Comments on: Calif. Game Sales Law Goes to the Supreme Court

By: Jared Newman

Jared Newman — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:24:09 +0000

@NanoGeek

Excellent, then we can debate.

Why would the state essentially throw out the ESRB? Because the proposed law is a vote of no confidence in the existing system. Even if the ESRB keeps putting its labels on games, this government system would undermine the ESRB by making its own decisions on what is too violent for minors.

To put it another way, the government would be deciding on a game-by-game basis what content is appropriate for America’s children. Does that raise any of your free speech flags?

I should clarify tht when I said movies and music aren’t scrutinized the same way, I meant by the government. It is not illegal for a minor to buy or see an R-rated movie; the industry enforces that voluntarily, just as the games industry does.

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 21 May 2009 16:24:21 +0000

So, um, an 18 sticker instead of the ESRB’s M (Mature 17+) label. Redundant, costly, stupid, and an effective way to increase demand for a game.

By: NanoGeek

NanoGeek — Thu, 21 May 2009 00:08:30 +0000

I strongly disagree with your view on the subject. You say that “the state would essentially be throwing the Entertainment Software Ratings Board out the window.” Why? From what your article says, all this will do is put an “18″ sticker on the box. It will not mess with anything the ESRB is doing. You also said “Why don’t movies and music receive the same scrutiny.” Movies in the theater do, but I agree with you that they should be treated the same way as videogames. I believe that the parent should decide what the child can and can’t do, and I think that this system will allow that. If the parent wants the child to play the game, then the parent can go out and buy it. However, if the parent does not want him to, then he won’t be able to.