Does Smash Bros. Brawl merit a Teen rating?

by Griffin McElroy { Mar 15th 2008 at 12:30PM }

We've all had a week to "FALCON PUNCH!" our way through the Wii's latest mega-anticipated title, scrambling for an innumerable amount of Smash Balls and mastering our technique with the subtly complex Jigglypuff, but in our excitement, we can't forget that group who is unable to join the Super Smash Bros. Brawl parade -- we speak, of course, of the twelve-and-under crowd, who are excluded from the party due to the game's Teen rating from the ESRB.

A blogger for San Jose's Mercury News recently called the mildly restrictive rating into question, claiming that the "crude humor" and "cartoon violence" present in the game is comparable to any number of children's TV shows. While we're usually not ones to disagree with North America's most esteemed game graders, we can't help but see where he's coming from.

What do you think about the rating -- is it completely unmerited, or does the game really run the risk of inspiring youngsters to attack one another with trophies and hammers?

Tags: ESRB, fighting, nintendo, rating, smashbrosbrawl, ssbb, T, teen, violence, wii

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Mar 15th 2008 12:32PM

Yeah that is strange. It should have gotten E10 or soemthing.

da governator @ Mar 15th 2008 3:58PM

Parents don't look at the ratings anyway, so it won't matter.

Joshua @ Mar 15th 2008 4:44PM

Seriously, as long as the game isn't rated M or above, no one (relatively) really cares what the rating is.

PSN: KillaKornbread (the shirt is a lie!) @ Mar 15th 2008 5:00PM

that M doesnt even matter if the news is any indication of how the world views games as a whole anyway. "this new game Grand Theft Auto is aimed at kids and rewards them points for killing cops and hookers!" i dont even have to remind anybody how many times we've all heard that. if 8 year old John-boy tells his mommy he wants that new Grand Theft Auto game enough, his mom will almost certainly buy it just to shut him up.

that said, the Teen rating it got makes absolutely no difference what so ever.

ShortFuse @ Mar 15th 2008 12:36PM

N64: E for Everyone
Melee: T for Teen
Brawl: T for Teen
Naruto Clash of the Ninjas: T for Teen

ESRB has raised it's standard. I don't think they give any fighting game, even if it's marketed to kids less than a T for Teen.

nutman @ Mar 15th 2008 12:38PM

This is a bit strange. I figured Melee was rated T because it was one of the many games that suffered from the ESRB not having the E10+ rating. Since that was introduced I assumed Brawl would have an E10+ rating.

Is it possible that they rated T because the previous games were rated T? I read that sometimes the ESRB gives sequels the same rating as the previous game because generally the games in a series do not change significantly as far as content goes.

Geist @ Mar 15th 2008 2:33PM

That's because they have yet to play Mario Bros: Murderiffic Killtastic Land.

Mr Khan @ Mar 15th 2008 3:04PM

You would think they would like to keep sequels in line like that, but they didn't for Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance to Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn

PoR was rated T, and was at the tail-end of the period before they introduced the e-10 rating. Radiant Dawn was rated E-10, however

xeleion @ Mar 15th 2008 10:58PM

Hm, I would think that a Fire Emblem game would get a T rating before a Smash Bros game, since it's relatively more realistic.

Patrick @ Mar 15th 2008 12:40PM

It's the same with movies. Movies that would have gotten G and PG twenty years ago now earn a PG and PG-13 rating. It's because we live in a more anal-retentive society and politically correct society now.

Worst Review Ever @ Mar 15th 2008 12:55PM

Sorry Patrick, but I have to disagree on that one. If they went back and re-rated everything according to today's "standards", I think a lot of movies would jump down from an R to a PG-13. Do you really believe that our society is stricter about crap like that now? Politically correct? Sure. But there is no way that sex, violence, and language aren't more acceptable now than in 1976.

Patrick @ Mar 15th 2008 1:12PM

@WRE

Movies that earned a G rating back in the day that would earn a PG now:
Treasure Island, Darby O'Gill and the Little People, and most other live action Disney films (especially ones with drinking and swordplay).
Movies that earn a PG rating now that would have earned a G rating back in the day:
The Incredibles, and any other kiddie movie with cartoony violence.
Movies that earned a PG rating back in the day that would earn a PG-13 now:
The Superman movies, the original Star Wars Trilogy, and just about any other good movie that we older gamers grew up with. Probably E.T., too.
Movies that earn a PG-13 now that would have earned a PG back in the day:
Transformers, the Bourne trilogy, and just about any decent PG-13 action movie now.
And those are just the examples that popped into my head.

