NIMF: Industry in 'ominous backslide'

National Institute on Media and Family's annual MediaWise Video Game Report Card claims retailers', parents' complacency outweighs industry gains in protecting kids from violent games.

by

Last year, the National Institute on Media and Family gave the gaming industry a mostly glowing review in its annual MediaWise Video Game Report Card, which evaluates the industry's efforts to keep violent or offensive games out of the hands of kids. This year, however, the NIMF has a strongly different take, calling the industry's performance "an ominous backslide on multiple fronts."

The NIMF began its assessment of the industry by lauding efforts of some specialty retailers and console makers to limit children's exposure to what it considers to be inappropriate games. Examples of this include the family timer being added to today's Xbox 360 fall firmware update, as well as Target's removal of Take-Two's controversial Manhunt 2 from store shelves.

The NIMF feels that the industry on the whole has become complacent with what the report calls "voluntary standards" that regulate games. "But right now, families and retailers have put too much faith in the current ratings system; the Entertainment Software Rating Board has put too much trust in the gaming industry; and some in the gaming industry have not done enough to monitor themselves," reads the report.

The NIMF takes particular exception to some churches and libraries using games to bring in a new wave of young audiences. The NIMF states these efforts "undercut the rating system and sabotage parents who are trying to follow the ratings and restrict their children from playing M-rated games."

For the first time, the NIMF also teamed with pollsters Harris Interactive to determine the role of games in the lives of kids and their parents. The online survey polled 1,360 participants ages 8 to 18 and 2,392 adults aged 18 and over (690 of which were parents) within the US. The survey found that 72 percent of parents knew little to nothing about the ratings system and were unable to recognize many ESRB ratings symbols. It also found that 38 percent of mothers and 31 percent of fathers never play games with their kids. Games are also a source of arguments, according to the poll, with 38 percent of parents saying they argue very often with their kids over playtime and when games should be played.

"Overall, the MediaWise-Harris Interactive Video Game Report Card Poll suggests that parental involvement is lower than it should be when it comes to the role of video games in their kids' lives," concluded the report. "For the most part, useful ratings information is available. It is up to parents to put it to use. The data, however, show that the ratings are not serving their intended purpose in the lives of American families."

The NIMF's report also addressed the recent controversy surrounding the ESRB's rerating of Manhunt 2. The report called the ESRB's argument that the content is only accessible through illegal mods "nonsense," saying that "the ratings process has not kept up with technological advances." According to the NIMF, simply bringing to light objectionable content on the game disc that is normally inaccessible to users is not enough, saying "the ESRB fails to discourage hackers and makes adult content all the more enticing to children in its right-under-their-noses secrecy."

The NIMF believes not enough is being done to curb what it calls the "undeniable potential harms of excessively violent video games." To highlight the absolute possibility of harm, the NIMF points to several research studies conducted this year that directly link games to learning.

"In one study, 375 adolescent and young adult cancer patients were randomly assigned to play either a commercial video game or also a game developed to teach about cancer and its treatment (Re-Mission). Those who played Re-Mission had significantly higher gains in cancer knowledge," the report said, referencing a research study appearing in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

As it has in the past, the ESRB quickly responded to the MediaWise report card. Unsurprisingly, the ratings board takes exception with many of the accusations purported by the NIMF. "This year's NIMF Report Card contradicts recent Federal Trade Commission findings related to parents' awareness, use and satisfaction with ESRB ratings, as well as retailer support of the ratings," said ESRB president Patricia Vance in a statement. "In addition, NIMF exhibits a significant lack of understanding of and, as a result, grossly misrepresents the facts surrounding last month's hack into pirated versions of Manhunt 2, a game rated for ages 17 and older that carried prominent and explicit warnings to consumers about its violent content. At a time of year when parents are looking for helpful guidance about video games, this year's Report Card does little more than sow unwarranted doubt about effective tools like ESRB ratings."

Vance's statement did not specifically detail what facts about the Manhunt 2 incident were misrepresented by NIMF.

