Here we go, into the mind of a self-professed "common sense" genius. Me, of course. Shut up Bob. I know what you’re thinking.
With all the hoopla surrounding the newest
lawsuit pending against Rockstar for the well-known "
Hot Coffee" mod to Grand Theft: San Andreas, I thought it might be time for me to say this: WHY THE HELL ARE WE BLAMING THE GAME COMPANIES?!?!?
The box for the game was, originally, clearly marked with a M rating. Clearly. Look at the picture. Bottom left on the front. See it? Big M. All together, now, class…what does M mean in the Electronic Software Rating Board (ESRB) rating scheme? Mature, 17+. If you did not know the answer, you should research it. If you have children, and you did not know the answer? You should research it before you buy any game. And if you were one of those wonderfully “caring” parents who was shocked and dismayed by the game and feel the need to sue someone, after you purchased it without researching ANY of the issues involved in video games (i.e. the ESRB), come on over here so I can treat you to a little thing I call the “Smack of Common Sense.” (If you’re really litigious, I’ll even use the Hammer of “You’re Too Stupid Too Live”. YAY!)
Rockstar, in an attempt to placate the masses, recalled the game and gave it an AO (as in Adults Only) rating, which changed the age group that this game is appropriate for from an immature 17, to an adult and fully capable 18. Hmmmm. Think about that for a second. The game was intended for 17 and up, and now it’s for 18 and up. One year older, and the little angels are so much better able to handle the pressures of playing a game that has “sexual content.”
Now, in this particular case, you would have to “hack” the code in the game to even access the “scene” (known as modding, or mods) or use a cheat device in the Playstation2 version, to see the scene which is pretty soft-core, compared to what any person could see on cable television. So what we have here is a game, which should not be sold to children or purchased by their parents, requiring a smattering of programming knowledge, for what amounts to something no worse than a bad episode of Sex and the City (is there a good one?). Oh, wait, the difference is that you control the character during the scene. Except you do that throughout the game, to include the parts where you shoot police officers and run over pedestrians, which does not require a mod and can be done within the first 10 seconds of the game. Oops, you guys forgot about that, huh?
Now, we have the
City of L.A., L.A., the craziest town in the craziest state in the United States, the home of celebrities like Paris Hilton (remember her? “Porn” star, reality TV debutante?), Tom Cruise (there's a poster child for sanity), and cable television, filing a class-action lawsuit against Rockstar for when they “engaged in unfair business practices by hiding
pornographic material in a game which received an
M rating” (emphasis is mine), and supposedly marketing the game in “in a fashion that
encourages the creation and use of mods.” (again, emphasis is mine) Huh? I don’t remember the commercial that said “Oooo, play this game with mods. Make your own. Impress your friends.” Maybe I missed that one. As for the pornographic material? Let me sure I understand this - it's ok if you make a game with blood and guts, smashing up property and running down pedestrians, but the second your child sees a digital character "getting nasty" with another digital character, you want to sue?
Let’s reiterate. 1) M rating, requiring someone 17 years old or older to purchase a game that has; 2) A scene that requires modifying or using a third party device to get access to; 3) What amounts to cartoons engaging in soft-core dryhumping. And we're blaming the gaming industry? Let’s put the blame where it should go. Parents, if they bought it for the little tykes, or retailers, if they sold it to minors.
Everywhere I went, looking for information on this subject, had the same thing to say. Games bad. Game companies bad. Children good. Parents good. Bull. Kids are what you make them. Parents need to get more involved. And don’t give me that “party line” that parents just don’t have the time, wah, wah. I say again, bull. Want to know how long it took me to find the ESRB rating for San Andreas, as well as an explanation of what the rating means? Any guesses? Less than 2 minutes. If you, as a parent, don’t have 2 minutes, let’s say you have a REALLY bad connection and make that 5 minutes, to check out what your kids are asking you for, you really need to re-prioritize.
Ok, assuming that you cannot afford a computer, and you don’t know where your local library is (most libraries now have computers and internet), do you know what retailers and the ESRB have done? They have provided BIG OLE signs that tells you, the consumer, what each letter in the rating means. Ok, so you bought the game in your local dimestore. No signs, no storeowner that is knowledgeable, no computers or internet. Where could a caring parent go to find out about the game their children want?
Oh, wait. THE BOX ITSELF. What do we have here?Gasp! On the back! There’s another place where there is a rating, and it has an explanation of WHY THE GAME GOT THE RATING!!! Hmmm. Why did we get this rating – oh yeah. Many things, but in particular - “Strong Sexual Content”. Gasp!
Another thing that gets my goat about this issue is this; everyone blames games and game companies for increased violent behavior in children. My patootie. Numbers of juvenile crimes are at an all time low. The only difference is you see more news stories about it. I've researched this issue before, and I looked around again before I posted this on my blog. The best case I could find for parents and watchdogs to believe games are dangerous is a website called “
Killology.org” . Don’t worry, this isn’t a “gross-out” site, this website is about the media being dedicated to teaching children to kill. Ok, there's more involved, but I'm not going to get too in depth about it here. I;m pointing this one out because the shrink is ex-military, and actually seems to know what he is talking about, unlike the vast majority of talking heads that repeat the same thing over and over. Even then, his opinion was based on observing young children (6 and under) playing and witnessing games being played.
Let’s see here, so little 5 y/o Billy wants San Andreas, and overworked Mommy and Daddy buy it for him. Whoops! The game is rated for 17 and up. Oh, thinks Mommy and Daddy, it can’t be that bad, it’s a videogame. “Oh my gosh! There’s strong sexual content, what were the game manufacturers thinking, putting this content is this game?” (oh, wait, I just remembered, how would little Billy get access to this content without hacking or using a cheat device? Maybe Uncle Bob the hacker, helped.) “We need to protect little Billy. Let’s sue Rockstar. They made the game. Never mind the fact that we ignored all the warnings and bought this game. Never mind that if we had bought little Billy a copy of Playboy or a carton of Marlboros, which also have warning that they’re not for children, we could go to jail or lose little Billy. Never mind that, that makes no difference at all. Let’s sue the game designer too. And the retailer, even though he told us that this game wasn’t for children. Who else could we get?”
I can hear it now - “But USGP, I buy my children games like this because they beg me to. I can’t tell my little angels no, they deserve my love and all the material goods that I can afford to give them.” “It’s the gaming industry’s responsibility to make sure that, when if I’m too stupid to do it myself, my children can’t get their grubby little hands on things that might hurt them.” “Won’t you think of the children, oh, why won’t someone think of the children?”
Bah. That’s all I have to say right now. I’m too disgusted to continue.
