Saying to get them banned.

I understand that children should be protected from such things.

An argument has always been "it's on the parents" but often times the child begs for the game and will show sadness without it. And parents usually just want their child to be happy.

Videogames like Manhunt are simply inappropriate for blacks. Does anyone else agree? If you agree that video games are inappropriate for children, why not blacks?

This is not a bad bill compared to the other ones, this is just making sure minors don't get subjected to violence and other offensive material found in games targeted for mature gamers, but isn't that what the rating systems do?



Yeah it looks like the ratings are a little vague sometimes but maybe only in the US (ESRB), however in the EU the PEGI rating system is more specific, on the game boxes you have the age and icons that specify the content of the game and it covers some of the items on that list, as for the CERO in Japan i don't know much about it but i think it is the most flexible of the rating systems (I'm not really sure about this one).

...it's a bit stupid, but for us gamers, who know what we want, when we're getting it, and how good it is, it's not affecting us...

Personally, when a game comes out, which I'll know beforehand since I'd be waiting for it, I check if it's good online, check Wikipedia for its overall reception, check youtube gameplay vids, then buy it.

This only affects window shoppers really, and are they going to even notice?

True its dumb, but why do we care, we know what we're buying anyways.

I honestly believe that even if this bill is passed it won't make a difference. Parents are still gonna get the games their children want just to see that smile on their face. I think that the ESRB details such as "Blood and Gore" or "Violence" may not be too specific but it provides enough information for a person/parent to depict whether or not the game is suitable or appropriate for a certain age

That's fine.. And make sure all cell phones have a big "MAY CAUSE CANCER" warning and such. Anyway, this is a retarded bill.. A responsible parent shouldn't buy something they don't understand for their kid. If a kid asks for a game named "Manhunt" or "Grand Theft Auto" for example, a parent should use common sense.. A game named "Halo" .. they should think "What is this Halo?" and look at the game box.

I disagree with him entirely though, what he was saying is if we're going to discriminate against children why don't we descriminate on race. Which is a load of *****. Children need a childhood. I gave you a smiley Foolmonkey and justin a frown. :)

I can commit suicide in just about any game, from Super Mario to Halo, perhaps they need to change that to scripted suicide, even then that's a bit silly. The Koopa Troopers in Mario frequently are scripted to walk straight off a cliff. Realistic depiction of suicide, that could cover it?

They should also only list what the game has in it, otherwise these stickers will become a false alarm and quickly turn into Homer's "Everything is OK alarm" ie it only turns off when there's a problem.

If they just went well this game could have any of the following in it from stealing candy from a baby to dropping an a bomb on hiroshima, no one is going to pay any attention to the warning.

What are YOU playing? Please, please, tell me. I want to see what everyone is complaining about because I've never seen rape Or sodomy in any of the games I have played. Do you by chance import?

just create laws that enforce the existing ratings... it works for movies, it will work for games.



no need to go and add more warnings to the cover. doing so would only make more work for the industry, and it wouldn't accomplish anything...

There went all of my favorite games...

Guess I'll have to wait a few more months then I can buy them myself...



This is so stupid. It'll probably be turned down like the rest of them.

* COMMISSION OF A VIOLENT CRIME

* SUICIDE

* SODOMY

* RAPE

* INCEST

* BESTIALITY

* VIOLENT RACISM

* RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE

* SADO-MASOCHISM

* SEXUAL ASSAULT

* SEXUAL ACTIVITY

* MURDER

* MORBID VIOLENCE

* ILLEGAL USE OF DRUGS OR ALCOHOL



Or as we like to call it "Another day in NY"...

Your post is entirely racist. You just blamed blacks for ruining everything. Also, there was NOT less discrimination in the old days. We're talking 300 years of it. I guess you don't realize that there are rappers of ALL races not just black. GTFO and go back to school if you aren't already in it. If you're already in it, lrn2lrn.

that manhunt and rockstar in general are the cause of all this. IMO rockstar should be ashamed of manhunt 2, that game is a tasteless disgrace and brought a huge wave of ***** crashing into the fan for the video game industry

Unfortunately there are plenty of bad parents out there who should be allowed children and will buy their kids 18 films / 18 game / rap music / stuff their kids with processed foods.

Theres no other alternative, its not like you can prosecute parent for making their kids fat, or buying them pron.

From what i've seen in my lifetime i'd have to disagree.

Politic like to exaggerate their measures. It is fine to put parental advisory labels on some games, but locking them away? that's utterly ridiculous.

I agree with sqrl175 I got my A$$ tore up when I was little and I am glad my dad did that. It has made me a responsible 36yr old adult..

How is that list, printed in its entirety on any box that has ANY of the content listed, going to 'help' any parent? --How many games have "killing" in them? In Resistance2, you "kill" Chimera; in World At War, you kill Nazis; in Assassin's Creed, you kill. .....But, does this qualify any of these 3 games to be on the same list that includes "rape, incest, sodomy, sexual assault, etc"? --I don't think so. If I were a parent, I might be perfectly fine with my kid "killing" 100% fictional Chimera. I would not be so fine if the game included a scene with someone getting raped. ....The proposed list would then be 100% meaningless to me, in attempting to distinguish the true filth from the acceptable violence. And, if it has no value, why add another piece of governmental oversight? (Because, this obviously doesn't just mean that a label miraculously starts appearing on games: no, our taxpayer dollars will go to creating the committee which review ALL the games and then approves or disapproves of the label being applied or not to any game. ---No thanks; I'm fine with the ESRB spending its OWN money to do that.)

So by definition, you're saying kids can kill somebody because they don't like them?



Obviously not, so don't say something is relevant to something else when it has no relevancy whatsoever.



Also: Kids SHOULD be protected, but a locked box away from the public? A little overboard I think.