Summarizing the FTC's findings, Vance said, "Its nationwide survey of over 1,300 parents showed that nearly nine in 10 parents with children that play video games are satisfied with the ESRB rating system, three in four use it regularly, 94 percent find the ratings easy to understand, and 59 percent never let their children play Mature-rated games. The most recent FTC mystery shopper research concluded that 'substantial' progress continues to be made by retailers to enforce their store policies regarding the sale or rental of M-rated games to those under 17, matching that of theatres' restrictions of admittance to R-rated films and far exceeding that for the sale of R-rated DVDs."

According to the FTC report, secret shoppers aged 13 to 16 were able to buy M-rated games 42 percent of the time, while children successfully purchased R-rated movie tickets 39 percent of the time. For R-rated DVDs, undercover shoppers had a 71 percent success rate in walking out with the goods.

Discussion

101 comments
lozandier
lozandier

With America as it is, there should be a more strict guideline on ALL Visual Media. Not just games, but TV shows and Movies. The data spells it out, but no one seems to comprehend it correctly; the data does not implies games are the biggest problem, but parents and retailer workers. Think about this for a minute, who gives these M-rated games to the ten-year-olds? Not the Walmart or Target CEO, but clerks. Who gives the ten year old 15-60 dollars to buy these M-rated Dvds, games, and etc., a ten year old can't formally work... THE PARENTS. Even when a clerk does a moral decision and NOT give these games to children, a parent can show their id, give the game to their kid and it is out of a retailer's hands; they got the money for it and it's not their kid, so why care? Call me crazy, but something must be done to not allow clerks to do this as much; like, you know, FIRE THEM. With employment becoming increasingly popular with teens, it's not surprising they would give M-rated games and media to other teens or allow fellow teens/friends go through the movie line (though I never seen it, but sometimes not even PAYING) . I'm 17, and I see stuff like that all the time while I always take the safe route; if I don't do it who will? I'm not limiting it to young clerks at all, it doesn't matter what age as most employees of all ages at retailer outlets do it all the time. My point is that authoritative power need to crack down and actually enforce unforeseen consequences for selling these Mature-rated mediums to kids. Most won't do it because it isn't a "big problem," or "I'll lose money and that hurts me AND the movie, game,and book industry, and besides it's not my kid." To be honest, the problem is never going to go away, it's almost saying there will be world peace..... However, the hard part of this for most to understand is that--knowing this might be VERY complex to understand--not all kids will be affected anyway by violent video games. To be more precise, I believe when a child hits 12 and over, that's when a parent must decide how much of mature-oriented entertainment that kid can handle. Many kids can understand what is mere fiction and real without a problem and analyze how much is distorted and focus on the message of a scene, page, picture, and etc. These are the kids that are sound, or, for the ones that have characteristics that are rare and uncommon to their age group the "gifted and talented." But the problem is, kids naturally feel it is unfair that "brilliant" Tommy can play Halo but they can't. I can easily say, like many "when I was a child I played so and so and it didn't affect me." But that is illogical, I'm a different person out of thousands; what may be too hot or salty for me may be too mild and in need of more salt for another. That is the same as mature rated games being in the hands of 12 year olds and over. I was different as a child, I was a gifted and talented child; while most children were empty handed trying to get Mature-rated games, I wasn't as I carried myself and entered conversation more sophisticated than others. When there was a time I DID get refused a sale initially, I didn't argue, I persuaded myself to a sale. As last resort, actually two occasions I can remember, because my parents GAVE me sometimes their checkbook and credit cards to pay their bills if their were gone on vacation or if they were lazy/tired I would buy the desired game over the internet, the easiest place to get M-rated games hassle-free. Now it would be stupid for me to say all 12 year olds should play M-rated video games, I was more than self-conscious and assertive of myself than most 12 year olds are; I basically parented myself (Had to growing up) while other 12 year olds might have gone mad or overboard. Overall Parents and retailer employees need to get their act cleaned by being more moral and more caring towards Mature media and Children. Some parents buy video games for their children JUST to distance themselves from their children or/and not be bothered by them for periods of time. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if that is on most parents' agendas when they buy their children video game systems; Heck, who knows? I might do the same thing too (but with logic)!

