...have the information necessary to make educated purchase decisions about games before they bring them home.
How much discussion goes on between game publishers and the ESRB before games are rated?
Our ratings are assigned based on the consensus of independent raters with no contact or relationship whatsoever with the development community. So when we issue ratings, we're issuing them based on the consensus of those independent raters. If a publisher does not want the rating that has been assigned, they can make changes to the product as they see fit and resubmit the product.
So the responsibility for getting the rating a publisher wants falls entirely on the publisher's shoulders?
Yeah, our rating categories are [well] defined. We also conduct seminars with the industry on a regular basis to provide them with information about how we assign ratings to which games, and we illustrate for them content that has been assigned different ratings. But at the end of the day, obviously, it's a creative form of expression and developers will create what they choose to. It's that creation that we rate. They're not following guidelines per se from us. They are following their own creative visions for the product and then submitting it to us so we can accurately label it for consumers.
Do you think the criticism that has been levelled at Rockstar Games over the "GTA" situation has been warranted?
Once it was determined that [the Hot Coffee content] was actually created by Rockstar, we had to correct the [rating] so that the consumers had accurate information on which to base a purchase decision. But in terms of intent or right or wrong, that really isn't a place that the ESRB ventures into. It's not our mission, and it's not our role to judge. It's just our role to make sure that the industry provides the information necessary to consumers and that the rules and regulations we have in place are followed.
After the Hot Coffee scandal, it seemed like the whole gaming industry was getting slammed.
I think we're in an environment right now which is quite politically charged and there are all sorts of criticisms levelled at the industry. Some are based on facts, and some are not.
Was it fair for politicians (such as Hillary Clinton) to try to make hay out of the Hot Coffee situation?
The Hot Coffee controversy ended up being a political football for both parties, and that's unfortunate.
There's plenty of extreme content in lots of different genres of entertainment. Have video games been singled out?
I think there are different standards that are applied to our industry, particularly by nongamers. There are assumptions that games are [only] for kids, and those are clearly not based on fact. The average age of a gamer...
For more, click here...
Talkback
Well, let me see if got it. If the game ONLY showed police officers being killed, it would not be imoral. Since it also shows sex scenes than it showld never been done. To me it's quite weird such measure of morality. That's maybe because I'm brazilian so can't realize the real meaning of morality in an american society, where a game that shows scenes of human life being taken is less offensive than showing sex scenes.
Weird, very weird.
The rating was probably increased because it now contains sex AND violence as opposed to just violence. But, in my opinion, the violence of itself should have led to an 18+ (adult) rating anyway.
I imagine there are many people that think sex should be without ANY kind of moral imperatives. (They should probably think more with their brains, and not with other organs!)
George: No-one has said the game would not be considered immoral if it contained ONLY police officers being shot. Where did you get this from apart from your prejudice?
It was already given a "mature" rating for that very reason and was always considered to be immoral by many from the outset. The reaction against the "Hot Coffee" scenes was because it appeared that the games company had tried to sneak such scenes past the censors and into the hands of minors.
I see too often a desire to just "bash" Americans and paint them as "simple prudes" which I think is affecting people's ability to think through issues such as this logically.
Sex isn't always innocent; the context is important. In this context, the sex was placed in the vicinity of violence which in some people's eyes doesn't go too well together. There IS a moral dimension to sex which many "liberal-minded" people would like to convince you doesn't exist...