ESRB Responds To Mixed Review From FTC

Thanks to GameSpot for its interview with Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) president Patricia Vance, following yesterday's publishing of a 'Marketing Violent Entertainment To Children' report [PDF link] by the Federal Trade Commission. The report's findings are discussed by 1UP, noting the FTC "still gives mixed marks to the American games industry when it comes to marketing mature games to a younger audience." Vance indicates that "ESRB's focus will continue to be on getting retailers to display signage at the point of purchase that increases awareness and use of the rating system", although, even after improvement over previous years: "69% of survey participants (aged between 13 and 16) were able to buy an M-rated game without hindrance, including 55% of unaccompanied customers." Outside of the ESRB's duties, "The FTC's chief sticking point was still with the placement of [M-rated] videogame advertisements... [which] still frequently appear in enthusiast gaming magazines and other publications technically aimed at a teenage audience."

Comapre this to Movies

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Most 13-16 year olds would have no problem getting in to see the matrix revolutions which shows kung fu kicks to the head and amounts of people getting torn apart on the ends of machine tentacles.

I find it puzzling that video games have much higher standards applied to them in comparison to movies. Consider GTA, 18-cert. For what? Swearing,car-jacking,violence. What about gone in 60 seconds? 15-cert for exactly the same stuff.

Re:Comapre this to Movies

[KDR_11k]

Keep the context in mind. In Matrix Revolution you see the "evil" machines doing their evil work, in GTA it's the player, ie. the "good" guy, committing the violence. Also, GTA doesn't include harsh penalties for dying or being arrested. Sure, you lose your guns and some cash, but that's neglectible. In GTA, there are no severe consequences to your actions, you can kill people to get, say, the gun they're holding or just for fun (GTA1 and 2 even gave you money for killing people).
The active aspect (you're comitting murder instead of watching it) and lack of moral lessoning (you don't experience killing random people as "bad", which in some eyes is promoting violence) makes it worse than some movie where e.g. Schwarzenegger mows down bad guys to save the world or avenge his family or something. It's not just the subject matter, it's how this subject matter is presented to the player/viewer.

Not game industry's fault

[arieswind]

69% of survey participants (aged between 13 and 16) were able to buy an M-rated game without hindrance, including 55% of unaccompanied customers.

This is not the fault of the game industry.. it's the fault of all the Wal-Marts and Best Buys in the world that employ people that don't ask for id when someone young-looking tries to buy a M rated game, or they ask for id but then sell them the game anyways. There have been several documentaries on news shows about this type of thing. Secondly, even if there was 100% enforcement, if the parents don't care, they will just go out and buy the game for the kid anyhow, so...

Re:Who will think of the children?

[mutewinter]

I wonder what percentage of readers of Playboy and Penthouse are under 18.