KakarotTheMonky
KakarotTheMonky

"""""Those who played Re-Mission had significantly higher gains in cancer knowledge." No, really? A kid learns more about cancer from a game about cancer than from a game not about cancer? That's just shocking! Who the hell are these bozos, anyway? Whoever paid for that study sure got their money's worth!"""" LMAO! I thought the same exact when I read that. Such utter obviousness and stupidity it's incredible they actually used that as one of their points.

TAEnemy
TAEnemy

This whole article seems less like criticism for the ESRB and more like a big question asking: Why are retarded people having children? "The survey found that 72 percent of parents knew little to nothing about the ratings system and were unable to recognize many ESRB ratings symbols." Seriously? I mean, this isn't a joke, right? Adult human beings can look at a symbol that says ADULTS ONLY and have no idea what that means? Even more insulting is the idea that it's up to the industry to try and solve this little problem. I highly doubt Rockstar Games can be held accountable if a parent is dumb enough to not understand what a big letter "M" with "MATURE" above it means. Sorry everyone, it can't get any easier. There will always be bad parents who end up raising kids in questionable ways. Sometimes you just have to accept that people will reap what they sew. Idiot parent can't figure this out? Well, let natural selection do its job then. Leave the games for the rest of us.

limafoxtrot
limafoxtrot

"In one study, 375 adolescent and young adult cancer patients were randomly assigned to play either a commercial video game or also a game developed to teach about cancer and its treatment (Re-Mission). Those who played Re-Mission had significantly higher gains in cancer knowledge," Wow you think!?!?! Imagine that - the ones who 'studied' about cancer research knew more about it - there's a shocker! oops - some else posted the same thing -

qiwihead
qiwihead

"Those who played Re-Mission had significantly higher gains in cancer knowledge." No, really? A kid learns more about cancer from a game about cancer than from a game not about cancer? That's just shocking! Who the hell are these bozos, anyway? Whoever paid for that study sure got their money's worth!

jsutton0010
jsutton0010

The way to stop kids from playing violent video games is for the parents to say no and tell them your not of this age so you can't play this game. If a child becomes violent from playing a certain game then it is the parents fault.

TheoleDominion1
TheoleDominion1

"A child should have full reign to DEBATE or ARGUE as much as they want." Lol..... spoken like a true child. Sorry the world doesn't work that way. Sure you can say whatever you want, just realize there's consequences for your actions. And I realize some choose to learn the HARD way..lol. PS. I'm not making fun of the situation,my son thought the same way at one time. Of course, he feels differently now since he realized saying or doing whatever he wanted wasn't worth the price he had to pay for defying his parents.

jnvwv
jnvwv

quincy0191: Most of this stuff is bull. Saying that you have to be 18 to play a violent game and letting kids under 18 watch the nightly news is rather hypocritical. ....by argue, I assume you mean whine like a child. "But MOM, &^$@#.. I wan't that game and if you don't buy it for me, I'll scream and cry and pout! I'll call you four letter words and tell you your being unfair, and then slam my bedroom door... (you know.. the one you provided)". And comparing GTA to the nightly news is such a bad comparison, its not EVEN funny..... I've noticed that most children who compare ANYTHING to the nightly news CLEARLY has never seen it. CHILDREN, like YOU, have the RIGHT not to get abused.... and that about is the limit to their rights. ...just be thankfull your not MY child. "Yes, most 12-year-olds shouldn't play violent games, but not all 12-year-olds are most 12-year-olds. " No... your wrong. NO 12 year old should be playing M rated video games. NO EXCEPTIONS. Saying that is kin to saying "most 12 year olds shouldn't drink beer, but not all of them (ie: not ME)" Oh... and NEVER use the words "reason and logic give me cause to be disrespectfull and argue"... you only sound foolish when you do.

