Welcome and The ESRB
Let me start off by welcoming you to 8bit Justice. This is mainly a vanity project for me, a place to try and hone my writing ability and a soapbox from which to shout. I am a first year law student and an avid gamer. I am trying to find a way to blend these two major portions of my life, and so far this is the best I have come up with.
I have decided that this, the inaugural post, will be as on target as possible in the realm of law and video games. To that end, let me discuss the recent proposed changes to the way the ESRB will rate games.
The ESRB, in case you don’t know, is the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, a non-profit industry self-regulatory board. Similar to the MPAA for movies, the ESRB is charged with rating movies, from EC for early childhood (3 and up) to AO for Adults Only (not intended for those under 18), giving guidance on the content of games. It is in the industry’s interest to have a guidance system like this. It keeps politicians from going crazier than they are, and helps parents and gamers alike get a feel of what the contents of the game are and what to expect from the game. The standards are industry driven, and are only enforced because the industry enforces them. There are no laws calling for the ESRB, there is no governmental enforcement of its standards.
Recently, the ESRB has come under a lot of pressure and criticism from all sides. The first major issue was the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (GTA:SA) infamous “Hot Coffee” incident. There was locked out content left within the code of the game depicting crude and really quite laughable depictions of sex. In order to access the content, a person had to download a patch, install it, and then could enjoy the pixilated titillation. Now, ignoring the fact that a simple search for “nude” on Google’s image search will give much more graphic results much easier than the work required to unlock “Hot Coffee” the media and politicians used the “Hot Coffee” mod to show that the ESRB was a broken system.
GTA:SA was rated M for Mature prior to the “Hot Coffee” incident, meaning that it is not intended for audiences under the age of seventeen. The descriptors on the box now are “Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Drugs.” It tells you what is going on in no uncertain terms. A month after the first reports of the mod, the ESRB and Take-Two Interactive (publisher of GTA:SA) agreed to re-rate the game as an AO and pull all copies from the shelves until they could re-label the games. Take-Two later got the rating knocked back down to M by removing the code from the game completely.
Was this a failure of the ratings system? It seems a tough argument to make. However, the ESRB took the criticism to heart and have tightened their ratings requirements. They changed their ratings requirements such that “pertinent content that is not playable, but will exist in the game code” must be disclosed as well. They have also started to consider the possibility of requiring a complete play-through before rating a game. This, of course, presents problems for two major emerging trends in the industry: 1) MMO games designed not to end and 2) Installments for existing games to be downloaded later or modifications and homebrewed add-ons (like Counter Strike originally was).
I thought the more surprising response to the “Hot Coffee” mod and ESRB’s response to it was that of the gamer populace at large. It generally viewed ESRB’s response as an outrage and attack on developer’s/publisher’s First Amendment rights. I love the First Amendment, but I do not believe there are absolutely no bounds to our freedom of speech. Everyone has the same rights, and therefore one person’s right cannot oppress another’s. But this isn’t even a First Amendment issue. This is not censorship. The ESRB is not preventing companies from putting any type of content they want in a game, they are just going to tell the world what that content is.
Why was the “Hot Coffee” code even included on the disc? If it was never intended for public consumption it should not have been printed on the final disc. The ESRB did what it needed to do to not have its power undermined by the politicians calling for much harsher responses. The fault lies with Rockstar. The GTA series has always been about pushing the envelope. The game play has stayed largely the same while expanding the scope of the game, and butting up against the boundaries of good taste.
I am not suggesting that Rockstar does not have the right to put any content it wants to in its game. In a supposed open market there should be no limits to the content put in a video game, but being free to put any content one wants into a game and expecting there to be no ramifications from said content are completely separate issues. Indeed, the ESRB is the accepted arbiter of ratings, and must be empowered and supported in its ability to delegate said ratings. It is not a perfect system. In fact, the descriptors for GTA:SA did not change between the M version and the AO version. This suggests that the descriptors could be better made to inform consumers of the actual content as opposed to it being a matter of degree. But it seems that Rockstar should take on the responsibility of its position as developer and be an upright citizen within the video game community.
I do not mean to imply that their response to “Hot Coffee” was improper. I am just questioning the initial wisdom of including the code on the disc. The ESRB did its job. We, as the gaming community, need to support the established ratings board in its role as buffer between gamers and other concerned parties. It is not an abridgment of developer’s First Amendment rights, nor a form of censorship to inform consumers of the content of video games. I, for one, applaud the ESRB and what it is trying to do.
