The ESRB don’t play games

Aaron Ruby, the underground gaming culture’s spokesperson, has a score to settle with the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB). The ESRB has been independently applying and enforcing ratings, ad guidelines, and online privacy since 1994. The writer stated in his opinion column that the system applied to rating games should be different from those currently applied to TV and Movies. How do they give out ratings anyway?

They read and watch. After filling out a questionnaire on what the game’s about, the game developers submit it with a footage of the most extreme scenes from the game. The three trained raters (not expert game players–check their site, it’s true) from the board then hands out the rating based on what they read from the form and see from the vids–this was the reason why Aaron was disappointed with the board.

According to the writer, “I find it alarming that the ESRB does not bother to base its ratings on the entire experience of playing a game, instead relying far too much on submitted clips…” He ends his piece saying that the Truth In Videogame Ratings Act (which we touched on a few days ago) is proof that the rating system has failed.

We see his point here, game developers may influence the rating by submitting footage they want the board to see. What’s the alternative then? According to some people in the community, the board might as well play the game. They might not finish it 100% but it will give more info than just reading a piece of paper or watching some vids.

As gamers, we’d like to get know how you feel about the way the ESRB gives its ratings. If you don’t agree with it, what would you suggest? If you do, how can it be improved? Feel free to comment below.

Via Next Generation

Aaron Ruby, the underground gaming culture’s spokesperson, has a score to settle with the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB). The ESRB has been independently applying and enforcing ratings, ad guidelines, and online privacy since 1994. The writer stated in his opinion column that the system applied to rating games should be different from those currently applied to TV and Movies. How do they give out ratings anyway?

They read and watch. After filling out a questionnaire on what the game’s about, the game developers submit it with a footage of the most extreme scenes from the game. The three trained raters (not expert game players–check their site, it’s true) from the board then hands out the rating based on what they read from the form and see from the vids–this was the reason why Aaron was disappointed with the board.

According to the writer, “I find it alarming that the ESRB does not bother to base its ratings on the entire experience of playing a game, instead relying far too much on submitted clips…” He ends his piece saying that the Truth In Videogame Ratings Act (which we touched on a few days ago) is proof that the rating system has failed.

We see his point here, game developers may influence the rating by submitting footage they want the board to see. What’s the alternative then? According to some people in the community, the board might as well play the game. They might not finish it 100% but it will give more info than just reading a piece of paper or watching some vids.

As gamers, we’d like to get know how you feel about the way the ESRB gives its ratings. If you don’t agree with it, what would you suggest? If you do, how can it be improved? Feel free to comment below.

Via Next Generation