quincy0191
quincy0191

Most of this stuff is bull. Saying that you have to be 18 to play a violent game and letting kids under 18 watch the nightly news is rather hypocritical. And screw you. Hell yes children have the right to argue, debate, do whatever the hell they want with their parents, just like their parents have the right to take their stuff away when they get out of control. I know most adults don't respect children, which I find ironically immature, but that doesn't mean that a) they're not intelligent or b) they're not right. Yes, most 12-year-olds shouldn't play violent games, but not all 12-year-olds are most 12-year-olds. There is always the exception that proves the rule, and if logic and reason are on the side of the child, the child should have full reign to ARGUE or DEBATE as much as they want.

jnvwv
jnvwv

"He said, "Since when a child has a right to argue with an adult or their mother and father?", which implies that he doesn't believe in debates between parents and children." A debate and an arguement is two different things. A debate is civilized, an arguement is not. If you don't know the difference, your probably arguing.

JerseyJ2007
JerseyJ2007

"Stand up for yourselves? How? This isn't a human rights violation here... its a M rated game, that you probably shouldn't be playing in the first place." For the record, I'm 18 years old. Just because I disagree with most of the age limit double standards doesn't mean I'm a certain age. What does this conversation have to do with M rated games, anyway? "Dictating, and debating are two different things. When a child (Legally defined as someone younger than 1 wants to have an open discussion with their child, it should usually be allowed. However, a child should not be allowed to tell his/her parents how things are gonna be." He said, "Since when a child has a right to argue with an adult or their mother and father?", which implies that he doesn't believe in debates between parents and children.

TheoleDominion1
TheoleDominion1

This not about abuse children. In that case arguing over gaming is the LAST thing they would be worrying about. They would be thinking of getting out of there and contacting the proper authorities. And the tide has changed, the parents more afraid of the their children and can't control them. There are more children out of control then parents.

jnvwv
jnvwv

TheoleDominion1 No you're wrong. Children do not have the right to ARGUE with their parents. That is beyond debating. Which is EXACTLY what the article said. I AGREE

TheoleDominion1
TheoleDominion1

No you're wrong. Children do not have the right to ARGUE with their parents. That is beyond debating. Which is EXACTLY what the article said.

jnvwv
jnvwv

"I don't have children," No, You don't. I do, so I'm gonna trhow my two cents in. "You said that children have no rights to dictate anything to their parents, which, as I said, sounds like you're saying that no child should debate with their parents about ANYTHING" Dictating, and debating are two different things. When a child (Legally defined as someone younger than 18 ) wants to have an open discussion with their parent, it should usually be allowed. However, a child should not be allowed to tell his/her parents how things are gonna be.... and sometimes "because I said so" should be all the explanation you get on some stuff. "Like I said, it's stupid to get annoyed when the kids stand up for themselves, especially with all the disrespect people show them." Stand up for yourselves? How? This isn't a human rights violation here... its a M rated game, that you probably shouldn't be playing in the first place. "Children have no rights to..." Children only have what rights that their parents and the law allow them to have. EVERYTHING else is a privlidge or a perk. Now... let the thumbs down begin.

JerseyJ2007
JerseyJ2007

@TheoleDominion1- You went off topic by claiming that you got annoyed at a certain sentence and then bringing up that chauvinistic, "Children have no rights to..." statement. We're on the same topic. You said that children have no rights to dictate anything to their parents, which, as I said, sounds like you're saying that no child should debate with their parents about ANYTHING, no matter the circumstances, because they parents are "always right" You might not have noticed, but plenty of parents treat kids like **** and expect the kids to treat them with the respect that they don't deserve. Like I said, it's stupid to get annoyed when the kids stand up for themselves, especially with all the disrespect people show them. I don't have children, but I wouldn't let them "run the house", and I'll be damned if I teach them to respect their elders, just because of the fact that they're elders, because I know good and well that not all adults are as innocent as they claim to be. How typical that you'd assume that I'm a kid just because I don't agree with you on this situation. If I am a kid, why did you even bother to respond to me?