Worst Review Ever @ Mar 15th 2008 1:25PM

I think that you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying in every case, I just think that movies like 3 Days of the Condor, The Godfather and maybe Part 2, and some other oldies but goodies would merit a PG-13 if they were re-rated. I can't see the Bourne trilogy rating a PG, though. Can you think of any earlier movies with the same kind of action that were rated less than a PG-13? I'm not being sarcastic, I'd really like to know.

nutman @ Mar 15th 2008 3:44PM

I disagree with that entire statement. Films that 20 years ago received an R, now get a PG13.

J.Goodwin @ Mar 15th 2008 1:47PM

Even if they didn't "merit" it, if they were being released today, the filmmakers would most likely make whatever minor edits were necessary to bring the rating down to PG-13 for the sake of the box office.

Godfather probably not. FFC would probably kick the violence up a notch to get an R rating if it came back PG-13 :D

It's got Snake in it. It was going to get a T rating.

Grog @ Mar 15th 2008 1:53PM

The only reason current PG-13 movies would have been PG back in the day is because the PG-13 rating wasn't added until the mid-80s.

Overall, I think the trend has definitely been toward the middle classifications (PG, PG-13) over the extremes (G, R). You're kidding yourself though if you don't think that sex, violence, and language aren't much more acceptable than they used to be.

mietha CAG @ Mar 15th 2008 2:46PM

In response to grog: Yeah, most movies are rated PG or PG-13 now, because the largest demographic, by far, that actually GOES to a theater is teenagers. They can't get in R's and most of them aren't going to go to a G. Most adults are smart enough to wait for the disc release to avoid the fucking assholes in theaters. I think I've actually been in a theather maybe 3 times in the last 5 years.

jopojelly @ Mar 15th 2008 2:48PM

You kidding? The first Bond film, Dr No, had full frontal Female Nudity and that was rated PG.

ark_keeper @ Mar 15th 2008 2:48PM

Quoted from wiki referring to the 70's/early 80's: "In retrospect, some ratings are culturally odd, though it must be remembered that the rating standards then were more liberal; violence, sexually suggestive speech and action, naked men, and mild cursing were acceptable in the lower ratings, while sexual intercourse (either implicit or explicit) and naked women were not."

Rating are definitely more strict now than they used to be.

ZeroCorpse @ Mar 15th 2008 2:59PM

There were plenty of movies in the 70s and 80s with nude scenes and F-bombs that were rated PG. These days, that would get an instant "R" rating.

For example, "Sheena" was PG in 1984. It features a nice, long, very nude scene where we get a very good look at Tanya Roberts... In fact, a few of Ms. Roberts' movies have been strangely rated PG when they contain elements that would be a definite R-rating today; "Beastmaster" comes to mind (more nudity).

"Dragonslayer" had a full nude scene, too. Rating? PG.

"Barbarella" was rated PG as well. Again, the same nudity, sexuality, and language today would warrant an R from the MPAA.

However, all this is moot. The ESRB and the MPAA are two different groups with different goals. The MPAA's business is to rate movies to determine what demographic it should be marketed to. The ESRB's purpose is to give overprotective parents a little information about the games their kids are playing, and to provide the gaming industry with a "See? We're policing ourselves" card whenever Governors and legislators get on the "video games are violent and they're destroying society" bandwagon.

It's all propaganda, but for different purposes.

The ESRB exists to keep Congress from passing censorship laws regarding video games. As such, they're EXTREMELY sensitive to violence and sex in games.

The ESRB also makes the assumption that "games are perceived as being for kids" in their ratings and is thus ultra-sensitive, while the MPAA assumes that there's a specific audience for each movie and seems to rate a little more broadly because of it.

I mean, let's be honest: The "Hot Coffee" version of GTA San Andreas wouldn't have gotten any more than an 'R' rating if the MPAA were rating it as a movie, and the 'R' would be based on the violence and language (F-bombs everywhere) and not on the mostly-clothed sex scene in the Hot Coffee sections.

But what did the ESRB do? FREAKED OUT! OMFG! There are people RUBBING AGAINST EACH OTHER WITH THEIR CLOTHES ON and they're insinuating it's sex! We've got to protect the children (who shouldn't be buying this with an M rating anyway) and pull it from store shelves where it sits just an aisle away from "Boogie Nights" and "Showgirls" on DVD! Quick! Give it an AO rating! It's practically pornography!!!

Give me a break.

The ESRB exists to placate oversensitive adults. That's IT.

Sir Fidlious Wong (Zeon Defense Force) @ Mar 15th 2008 9:35PM

And you guys forget, All Dogs Go To Heaven nowadays would be an instant R. Smoking and all that....

ApolloIV @ Mar 15th 2008 12:41PM

Zero Suit=T rating

jackbauer @ Mar 15th 2008 1:03PM

Scandalous!

