Brownback re-introduces federal game bill

Posted Feb 14, 2007 at 12:45AM by QJ Staff Listed in: Tags: Doug Lowenstein, ESRB, Kansas, Pennsylvania, senator
Ó


Sam Brownback - Image 1Back in September, one of our MyQJ contributors talked about Kansas Senator Sam Bronwback (R) and his introduction of a bill called the Truth in Video Game Ratings Act. The gist of the bill is that the Entertainment Software Ratings Board's (ESRB) game ratings should be based on the game's entire content and not just on viewing a game's most offensive content.

Fast forward to today. Doug Lowenstein has relinquished his ESRB presidency and Senator Brownback is gunning to be the next top inhabitant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue (that's the White House for those who don't know). He is also re-introducing the said bill. This is what he said in a statement about it:

Video game reviewers should be required to review the entire content of a game to ensure the accuracy of the rating. The current video game ratings system is not as accurate as it could be because reviewers do not see the full content of games and do not even play the games they rate. The Truth in Video Game Rating Act would also commission a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study to determine the efficacy of the... ESRB ratings system.


Former ESRB head Doug Lowenstein said in September that this bill will not succeed and that people would not be represented by the average American parents. With him out of the picture, what happens next?

Via GameSpot

 
 
 

Comments [refresh]

by ssss - 2007-02-13 23:50
» sss

133t? gtfo my internets

by F1rst!! - 2007-02-14 00:44
» F1rst!

thats dudes a *****

by FreePlay - 2007-02-14 01:10
» OK, what?

It's not even POSSIBLE to see all the content in a game without playing completely through it. Even then, there's stuff you won't run into. Hot Coffee, for example. This wouldn't have been found simply by playing the game. So the entire concept of rating a game based on playing it through is rubbish. It wouldn't help and would just slow down the ESRB's job.



Maybe if parents actually did their farking jobs and kept M-rated games out of the hands of their minor children, we wouldn't have a problem here.

by mohaas05 - 2007-02-14 02:41
» actually...

i think this might be good. instead of viewing a mere video of the game they will actually play some of it and really see the nature of the game. i don't think its accurate to rate a game just on the offensive content.

by stinky_mcpeterson - 2007-02-14 02:45
» typo

Sam Bronwback (R)

by Flare576 - 2007-02-14 02:57
» To Mohaas05

Well, I hope you like your tax dollars going down the *****ter, because if this bill passes there will be no more ESRB. They can't afford to play though every game, it's sort of the reason why they have developers submit videos of the "worst parts of the game." Assume that every one of those videos is 20 minutes tops (I think they're only 5, but for the sake of argument). Play through an average game would take 20-40 hours if doing it for entertainment. Play through for REVIEW could take significantly longer ("What happens if I shoot this girl? OH, she takes off her top. Makes sense in a post-Duke Nukem world")



So, there would have to be a government run organization to review the games, and guess who'd pay for it?

by ATDA - 2007-02-14 04:16
» meh

I don't see the need. I haven't seen any games that have warranted a "rerating" due to unseen content. In general things are either adult, or not. The fact that SA had sex in it didn't make it an M game, the racial slurs, violence, and substance abuse did...all of which were pretty clear before you even put the game in.



Parents just need to gear up and monitor their kids better. Besides, it's the stuff that the esrb doesn't rate (like freeware pc games) that they need to be watching out for anyhow.

by VideoGame Historian - 2007-02-14 04:34
» Exactly!

FreePlay hit this one on the head. There is NO WAY that an agency could have a staff that would be able to play through EVERY permeatation of EVERY videogame that is released. It would take waaaaay too long and cost far too much money. And as he/she said regarding the Hot Coffee mod, even if you played EVERYTHING comprehensively , that wouldn't mean that you'd find those nooks and crannies that are hidden.



As it is, look at the Hot Coffee situation. The ESRB had already flagged San Andreas as a Mature title. It's not like that game snuck in at an "E" rating or anything. As ATDA says below, it seems like the system in place has done a pretty decent job so far. When you conduct a cost-to-benefit analysis, we won't get what we pay for.

by rileymartin - 2007-02-14 06:51
» browncrack

Brownback is a joke. He's a religious fanatic who just tells the religious people what they want to hear. He makes Bush look moderate.

by FreePlay - 2007-02-14 11:06
» Well...

They re-marked San Andreas as an Adults Only game for a while. I don't know if they removed the Hot Coffee scene and re-released it as Mature, but still, the whole situation was garbage.

by Mike - 2007-02-14 11:20
» Thats just stupid

Theres no way the ESRB can play all the games completely. Also they see the most offensive stuff in the game, so even if they play it they won't see more offensive content than the most offensive content. Stupid ignorant politicians. We need young politicians who know what they're talking about. But nooo, people feel more confident with older people, all the old people I know are selfish, ignorant, greedy and cheap, than young people.

by mr_bigmouth_502 - 2007-02-14 11:41
» yeah..

good point

Add comment

Security code
Refresh

Add QJ.NET
Add to My Yahoo!
Google Reader Subscribe with Bloglines
Add  to your Kinja digest Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader Add 'www.qj.net' to Newsburst from CNET News.com
Subscribe with SearchFox RSS del.icio.us www.qj.net
Add to Technorati Favorite! Add to My AOL
furl! it Stumble for Treehugger!