TheoleDominion1
TheoleDominion1

@ JerseyJ2007- Don't try to make a stupid point based on extenuating circumstances. STAY ON TOPIC! My point was about children arguing with their parents over how much time they should spend playing a video game. In my opinion children can't dictate anything to their parents. If you want to debate and argue with your children then go ahead. You'll find yourself repeating and pleading for 10 minutes or more just to get them to do something, as a parent I won't tolerate that. But bringing up issues like abuse and neglect shows not only you don't have a valid point on the topic, but probably let your own (if you have any) children run your house too. I not saying I'm any better than anyone,but my children show the proper respect to adults and do what they're told. In case you've never heard of it called DISCIPLINE. Ps. Just dawned on me, you're probably a kid yourself. Oh yeah, a little advise, before you take a stand against something make sure the ground you're standing on belongs to you. Especially if you're in someone else's house.

Rockman_00X
Rockman_00X

It's no surprise that DVD ratings aren't enforced as much as video games. I'm sure when video game companies start endorsing politicians, and donating in to government programs (especially in the US) they won't make a bid deal about ratings. I remember when I was 10 years old and on my way to Hawaii (by myself) I was watching the in flight movie Frankie and Johnnie (I believe) and no one ever told to close my eyes or made me go to the restroom during the sex scene. Just goes to show, whoever kisses a#$ to politics, gets less restriction on how their product ratings are enforced. My own mom didn't care I watched R rated movies but at the time when "gangster rap" was all the rage, she tried to make sure I didn't have cassettes with the "Parental Advisory" label. Goes to show how dumb some people can be and that the media is two edged sword and can influence decision.

wolford61
wolford61

It is not the job of the industry to be the parents of our children. We should be thankful that the ESRB rates games as a tool to parents. When will parent step up and take responsibility for what their children watch/ play/ read/ listen to?

PseudoFinrod
PseudoFinrod

Once again, people who don't know what they are talking about make fools out of themselves. The problem is that the fools are trying to meddle with our pastime...

eryk1
eryk1

"In one study, 375 adolescent and young adult cancer patients were randomly assigned to play either a commercial video game or also a game developed to teach about cancer and its treatment (Re-Mission). Those who played Re-Mission had significantly higher gains in cancer knowledge," the report said, referencing a research study appearing in the Journal of Adolescent Health." In another study related to this one, a higher rate of kids and young adults that went to school could read. It was an instrumental study into the bull sh** that they are trying to pas of as fact. I can't beleave that they put that in there report. The only good thing, and it will probably be over looked, is that these people learned for the game. They can't find any solid prof that games are bad because most people are so jaded form other media outlets like the news, TV, and the increasingly violent moves that are being put out. When was the last time any one saw a G rated movie, are even a PG? But you know what, it all because of VG. They are being used by politictions to boost there campaigns for election time. Have anyone noticed that this happens every two years or so. It's crap, and the only good thing is that all the people that this effects are or will be voters soon, and we can finally get all the fire starters out of office. The amount of money, time, and resources spent by these people trying to take are rights away is bull sh** and I'm ready for it to end. Find something els to f*** with like the war, unemployment, rising health care, rising gas prices, low average wage. What we have we like the way it is. There are to many people agents you for you to win in the short amount of time between election campaigns.

JerseyJ2007
JerseyJ2007

@ TheoleDominion1 You sound like one of those chauvinists who believe that all parents are innocent, intelligent human beings and all kids are some kind of demons. I suppose you also think that kids should NEVER get upset if their parents abuse them, right? With the amount of parents who abuse, neglect, and mistreat the kids and expect them to just take it, it's crazy that people can get offended when kids stand up for themselves. Parents who prevent kids from viewing certain things, just because of their age aren't exactly bright. Kids need to especially stand up against the rating fanatics.

