They have always annoyed me. I think that they are way to strict. Most of the time when I go looking for a new game to play I don't bother with it unless its rated T and up. The Blood and gore aspect really bugs me . I see it so I think cool blood then I play the game and all that happens is a red streak that dosen't even look like blood jets out of someone once or twice. Strong language is another one. They say shit or damn maybe twice. Any way enough of my rambling I want to know the DD users opinion on this.

Well, that's what you get when only 3 people are reviewing the games for the ESRB who are supposedly from various backgrounds...

Well just don't get me wrong, there are some that earn their rattings. Quake 4 had more blood and gore in it then every game I've ever played. I have a huge love for the trog medical facilitys.

There are also other ones that get me a little mad. The whole "suggestive themes" thing gets me. The only game that has this label and DESERVES it (that I have played) Is Fable (Even more with the lost chronicles). And that's only because "hearing" it might be a little to much for kids under 13. There was also a whore house which I laughed at madly while spending loads of money, lost chronicles only I even got the pimp hat, still have nightmares from the granny I had to go through to get it.

Getting off track so I'm stopping there.

Yeah, game ratings suck. Period. All they do is keep kids from getting to play fun games because they have idiot parents.

Thinking of this shit makes me want to hurt people, I'm going to go play some mindlessly violent game with lots of blood and gore.

All they do is keep kids from getting to play fun games because they have idiot parents.

Which is exactly the point. Since it's popular these days to blame the world's problems on games, I'd rather see people carded than politicians and parents rallying for harsher restrictions on game content. Besides, most people old enough to buy M rated games aren't going to base their decision to buy the game on whether or not it has blood and gore. I can get violence and sex elsewhere, if I buy a game I expect to have fun playing it.

isukun

All they do is keep kids from getting to play fun games because they have idiot parents.

Which is exactly the point. Since it's popular these days to blame the world's problems on games, I'd rather see people carded than politicians and parents rallying for harsher restrictions on game content. Besides, most people old enough to buy M rated games aren't going to base their decision to buy the game on whether or not it has blood and gore. I can get violence and sex elsewhere, if I buy a game I expect to have fun playing it.

Please clarify, I had trouble telling if you were agreeing with me or yelling at me.

And anyway, my problem with it is problems with the entire consept of censorship. The whole thing is that people are going to be violent regardless of what they see in games. Especially young children. Now, if their parents would let them play the game, but tell them while they're playing "It's bad to do this stuff in real life." then maybe the kids wouldn't be as bad. But probably not, since little kids hit people anyway, and an adult will only be violent if they're not taught that violence is bad. Which they won't be if they're never exposed to violence to be taught that it is bad.

Also, young kids have a natural aversion to sexuality and the opposite gender anyway. Notice how they're always like "Ewww.. kissing is gross" etc? That's instinctive. However, when someone gets to the age when they won't be naturally opposed to the concept, keeping them from seeing naughty bits won't stop them from being perverted. Really, it will just cause them to have psychological issues from being sexually repressed.

And anyway, my problem with it is problems with the entire consept of censorship.

Since they aren't limiting the message, I don't really consider it censorship. Censorship is what we would get without a rating system. Parent groups and politicians would push through laws which restrict content in games for everyone, not just certain age groups.

The whole thing is that people are going to be violent regardless of what they see in games. Especially young children.

Can't agree with that. There is scientific proof to the contrary that people are impressionable and children are more impressionable than adults. What people overlook in the debate over what causes violence in children is the context of influential material. Kids are more likely to do something if it is presented in a positive light. TV often presents violence with a moral message, usually depicting heroes who don't kill and villains who have little respect for life. Video games more often than not don't have any real moral undertones. They glorify the violence and reward you for the awful things you do. For an adult, this isn't really a problem, but for a kid, it sends the message that violence is a good and acceptable thing.

Now, if their parents would let them play the game, but tell them while they're playing "It's bad to do this stuff in real life." then maybe the kids wouldn't be as bad.

You can't pass a law which requires people to be good parents, unfortunately.

Really, it will just cause them to have psychological issues from being sexually repressed.

I'm not sure where you get that from. I've known plenty of people who grew up sheltered from that stuff who ended up having perfectly healthy sex lives later on in life. While I don't have any real problem with sexual content, I think it boils down to the message we try to send with this content. It isn't so much the problem of people being perverted as it is a problem with the way society perceives sex. Perhaps the psycholigical issues you talk about aren't due to being repressed, but are due to the excessive emphasis media puts on the sexual act. There is a fairly heavy stigma for those who are virgins in today's society. The sexual act is almost considered a right of passage or something which identifies you as a productive, adult member of society, even though it really has very little meaning outside of a dedicated relationship. Games, movies, TV, and music all seem to push this idea that if you aren't having sex you're worthless. That's far more damaging than not being exposed.

isukun

And anyway, my problem with it is problems with the entire consept of censorship.

