Culture Clash

(June 2006)

With Teeth

Reforming game ratings

For ages, California Assemblyman Leland Yee has decried the ESRB as a “failure” because it missed one (well, two) game's locked, hidden and marginally objectionable content. That's one (well, two) mistakes, both corrected, in the organization's dozen-year history. California, which hasn't done anything right in the last twelve years, is not a “failure.” But the ESRB is.

Frustratingly, their responses are limited, because short of I know you are, but what am I? , it's hard to rebut baseless assaults. The fact is ESRB ratings are extremely prominent and contain more information than what's found on most other media. Yet it's labeled a “failure,” and so far it has countered by saying “No we're not,” because that's all it really can say.

I admire the ESRB. My only true complaint is that they're over-sensitive post-Hot Coffee and a little too quick to re-rate games. The fact that Kim Possible shows more skin than the unhacked version of Oblivion, and the effort involved with hacking it, should have had more bearing on their decision to re-rate that game. After all, enterprising modders could make Reader Rabbit into hardcore porn. To hold the rating systems responsible for the actions of outsiders would be disastrous.

And yet we must deal with the “failure” accusations or face censorship. But the solution is not to rush into a rating and re-rating paradigm that may destabilize consumer faith in the system. Small policy adjustments might do the trick. Contrary to what Yee believes, the requisite changes don't imply failure – just a need to reevaluate some tactics.

Game rating scales are based on the cinematic model established by the MPAA, which creates an immediate problem that lawmakers can take advantage of by twisting the intent of those ratings to suit their needs. Rating systems are consumer advice; not a mandate but an informational tool. Theater policy dictates who's allowed to buy movie tickets, and it's not legally enforceable. Not to mention that movies and games are not consumed the same way. Parents can be present with impressionable audiences throughout the course of a film, because it's a two-hour endeavor. Games are not, and parents are far more likely to be there for the purchase than for the play. It's wrong to see ratings as delimiters of purchasability. They're just guidelines. To combat this, content descriptors should have greater prominence than the rating itself. If game content is concisely and honestly defined, the rating system is protected. Plus content descriptors are a more fitting way to describe a lengthy, complex interactive experience.

The ESRB is also wrong to separate sex and violence. In the U.S., R-rated films are open to kids under 17 if accompanied by parent or guardian. Many include some remarkably explicit sexual content, and there's no real limit to the gore and violence an R film can have. Films containing either or both carry the same rating. In fact, the MPAA's top-shelf rating, NC-17 (no one under 17 no matter who you're with), is only used in instances of “ excessive violence, sex, aberrational behavior, [or] drug abuse.” Most of that stuff still usually only rates an R. Since NC-17's arrival in 1990, only 48 studio films have been released carrying it. Sex and violence are both for grown ups. Implying that they should be delineated separately in games (I'm unaware of any released game receiving an AO rating for violence) plays right into the hands of those who want to label games as pornography, and therefore subject to government oversight.

Ratings authorities have considerable enforcement powers, but they're perhaps not as quick to use them as they should be, and don't always use them with particular wisdom. The ESRB has broad punitive license to discipline publishers and developers who break the rules, but so far what we've seen has been limited more or less to restickering. That doesn't really incentivize developers and publishers to disclose content, because restickering campaigns are terrific advertising for violators, and they'll make enough in the sales bulge to pay off any fine. Hot Coffee wasn't about the content, it was about the deception. We'd never see another if the ESRB had announced that in addition to slapping San Andreas with an AO rating, it wouldn't be rating any more of Rockstar's games without access to all final assets. And there is also the nuclear option: those who repeatedly or egregiously violate ESRB mandates will not receive ratings on future games. Developers who believe it's cute to endanger the industry for the sake of free publicity will think twice when they have to sit on a gold master while the ESRB combs through every line of code and art asset, or when no retailer in North America will carry their unrated game, no matter how harmless.

Of course such measures should never be used against developers guilty of mere mistakes, or those who choose to create mature games and disclose the content properly. Nudity, violence and sex are fine for games, provided the ratings board is apprised. But since it's unrealistic to expect that every second of every game be evaluated before a rating is issued, stern penalties must apply for those who abuse the honor system. And that might quiet those who want to scream “failure.”

Appeasement, they say, only makes the aggressor more aggressive. And some could view these suggestions as an attempt to appease censors who have no interest in making peace with the industry. But the point is to demonstrate that the industry can police itself. There are those who would eliminate cover art and put a giant MURDER SIMULATOR label on the front of every game box. We'll never get through to them. The problem is that there's a good possibility they'll get their way unless we do something.

I hate to say I told you so, but I warned that politicians would start accusing video games of encouraging terrorism way back in 2003. This is exactly the kind of hysterical finger-pointing that will make the courts forget freedom of speech. It wasn't until comics were accused of making kids into gay communists that the hammer really came down on the art form. The mistake the comics industry made was ignoring the warning signs and refusing to at least try to meet the opposition halfway. Game ratings systems are for the most part excellent and functional – but if a few tweaks can help protect the industry from publicity-crazed demagogues, it might be worth it.