maestromjs
maestromjs

The problem is that the parents are out there fighting for their kids all the while they are ignoring them @ home. Sorry little Johnny, Daddy can't play with you right now, I have to go to a rally to save you from the devil.

hunter8man
hunter8man

Their logic is so flawed, I don't even know where to begin. So the ESRB is supposed to be held responsible when someone like me can buy Ratchet and Clank, and I find a way to make Clank into a naked Jenna Jameson? By their logic, every game made should have a M rating on it? We aren't stupid. We know your agenda, and it's not going to work.

darkdragonmage9
darkdragonmage9

retailers', parents' complacency outweighs industry gains in protecting kids from violent games. well DURRRRRR isn't that what people like be keep leting these people it's not the industrys problem if anything the gaming industry is doing everything right it's dam retail why would they refuse to sell something to someone thats money out of their pocket and the parents who don't bother reading the ratings in the first place raise your own dam kids you made them now live with them if you don't want them playing m rated games stop buying them said games if they buy them them self take it away from them and stop giving the little idiot money obviously they aren't respounceable to handle money

matt_dangelo
matt_dangelo

yuo know what..if people are like not smart enough to distinguish fact from fiction then that isnt the developer's problems....

curua02
curua02

Gee... The people selected to play a game DESIGNED TO TEACH YOU ABOUT CANCER had greater cancer knowledge. I guess that proves everything.

MetalZombieII
MetalZombieII

shloobonya, I don't agree with your method, but that is your choice. I have also taught my child the differences between reality and fantasy, but I still regulated the content she viewed and what she did on the internet. I believe it is up to the parents to keep the things that they find inappropriate out of their childrens hands. I for one didn't allow my child to play violent videogames, or watch certain kinds of movies, or listen to certain kinds of music, until I felt she was mature enough to do so (which by the way, isn't always according to age). It simply comes down to parenting and some people fail miserably at doing it, they allow their children to do as they please and allow TV, the internet and videogames to act as teachers and babysitters, because they can't be bothered with the responsibility and when something goes wrong, they then have a scape goat and can once again side step responsibility for their actions or in-action as the case maybe. The sad fact is, to many people have children before they are mature enough to handle it and then they blame everyone and everything but themselves when their children screw up or do something wrong. NIMF should stop wasting time blaming the videogame industry and start educating and working with people to be better parents.

TheoleDominion1
TheoleDominion1

I find this sentence disturbing" "Parents argue with their children." Are you kidding me? Since when a child has a right to argue with an adult or their mother and father. When my parents told me to do or not to do something, there was NO ARGUMENT. Parents are getting weaker by the minute, and you see it all the time in public when "Lil Johnny" has to be told 5 or 6 times to stop. Pathetic.

v8nnwilder
v8nnwilder

Firstly my girlfriend is a NIMF and she rocks... This NIMF is utterly boring and useless in it's own way.... Okay now something more serious... As I said before we live in a violent world and in a twisted way it is our nature that makes us like that...Not games or movies or anything like that... And if it does it's not the material that make us that way it's our education and how we are brought up... If I was a 13 year old kid and i just saw "daddy beat the crap out of mommy...." and I'm playing Manhunt 2 I would also get aggressive... hell man if I saw abuse or were being abused even Mario Brawl would make me pretty p****** off. That is just one example to go buy but I think you know were I'm heading with this...

