less if there is a system at all... but i can say from experience that even a good parent (what i strive to be, anyways) needs help, and it does parents NO good to do their best if game publishers, ratings boards, and retail chains can't all make a decent effort as well.
the fact is that not every gamer is a well-educated socially-adjusted person over the age of 18... and as long as that's the case, there will always be a need and a desire for information pertaining to how the gaming industry as a whole can deal with that fact.
AssemblyLineHuman @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
How is the ESRB at fault? The only real difference between the ESRB and the MPAA is that the ESRB can only rate what the publishers give them due to the nature of video games (and that the ESRB has an EC rating to show which games are created specifically for younger children).
skman @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
i love it when parents can pass on their jobs as parents onto businesses and the sue businesses for not doing their jobs. gotta love america.
Billy Dee Williams @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
After visiting 17 arcades in five states, we are encouraged to see that this year all of the arcades have ratings displayed on at least some of the games. However, in arcades where there are ratings, only 78% of the games have ratings displayed (down from 81% in 2001) <<<
You mean, they visited all 17 arcades located in those 5 states? What states still have arcades?
Billy Dee Williams @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
After visiting 17 arcades in five states, we are encouraged to see that this year all of the arcades have ratings displayed on at least some of the games. However, in arcades where there are ratings, only 78% of the games have ratings displayed (down from 81% in 2001) <<<
You mean, they visited all 17 arcades located in those 5 states? What states still have arcades?
theLoneYoshi @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
What total hypocrisy. Firstly, the grade for ratings accuracy should be A. I believe that all of the ratings for video games are as accurate as they can be. "The report suggests the industry is at fault for letting kids own M-rated titles". And yes... again they blame the industry for parents letting their kids play M rated games. Why don't the parents take a look at what their children are playing? Or do they assume that video games are childish and that all video games are played by children and only children (I know people like this so don't tell me it doesn't happen)?
Although I do agree that Ratings Education is C+, the ratings are already self-explanatory. It does not take a rocket scientist, heck even a regular scientist, to realize that an M rating saying 17 and older means for audiences 17 and older. It just seems like parents are careless enough to not care about what kind of content is viewed by their children. My parents actually looked at ESRB ratings, and asked about "Parental Advisory" labels on CD's, and asked what movie I was seeing with my friends, but if I got an M rated game, or saw an R rated movie, or bought a CD with vulgar language, they would want to know about it themselves before they let me get my hands on it, even though they were pretty compromising. I believe more parents should be like that.
Although, I do agree about enforcement being a D- to some extent. It really isn't enforced at most retailers what games children are able to buy, but I know that Gamestop checks ID if you're buying an M rated game. This issue should be dealt with at retailers, and it's not the video game industry's fault at all.
littlestninja @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
This is rediculous. I do think there is a lack of empathy for parents in the industry, but now we are giving them too much room for them to blame video games for everything children do wrong. Its out of hand!
The ESRB ratings are FINE. I think all these people who keep bringing it up need something to do. Go pick up a Martha Stewart Living Magazine and make a nativity scene out of toothpicks, glitter and marshmellows. At least then you'll have something to show for your foolishness.
ZeroCorpse @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
One more time:
If parents would actually use the ratings, or pay attention when retailers tell them that an M-rated game is not right for their teenagers, then things would be better. However, parents BLOW OFF the ratings, and only react when they see something they're offended by, or when their kid gets in trouble. THEN they blame it on the games, the retailers, and everybody but themselves for allowing their kid to play M-rated games in his bedroom on his own entertainment center.
If they are so worried about FAMILY they should keep the gaming consoles in the FAMILY ROOM and stop pushing for government censorship.
Codemule @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Actually, this is a very major issue. Federal regulation is now being proposed by Clinton and Lieberman.
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1754&Itemid=2
Jay @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Look at these grades. Little ESRB is performing well beneath its potential. Mr. and Mrs. ESRB will be so disappointed in you.
Jau_Peacecraft @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
phew for a second there i thought it was something important. The gaming industry failing a report card is much like failing that potery class, in the end, it dosen't matter.
funkonaut @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Parents are solely responsible for allowing minors to purchase and play games rated M and AO. Liberals like Hitlery are wanting to ban the games because, according to her crazy socialist mentality, it takes a village to raise an idiot.
That's the difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives think it's the responsibility of parents to protect their children, and liberals think it's the duty of government to "protect" the ignorant masses (as they're viewed by liberals).
I'm libertarian and tend to side with conservatives on the issue. Government is perfectly right in regulating the public airwaves, but when dealing with tangible goods, it's the responsibility of the market and buyers to behave responsibly.
Now if only we can get drugs legalized... :-)
iamspartacus @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
This is the deal...
I can perfectly understand the report card grade when looking from one for perspective; however, I believe that the ratings given by ESRB are perfectly fine, A material.
What should happen is that store retailers should ask for id whenever anyone buys an M rated game. After checking the id, tell them what the game is rated M for.
This will help bring out parent awareness on what is really going on. I know some people will go in to the store with their 12 year-old boy to get an M or AO rated game rated for strong language and nudity and just buy it, not realizing what is on it.
If retailers would read the reasons it is rated M or AO and actually have knowledge of how much violence and nudity exists on the game. The retailer should state the accuracy to the consumer, in their opinion, and maybe then 12 year-old Timmy won't get his porno game of death.
I know this process may be tedious, but I believe that this will at least help with the problems we have with videogames today. And I am perfectly aware that its possible retailers wouldn't do their duty, as many of them do not now, and mess the system up.
But at least it would be a step.
What do you think?
Andrew Fong @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
Watch online distribution of games completely screw up any system they create. If they can't stop little Timmy from downloading porn, they're sure as heck not going to keep him from downloading GTA.
Virtuous @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
I don't care what the the National Institute on Media and the Family thinks about video games. Parents blame everyone else except themselves for their kids' failings.
crazedcow @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
didn't ESRB just release some independent group's report on getting a bunch of parents together in a room and playing video game footage similar to what the ESRB relies on to make its ratings (i.e. what is considered the "worst" aspects of the games)? i know i read about that somewhere, and i'm pretty sure the report found that about half the parents found that games were rated correctly, while like 30 or 35% of them thought the ratings were too strict. if you have that many parents saying that games are either correctly rated or too harshly rated, i would say that according to the National Institute on Media and the Family, the parents are f-ed up, not the games. (sorry i don't have a link to the article, i don't have time to look for it right now, but i remember reading it and thinking "damn, this only goes to show that there's a really vocal minority when it comes to parents being against the gaming industry")
AssemblyLineHuman @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
I think that the results were that about 80 percent of the parents got the ratings right (or maybe it's that they felt that the ratings were accurate), and 5 percent felt that the ratings were too strict.
AJ @ Dec 18th 2005 10:09PM
I forgot to mention, the highest movie rating is NC-17(no children under 17 even with permission) So really there are two video game ratings M and AO. So when they say why are there like no games with AO as a rating they need to look at NC-17 and see they need to count M ratings too.