Should ESRB rewrite the rating system? - PSP3D.com - Sony PlayStation Portable News, Homebrew, Hacks, Reviews, Videos, Mods, Forums

dq9 · #1 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 02:15 PM

Hey guys, I am writing a research paper on why ESRB needs to rewrite the rating system. Please take a minute to complete the poll and make any comments below. Please include what you think the rating system should be changed to. Please also let me know if I can use your response in my paper as a citation, quote as some teachers call it. I need your permission or I can't use it.

Thanks for the help!
If you're all wondering, I think the rating system should be as follows:

- EC: Early Childhood - Games suitable for children under the age of 5 years old. Equivilant to a G rating movie. (This would include games like Dora the Explorer or Math Blaster.)
- C: Adolesent Children - Games suitable for children under the age of 11 years old. Equivilant to a PG rated movie or an E rated game. Contains a little bit of violence, harmless humor, no blood or gore. (This would include games like Pokemon, Mario Bros., most sports games, or Tetris.)
- ET: Early Teens - No, not the alien! Games suitable for Teenagers in their early teens, 13-15ish. Equivilant to a PG-13 rated movie or some T rated games. Contains a little blood, adult swim style humor, etc... (Games suitable: Goldeneye, Dragon Quest

, or Marvel Ultimate Alliance.)
- LT: Late Teens - Games suitable for teenagers in their late teens, 16-17/18. Contains more blood and gore, more adult situations, adult humor.(Games: Half-Life, Counter Strike, Concker's Bad Fur Day, or Halo)
- A: Adults - Games that adults should be playing. Adult themes, Adult situations, blood and gore, adult humor. Not suitable for teens or children under 18! (Games: Grand Theft Auto or Bioshock.)

Above is what I think the rating system should be, it's only a rough draft and I could change it at any time. It is my opionin, please do not make fun of it or attempt to argue with it. If you think differently, please say so below and include what you think I should have said.

Again, I need your permission to use anything you say in my paper. After I have written my paper, I'll post it and eventually let you guys know how I did on it.

dorkdork777 · #2 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 02:31 PM

IMO I prefer the one we have in the UK (3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+), if only because it actually gives ages clearly. Though that one you made is better than the current ESRB ratings - games that are OK for under 11s are usually fine for people right down to childhood, so the way the ESRB split that zone up into 3 (EC, E, E10+) is a little stupid. Yours is better.

dq9 · #3 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 05:07 PM

I forgot to add the poll when I first posted this. I just added it now.

And thanks dorkdork777.

zzaz3 · #4 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 05:12 PM

Yeah, I think they should change it. Alot of the games that are rated Mature, are rated that for Blood and Gore, Strong Language, Violent, Partial Nudity, Ect... There are tonz of movies that are PG-13 that are rated for the same things.

lembi2001 · #5 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 07:05 PM

I like your rating system but i would change the C rating to include 12 yer olds too as they are not strictly speaking teens. I agree with Dork Dork that the UK system is clear as is the BBFC system with the symbols but something universal needs to be adopted.

Robert A. · #6 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 07:33 PM

Personally, I think "Adult/Mature" ratings and their respective restrictions on the underage (18-) are silly and pointless. Then again, I think it's stupid for the MPAA to do the same to movies, and I also think marijuana should be legalized... so...

One's maturity isn't really determined by a set age. I know when I was under 17, I was definitely a whole lot more "ready" for the scenes in Saw 3 than the 20 year old chick who was sitting in the seat a few front of me, who screamed her ass off and ran out the theater.

Sex and drugs? Comon' now, if you're parents instilled any cent of morals into you, you'd know what's right and wrong. And even if they didn't, it's each individual's responsibility to interpret what they see as they wish, not the government's duty to limit its access.

I can see how movies can influence teenage behavior negatively, but games? Jeez... I don't even notice the "Mature" aspect of most games these days anyways!

iamstrange14 · #7 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 09:14 PM

Robert speaks the truth. I don't think there's much that I cant handle now, that will be able to handle when i'm 20

jsf · #8 (**permalink**) 04-08-2008, 10:07 PM

I agree with Robert and iamstrange14 completely

dorkdork777 · #9 (**permalink**) 04-09-2008, 07:20 AM

I've always been somewhat more mature than some others of my age - I was quite happily playing GTA when I was 9, and I first saw South Park: The Movie when I was 10. So far, I haven't stolen a car and ran over pedestrians to find out if they really did drop cash in green glowing bundles, and as far as I can remember, I haven't waged war on Canada, nor do I put swear words in every other sentence.

So basically, I see no reason why I, when I was 10 or 11, shouldn't have been able to go into a shop and buy whatever games or movies, besides porn, that I wanted.

gdspsp · #10 (**permalink**) 04-09-2008, 08:38 AM

one area you did not address in first post is language. i assume you went to the ersb website an collected the ratings info there. also take note the esrb ratings system not only uses the ec, e, t, m, ao; but also states what kind of genre gives it that rating (i.e. fantasy violence, blood, sexual themes, gore, language, etc.) if you can go to a gamestop/eb games, they have little handouts for parents to use when shopping for their kids. i suggest snagging some to hand out and look at it yourself. further, please also look on the backs of some of the games while there and note how some games have a more "mature" rating than other games, but have very similar content (my only argument with why ersb is not so great) another point is how the games are rated in the first place. initially , I think, the game was not played through all the way; then later (and of course now after the "hot coffee" incident of gta:sa) companies had to submit not only the game, but all code in it to be looked over. Please also remeber the initial hubbub with manhunt2 being rejected as to graphic violence. of course the cheap, simple fix for Rockstar was to implement the "filter" to block what the ersb didn't like. manhunt2 was re-submitted, approved with a M rating, and not even 2 weeks later was hacked and the filter removed from the iso. the ersb said it couldn't rockstar accountable for what one individual did. somewhat a double standard in my eyes because hot cofee was unimplemented code in gta:sa and the content in manhunt2 was just blocked by the filter (implemented code) also i think the system has just gotten more complex (like many of the games now). do you remember doom? do you know what its rating was? how would it rate today if it was submitted? My mom would not let me play it when it came out because she thought it was too violent and gory. The ersb rating system has evovled but i think you are right it needs yet another revision.

You may use my statements in your paper after you do some background research.