In order to keep up with the proliferation of digital download titles, the ESRB is introducing a new methodology for rating video games. At first, it will only be used for downloadable titles, such as those found on Xbox Live Arcade, PlayStation Network, and WiiWare.
Typically, the process for having a game rated involves submitting it to the ESRB for playing, along with filling out a questionnaire. For the new method for downloadable games, publishers for these will use a different submission form that features a number of multiple choice questions around various areas of content including violence, sexual content, language, bodily functions, etc. Other contextual questions are also included so it’s not just things like “How many times do characters get naked?” The results are fed into a computer program which then determines a rating which is released to the publisher once a DVD of content is received by the ESRB. Normally, this DVD would be reviewed first, but instead will be done after the fact. Of course, there are measures in place to deal with issues of partial disclosure, and even deliberate misleading.
On one hand, this is a positive step in dealing with what must be an increasing backlog of game reviewing due to the sheer amount of titles that are being created now with the surging popularity of smaller downloadable titles. If it helps get good games out faster, this can only be a good thing. Also, it could lead to more consistency of ratings, something I’ve seen issues with in the past, along with fellow GamerPops writer Larry McMahon. Of course, questionnaires like this are just asking to be gamed by savvy respondents who become familiar with how they work. Sure, any issues could eventually get caught, but sometimes you just need to see that killing of an enemy to understand if it should be a T thing or an M thing. Reducing things to what is essentially a mathematical algorithm leaves things open to potentially slip through the cracks, and even a short amount of time with the wrong rating could result in big problems.
The only thing standing between your child and violent video games featuring killing, raping, and other atrocities is… a computer.
Imagine if a game with T or even M content mistakenly gets an E10+ rating, and during that time 10 year-olds start buying the game. I know, there’s a whole other issue with why 10 year olds are allowed online to buy things in the first place, but work with me here. Even with parental controls on limiting the console to playing E10+, they could still play a game with questionable content until the rating is corrected.
“The ESRB says your 10 year old can play this game involving strippers shooting innocent kittens. How is this possible? Find out at 11.”
Heck, it doesn’t even have to get to this point…
“The only thing standing between your child and violent video games featuring killing, raping, and other atrocities is… a computer. Is your child’s Game Boy safe? Details at 11.”
The idea is well intentioned, but there will be concerns about reducing something subjective like game evaluation to a set of numbers. There will be the odd glitch here and there. Instead of the usual process of three reviewers rating a game, maybe make downloadable games only subject to one standard, expedited review process by one person before giving the final rating, instead of after. Expediency is one thing, and it’s a big thing, to be sure. But not in the name of quality. Plus, if this “works,” then how long until this spreads to retail releases and all games are subjected to what amounts to less scrutiny? And God help us all if a game or two falls through the cracks and gives the media more fodder that it doesn’t really need.