JerseyJ2007
JerseyJ2007

@shloobonya Smartest posts I've ever read on this site. Nice to hear/read from a parent who isn't a chauvinistic idiot. People who believe that the media causes violence in teens and children have no life. I've played violent games since I was seven years old, starting with Killer Instinct (SNES). Some of my friends played violent games when they were younger than that. Our parents didn't put that age restriction crap on what we watched/played/listened to and none of us tried to emulate dangerous things that we saw or heard. Plus, most of us (including me) are in college now. Plenty of parents come home drunk and abuse their spouse and/or kids. Why don't they (the Government or whoever) ban liquor? People smoke in front of kids before the kids even know what secondhand smoke is. Why aren't cigarettes getting banned? Last I heard, liquor and cigarettes are two of the leading causes of death in the country. Look at video games. Look at tag. Look at certain cereals. They (and plenty of other things) are made/marketed mostly toward children and they're either banned (in some places) or in talks to be banned. This might come as a shock to some people but... most of them never killed anyone. My point is, every time the youth likes something, chauvinists will use every excuse in the book to keep it from them. Rock & Roll was the Devil's music, video games turn kids into killers, Bratz inspire little girls to want to grow up to be prostitutes, and the list goes on. The video game debate is just another chapter in the Older vs. Younger Generation Debate, a.k.a. only-bad-when-the-youth-does-it. Ironic how these "child protection" groups are among the first people to treat the kids/teens like some kind of mindless drones who believe everything they see/hear.

upstartrex
upstartrex

Violent games cause no harm to be protected against.

aura_enchanted
aura_enchanted

personnaly the only good thing they said was that parents are more to blame for bad content in the hands of minors. this is why i would like a job at an eb games. this way 9 year old timmy gets a free rebate for sensetive content on the internet with his halo 3. that'll teach em to buy stuff obliviously. Finally id like to ad NIMF u got nuthin on us and youve said nuthin new that isnt jargon and nonsense plz insert fist in mouth at this time and stop trying.

Erebus
Erebus

So, if I can use Final Cut to 'hack' a DVD and remove clothes from the actors, and then make that scene available on the Internet with the tools to burn it to a DVD, that movie should be re-rated? That's exactly what NIMF is saying about the hackers of Manhunt 2. BOTH situations are absurd.

LordSpleach
LordSpleach

The NIMF basically wants the games to be rated on how dirty the mods can make the game. What a load of crap, all they got is Jack and S*@t, and Jack left town!

Kfoss
Kfoss

parental complacency imagine that!..."mam this game is rated M for mature" ... "yea yea yea i dont care...Fjkhljkhgfh!!! Sean AND Amy PUT THAT DOWN RIGHT NOW BEFORE I BEAT THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF YOU!!! When we get home!!!! BRATTS!" "can we hurry this up i have a divorce lawyer meeting at 2pm" LOLOL yea face it...the future is doomed

PacoL250
PacoL250

NIMF almost made it over the mountain of ignorance and then promptly slide back down a bit; they seemed they were close to saying that parents and the like need to take more action but they really didn't want to make that the focus now do they? Enough of the blame game and it's time parties on all sides work on this together. Retailers need to enforce their rules a tad more stringently, the ESRB needs to make themselves more visible, and even if that is done or not, parents need to be far more involved in what their kids play/do.

Boo_looDODO
Boo_looDODO

Wow...i dont even know where to begin. What are they trying to prove to us?? Anyhow, i believe a large majority of us here on GameSpot are aware of many facts and things mentioned in the article and i dont thnk too many of us care if ""Its nationwide survey of over 1,300 parents showed that nearly nine in 10 parents with children that play video games are satisfied with the ESRB rating system, three in four use it regularly, 94 percent find the ratings easy to understand, and 59 percent never let their children play Mature-rated games" Please, how can someone justify that they NEVER let their children play M-rated games. I wonder how what percentage of parents are aware of the fact that their child is actually playing M-rated games. For me this is just another article that is somehow trying to explain the generation gap and the general misconception of games and the people who play them :) thank you!

gnbfd
gnbfd

Ok. so as far as I see it... the cancer thing means if you play a game about cancer, you'll learn about cancer. Now let's make more comparisons: Gran Turismo-teaches you how to drive Cooking Mama-Teaches you how to cook Sims-teaches you about life Brain Age/Big Brain Academy-teaches you how to teach Yu-Gi-Oh-teaches you how to play a children's card game DDR-teaches you how to dance Karaoke Revolution-teaches you how to sing Guitar Hero-teaches you how to play guitar Virtua Tennis-teaches you how to play tennis Super Mario Galaxy-teaches you how to travel through space and rescue princesses from fire breathing dragons