Since they aren't limiting the message, I don't really consider it censorship. Censorship is what we would get without a rating system. Parent groups and politicians would push through laws which restrict content in games for everyone, not just certain age groups.

The whole thing is that people are going to be violent regardless of what they see in games. Especially young children.

Can't agree with that. There is scientific proof to the contrary that people are impressionable and children are more impressionable than adults. What people overlook in the debate over what causes violence in children is the context of influential material. Kids are more likely to do something if it is presented in a positive light. TV often presents violence with a moral message, usually depicting heroes who don't kill and villains who have little respect for life. Video games more often than not don't have any real moral undertones. They glorify the violence and reward you for the awful things you do. For an adult, this isn't really a problem, but for a kid, it sends the message that violence is a good and acceptable thing.

Now, if their parents would let them play the game, but tell them while they're playing "It's bad to do this stuff in real life." then maybe the kids wouldn't be as bad.

You can't pass a law which requires people to be good parents, unfortunately.

Really, it will just cause them to have psychological issues from being sexually repressed.

I'm not sure where you get that from. I've known plenty of people who grew up sheltered from that stuff who ended up having perfectly healthy sex lives later on in life. While I don't have any real problem with sexual content, I think it boils down to the message we try to send with this content. It isn't so much the problem of people being perverted as it is a problem with the way society perceives sex. Perhaps the psycholigical issues you talk about aren't due to being repressed, but are due to the excessive emphasis media puts on the sexual act. There is a fairly heavy stigma for those who are virgins in today's society. The sexual act is almost considered a right of passage or something which identifies you as a productive, adult member of society, even though it really has very little meaning outside of a dedicated relationship. Games, movies, TV, and music all seem to push this idea that if you aren't having sex you're worthless. That's far more damaging than not being exposed.

Isukun, I love you. You're having a debate with me without pulling in bullshit. Imma add you to my friends.

Really, society does cause a lot of the fuck ups that people do.Most of the problems that censorship tries to adress would be non-existent if people would just stop being idiots. Violence will be there no matter how much you try to get rid of it. The best thing that can be done is to let the kids see it and tell them that it's a bad thing. Also, the whole stigma with sexuality is just stupid. There's nothing wrong with someone wanting to have sex or knowing about sex. Just be sure to tell them "Wear a fucking condom, or you'll have a lot of problems later on."

After reading this, I realized that almost all of this would be unnecessary if parents would just do their fucking jobs. But like you said, we can't make a law for them to do that.

Yeah, it all boils down to parents doing thier jobs.

you know what annoys me more than the game ratings? Parents who sees something competely innocent as a dirty inndendo and competely overreacts. in fact, they find everything competely dirty even though there was nothing dirty going on. the same for violence and all that.

For instance, if a woman in a game happed to have a very nice body... breasts and all that in a revealing dress that manages to cover up all the body bits but leaves the rest exposed. And if she ever happened to flirt slightly with the hero then the overreactive parent goes: "OMG!!! She's in a very revealing dress AND she's coming on to the main character!! That's WAY TOO SUGGESTIVE OF SEX FOR MY LIKING!!!!111!!!! My kid isn't gonna play this game anymore!!"

All PC bullshit. That's all I have to say.

isukun
Besides, most people old enough to buy M rated games aren't going to base their decision to buy the game on whether or not it has blood and gore. I can get violence and sex elsewhere, if I buy a game I expect to have fun playing it.

That was a very interesting point. I thought about it and I realized that most of the gamers who would seek out a game based on its blood and gore would be children. Most older people realize that those things don't specifically make the game fun to play.

I'm 18 (and maybe i am a child in you eyes) but I prefer fighting games to have some sort of blood/gore. And I prefer it to be pretty intense. I don't know why, there's just something about seeing i that lets me know that I am actually hurting my opponents.

No it doesn't need blood and gore to be a good game, and it is true that when I play a game its for story, I seldom go back and play a game again just because I already know what happens, its almost like an interactive TV program.

I understand that and it's okay... I just think that blood and gore are a risky measuring stick by which to choose your games. There are a lot of really gory games that aren't necessarily good or fun.