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z46/pabloshong/24kyy4l.jpg

Haon @ Mar 17th 2008 11:40AM

Thats exactly what I was thinking.

1UPMASTER @ Mar 15th 2008 12:41PM

its obvious when you think about it. Snake's manliness earned Brawl a Teen rating.

Judd @ Mar 15th 2008 3:29PM

Honestly, I thought that this game was a little more mature than Melee. Yes, Melee had lasers, but like people mentioned look at Snake. The guys attacks are grenades, remote explosives,and his charged A shoots a rocket. Not to mention his final smash being shooting people from a helicopter ladder.

Also, I don't if this would qualify as being more "mature", but Wario's fart attack would be controversial for an E rating. Plus, anyone see Luigi's final smash? He's clearly on acid.

iMax @ Mar 15th 2008 12:41PM

Even though, yes, it is a little too much, it's not going to stop anyone who isn't a teenager from playing it.

Mike Jenkins @ Mar 15th 2008 1:22PM

Yeah, there's nothing stopping people from buying T rated games, like there is with M rated games. If a kid has the money he'll buy it, and most parents don't actually worry about a T rated game unless it seems like a bad game.

ZeroCorpse @ Mar 15th 2008 3:07PM

You don't know my sister, then. She wouldn't let her kids play 'T' rated games until they were 13 or 14 years old. She took it quite seriously.

Of course, she also had a device that blanked out "bad" words on broadcast television and replaced them (in closed captioning) with "safe" words, so her kids wouldn't hear any swearing.

It was annoying to watch a TV show at her place, and have the sound drop out and the word "behind" appear whenever the word "ass" or "butt" was spoken, let alone harsher words...

And it ruined lines, too. "You're the [BEHIND] of the joke!" or "Now wait a [GOOD GOSH] minute!" just weren't as cool.

And movies-- Ugh! Utterly ruined: "I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick [BEHIND]. . . And I'm all out of bubblegum."

Phi Nguyen @ Mar 15th 2008 3:35PM

LOL @ ZeroCorpse. I have a friend whose parents bought one of those boxes to "protect" their youngest child as well. It uses a flash drive as a key so that the parents can watch their shows uncensored. Off topic, isn't it strange that when the word, "Asshole", is said on tv, they bleep out "hole". Wouldn't you think that they'd block out "ass" instead? I guess "ass" could be interpreted as a donkey, but still.

Phi ^_^

rockintom @ Mar 15th 2008 4:23PM

Its funny how much people will "protect" their kids from swearing, and then send them to public school in the morning.

ThornedVenom (Harley Quinn Defense Force) @ Mar 15th 2008 5:19PM

I'll have to look into those boxes whenever I'm going to have really young kids.

It's not that I think that my kids would be offended by the language, it's just really annoying when they repeat those words, especially when they don't know when it is or isn't appropriate (like during dinner with guests).

nickj6282 @ Mar 17th 2008 10:06AM

@ThornedVenom

Or, you could just do what I do. Teach your kids which words are not OK for them to use or repeat. "Those words are not OK for you to use, only adults. And even adults shouldn't use them so I definitely don't want to hear you repeat any of them."

My son has never sworn.

iMax @ Mar 17th 2008 7:10PM

In front of you. lolz.

dantebk @ Mar 15th 2008 12:46PM

There's a great danger here that kids playing this game will use the violent tactics they see on their friends and family. Do you want to be on the receiving end of a fireball or a Sonic spin from a seven-year-old? That's an embarrassing hospital visit.

-Dante
http://www.gamestache.com/

iofthestorm @ Mar 15th 2008 3:31PM

Wow, I don't know whether to + you for the wit or - you for the blatant url whoring.

dantebk @ Mar 17th 2008 5:50PM

Both?

Angusailde @ Mar 15th 2008 12:50PM

Maybe it's just the massive amount of Cartoon Violence. Most kids cartoons don't feature the main characters wailing on each other for 30 minutes, do they?

Geist @ Mar 15th 2008 2:36PM

You're kidding right, every kid's cartoon features good guys wailing on bad guys. I don't know the names of any of them, but I've seen commercials that feature that in spades.

mietha CAG @ Mar 15th 2008 2:42PM

I hope that was sarcasm. Last I checked, the number cartoon in america was Naruto...

n3rrd @ Mar 17th 2008 8:38AM

Violence has always been a part of cartoons, and always will be. The violence shown in American versions of Anime shows is no worse than that you'd encounter in Looney Toons, etc.

Bassir @ Mar 15th 2008 12:50PM

If the parents are that concerned, and the child wants it that badly, they can just look on the back and check why the rating is what it is. Or they can ask an employee, I'm sure someone there in the game department (or GameStop) can explain if the game is appropriate.

but whatever who cares if they're not willing to ask or look