Alright, next up will be our good friend Jack Thompson.
I have decided that this, the inaugural post, will be as on target as possible in the realm of law and video games. To that end, let me discuss the recent proposed changes to the way the ESRB will rate games.
The ESRB, in case you don’t know, is the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, a non-profit industry self-regulatory board. Similar to the MPAA for movies, the ESRB is charged with rating movies, from EC for early childhood (3 and up) to AO for Adults Only (not intended for those under 18), giving guidance on the content of games. It is in the industry’s interest to have a guidance system like this. It keeps politicians from going crazier than they are, and helps parents and gamers alike get a feel of what the contents of the game are and what to expect from the game. The standards are industry driven, and are only enforced because the industry enforces them. There are no laws calling for the ESRB, there is no governmental enforcement of its standards.
Recently, the ESRB has come under a lot of pressure and criticism from all sides. The first major issue was the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (GTA:SA) infamous “Hot Coffee” incident. There was locked out content left within the code of the game depicting crude and really quite laughable depictions of sex. In order to access the content, a person had to download a patch, install it, and then could enjoy the pixilated titillation. Now, ignoring the fact that a simple search for “nude” on Google’s image search will give much more graphic results much easier than the work required to unlock “Hot Coffee” the media and politicians used the “Hot Coffee” mod to show that the ESRB was a broken system.
GTA:SA was rated M for Mature prior to the “Hot Coffee” incident, meaning that it is not intended for audiences under the age of seventeen. The descriptors on the box now are “Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Drugs.” It tells you what is going on in no uncertain terms. A month after the first reports of the mod, the ESRB and Take-Two Interactive (publisher of GTA:SA) agreed to re-rate the game as an AO and pull all copies from the shelves until they could re-label the games. Take-Two later got the rating knocked back down to M by removing the code from the game completely.
Was this a failure of the ratings system? It seems a tough argument to make. However, the ESRB took the criticism to heart and have tightened their ratings requirements. They changed their ratings requirements such that “pertinent content that is not playable, but will exist in the game code” must be disclosed as well. They have also started to consider the possibility of requiring a complete play-through before rating a game. This, of course, presents problems for two major emerging trends in the industry: 1) MMO games designed not to end and 2) Installments for existing games to be downloaded later or modifications and homebrewed add-ons (like Counter Strike originally was).
I thought the more surprising response to the “Hot Coffee” mod and ESRB’s response to it was that of the gamer populace at large. It generally viewed ESRB’s response as an outrage and attack on developer’s/publisher’s First Amendment rights. I love the First Amendment, but I do not believe there are absolutely no bounds to our freedom of speech. Everyone has the same rights, and therefore one person’s right cannot oppress another’s. But this isn’t even a First Amendment issue. This is not censorship. The ESRB is not preventing companies from putting any type of content they want in a game, they are just going to tell the world what that content is.
Why was the “Hot Coffee” code even included on the disc? If it was never intended for public consumption it should not have been printed on the final disc. The ESRB did what it needed to do to not have its power undermined by the politicians calling for much harsher responses. The fault lies with Rockstar. The GTA series has always been about pushing the envelope. The game play has stayed largely the same while expanding the scope of the game, and butting up against the boundaries of good taste.
I am not suggesting that Rockstar does not have the right to put any content it wants to in its game. In a supposed open market there should be no limits to the content put in a video game, but being free to put any content one wants into a game and expecting there to be no ramifications from said content are completely separate issues. Indeed, the ESRB is the accepted arbiter of ratings, and must be empowered and supported in its ability to delegate said ratings. It is not a perfect system. In fact, the descriptors for GTA:SA did not change between the M version and the AO version. This suggests that the descriptors could be better made to inform consumers of the actual content as opposed to it being a matter of degree. But it seems that Rockstar should take on the responsibility of its position as developer and be an upright citizen within the video game community.
I do not mean to imply that their response to “Hot Coffee” was improper. I am just questioning the initial wisdom of including the code on the disc. The ESRB did its job. We, as the gaming community, need to support the established ratings board in its role as buffer between gamers and other concerned parties. It is not an abridgment of developer’s First Amendment rights, nor a form of censorship to inform consumers of the content of video games. I, for one, applaud the ESRB and what it is trying to do.
Alright, next up will be our good friend Jack Thompson.