It could be "Game Over" for the video game industry's voluntary ratings system if presidential hopeful Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) gets his way. Brownback recently reintroduced the Truth in Game Ratings Act, which proposes a revamping of the Entertainment Software Ratings Board's methods. Though some parent groups support such legislation, gamers and game industry officials have strong concerns about the bill's constitutionality.
Brownback's bill restricts freedom of speech and makes game developers scared to put the content they want into their creative works, said Chris Kohler, editor of Wired.com's Game Life blog. The government cannot regulate independent bodies, but Brownback is trying to make a special case with video games, he said.
"It does not happen with books, it doesn't happen with music, and it doesn't happen with TV," Brownback said.
Brownback's Truth in Video Games Act mostly criticizes the process by which raters review game content.
"The current video game ratings system is not as accurate as it could be because reviewers do not see the full content of games and do not even play the games they rate," Brownback said in a Feb. 14 statement.
The content of video games is "a real concern to parents," said Dan Isett, Parents Television Council director of corporate and government affairs. Game developers may try to hide violent or sexually explicit content from raters, he said.
If passed, the bill would require game raters to play video games in their entirety before categorizing them for parents. It would also commission an investigation of the current industry-run ESRB ratings system and determine if an independent rating system is needed.
Bill may be 'unrealistic'
Under the ESRB's current system, raters watch developer-prepared tapes of a game's "pertinent content" to make their judgment. If something is unclear, raters may play an incomplete version of the game. The ESRB also performs play tests of games already being sold to ensure rating accuracy, but this is only done for a pool of random and hand-selected games.
Raters currently work part time, but the ESRB has plans to hire full-time raters so that it will be possible to perform more postrelease testing of games, said ESRB president Patricia Vance. The process by which raters review games will not change, however, as the move to full time is not a reaction to any government bill, she said.
It's unrealistic to require raters to play though entire games, Vance said, because they are "unlike TV shows, where the beginning and end are not too far apart from each other."
The ESRB would require an "astonishing increase in manpower" if it had to play entire games, said Kohler. Xbox 360 title "Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion" and many other role-playing games can take almost 100 hours to play through, he said. Meanwhile, online multiplayer games like "World of Warcraft" constantly add new content and may not have an end at all.
These excuses show irresponsibility on the part of the video game industry, Isett said.
"To say that a multibillion dollar industry lacks the resources to adequately rate its own material ... is absolutely ludicrous," he said. "I would recommend that the industry get serious about its obligation to rate its own content."
But even if the industry put all its resources toward playing the games it rates in their entirety, there would be no benefit for parents and other consumers, said Ed Desmond, vice president of congressional affairs for the Entertainment Software Association.
"Instead of providing consumers and parents with more information, it would in fact cripple the ESRB ratings system," he said.
It could take hundreds of hours to sufficiently play popular sports game "Madden NFL," for example, and parents wouldn't be any better informed, he said.
"You'd have to play that game ... at every position of every team in every stadium on every day of the week in every weather condition in every color uniform ... What additional content would you be providing parents?" Desmond said.
Incentive to deceive
Brownback and other critics have also voiced concern that letting game developers create review tapes for their own games encourages them to deceive the ratings board, Vance said. But this practice has not presented problems because "there is no incentive for a [video game] company not to disclose material," she said. If the ESRB found that a rating needed to be changed after the game reached stores, the developer would lose money from the recall and additional production costs, she said.
"It's absurd to say that [game developers have no incentive] when there have been instances of people going out of their way to deceive the ratings board," Isett said. When it was revealed that a user-designed download for "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" called "Hot Coffee" provided access to sexual content hidden on the game disc, developer Rockstar Games' initial response was one of denial, he said.
"I hate to use the word 'lie,' but they simply were not truthful," Isett said.
After "Hot Coffee," the ESRB updated its definition of "pertinent content" to require developers to disclose all non-playable content in their tapes, including material the developer may believe is inaccessible.
But is it constitutional?
One particularly controversial provision in Truth in Game Ratings requires the government to assess the ESRB's ratings to determine if it has incorrectly categorized the content of a game.
"Putting the government in the role of deciding what is an appropriate rating based on content is not the role of government in [the ESA's] eyes," Desmond said.
Government regulation of the video game industry raises "constitutional and free speech issues," Vance said.
Isett said he believes Truth in Game Ratings does not involve the government in the rating of games as others fear. "It simply says that if [the ESRB] is going to rate a game they must produce an accurate rating based on something real," he said. "[The PTC] will support any concept that protects children from [explicit] content."
Government regulation of the video game industry is unnecessary, Desmond said. The ESA has met with Capitol Hill offices to urge them not to sponsor Truth in Game Ratings and to offer alternatives outside of legislation to address concerns, he said.
'Folk devil'
Teaching parents about the ratings system is more important than regulating it, Vance said. The ESRB uses TV and the Internet to inform parents about the importance of checking ratings and is constantly exploring new media, she said. Last year, the ESRB partnered with the PTA to distribute brochures and online resources to 26,000 PTAs around the country. "We want parents to be involved," she said.
Politicians like Brownback have turned video games into society's latest "folk devil," Kohler said. The situation can be compared to the plot of "Music Man," in which con man Harold Hill wins over a small town by telling them that pool tables are morally corrupting its youth, he said.
The video game industry is not dominated by violent content as some perceive, Desmond said. Only 10 to 15 percent of games released each year contain violent material, he said.
"It's one of these cyclical events," he said. "Over time you've seen policy makers look closely at a new form of entertainment or one they may not personally be familiar with," he said, pointing to comic books and rock music as examples. The video game industry's significant growth in the past five years has made gaming a popular political issue, he added.
ESRB critics are not anti-video games, and neither is the Truth in Game Ratings Act, Isett said. "Nobody's saying that these games should not exist or adults shouldn't have access to these games," Isett said.
"The only question is if children should have unfettered access to these games and if the industry itself should have some sort of meaningful situation at which they arrive at the ratings for the games in the first place."
ESRB GAME RATINGS
Early Childhood: Toddler tested, mother approved!
Everyone: 6 and up. The game may contain some cartoon, fantasy or mild violence and some mild language. Not too upsetting.
Everyone 10+: 10 and older. Games might have slightly more cartoon violence and mild language than an E-rated game. It might also have "suggestive themes."
Teen: Game equivalent of PG-13. May contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling and/or occasional profanity.
Mature: Same as an R rating, games rated M are suitable for ages 17 and up. These titles may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sex and/or profanity.
Adults Only: Should only be played by adults 18 and up. Prolonged scenes of intense violence and graphic sexual content and nudity are not for children!