Yuck_Too
Yuck_Too

--dn3datomiced -- But see you just proved my point. On the one hand you say Halo 3 is "M" because of human opponents and blood letting but Uncharted should only be "T" even though it has the same things? Or would Oblivion be "T" is there was no human race involved like MP3? We know a lot more then the average person about these games and we are still unsure why something is one way and not another. All I was saying is that the ESRB should be much more defined in how it does things and they need to let us know. (edit: just noticed the ESRB post...looks like I belong over there)

crunchb3rry
crunchb3rry

#&%@ the children. If parents can't do the job, that's their problem. The average gamer is 30+ years old. So "kids" are an extreme minority that does not warrant overpolicing of the industry.

TristanH12
TristanH12

What how were they able to walk out the store, whenever Im at the store the register flashes whenever I attempt to pick up any M-rated game, they even check my idea and im over the age.. where are these people shopping

zeldagamefreek
zeldagamefreek

Wow ever since i was little my parent said that video games where bad and this just makes it a greater cliche like a bannana is to sliping and falling.

Maverick82102
Maverick82102

PARENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHERE THE F*** ARE THE DAMN PARENTS??

sybillium1
sybillium1

"The data, however, show that the ratings are not serving their intended purpose in the lives of American families." Well duh. And they blame the government or the developers when there kids get there hands on a GTA game or Manhunt. Parents need to start taking responsibility.

dn3datomiced
dn3datomiced

YuckToo Metroid Prime "T" Halo 3 "M" Last time I played both there was precious little difference between killing aliens FPS style and I'm absolutely positive a 12-year old makes less distinction. The distinction is the presence of humans, and the fact that there are, while not extreme, still copious amounts of bloodshed. Shoot another player online with a shotgun, and you'll smear blood all over the floor and wall. MP3 has no such human bloodletting, and you don't use ballistic weapons. That makes enough sense to me. Or how about: Oblivion "M" Uncharted "T" This one is tougher, but remember that, prior to getting a clearer picture of the of the gory zombies and corpses, and the (fairly) graphic depiction of a fatal torture in the Brotherhood, the game was rated T. Uncharted may have stealth kills and gunplay, but as far as I know, there is not a great deal of gore, not much bullet spray, and it's not any more violent than an Indiana Jones film, which I assume would be the comparison. Still, it is a bit tougher to picture, as I haven't played it yet.

V-Nine
V-Nine

Retailers are forcing these youths to buy these games..heheheh.

Haimoimoi
Haimoimoi

"People who read a book about cows knew more about cows than people who read a book about badgers"

Brmarlin
Brmarlin

"In one study, 375 adolescent and young adult cancer patients were randomly assigned to play either a commercial video game or also a game developed to teach about cancer and its treatment (Re-Mission). Those who played Re-Mission had significantly higher gains in cancer knowledge," the report said, referencing a research study appearing in the Journal of Adolescent Health." ----- Wow....does that make any sense? Of course you're going to learn more about cancer if you play a game about it than if you play Manhunt. Should we really trust an organization that claims to be pro-family and children? Many of these groups kill freedoms in those names. Not to mention that the NIMF's founder suggested that a certain game promoted cannibalism and then went on to say that gamers tricked them and not that the group was wrong. At some point, Dr. Walsh has attempted to make a new word: "Killographic". Screw the NIMF.

Blue-Sphere
Blue-Sphere

I agree with the very first comment on these news from Yuck_Too, along with all others who have suggested that parents should be getting criticized more for this.

These ratings on games are like a waste of time and paper to have em on the game boxes because most kids who want violent games end up with them anyways. For example, I've been somewhat surprised at the amount of young kids I've played with on Gears of War on XBL. I'm talking about 7, 8, 9, 10 year olds that I've played with. It's unbelieveable, and I can't understand how parents would let kids that age play a game like that. Jeez.

For a game that "requires" you to be 18+ to play, and you're 16 or 17, then I don't think it's a big deal for you to be allowed to play it, but 7 or 8? Come on.