This week I finally got my hands on Dead Space 2. I know I’m a little late to the party, but I go through games at an alarming rate, so I try to find deals on everything I buy. Anyways, I popped this terrifying little gem into my 360 and proceeded to squeal like a little girl. Dead Space 2 really took the terror to another level; there have been multiple times where I had to pause the game to calm my beating heart. Everything about this sequel has been taken to the next level; the startling scares, the dark environment, and the gore. The first Dead Space was not a game for the squeamish, but Visceral Games seems to have amped it up even more. Now, Dead Space 2 is rated Mature, but it seems like the folks over at Visceral pushed that rating as far as they could go. This is neither good nor bad, it just is. However, as I sit and play Dead Space 2, I cannot help but think that games like Halo: Reach and Mass Effect, two other games both carrying an M rating, just don’t deserve to be placed in the same category.

As many of you know, games are rated by the ESRB and placed into one of five frequently used categories: E (Everyone), E10+ (Everyone 10 and up), T (Teen), M (Mature), and AO (Adults Only). Seeing as how console makers such as Nintendo and retailers such as Walmart will not tolerate AO games in their respective domains, basically you only have four categories. None of these ratings carry the weight of law, so a 5 year old could in theory go out and buy any title without any legal repercussions. But retailers have embraced the ratings system, so if you want to purchase an M rated title you had better be prepared to show some ID. This system works for the most part in keeping kids from purchasing games inappropriate for their age, but does nothing to prevent older people from purchasing games for the younger crowd. Now I’m no expert, but from what I’ve observed, there is such a wide variety of games with an M rating that it would be easy to see the content of one and assume that all games with that rating were similar.

One of the first games I ever purchased on my own was the original Medal of Honor: Allied Assault. I loved that game, and spent hours playing both the single player and the multiplayer. It was a first person shooter just like the popular Halo series, but carried a T rating rather than an M. Why was this? Because there was no blood. If you played Medal of Honor and then Halo: Reach, you would most likely think they were just as violent as the other, but since Reach has a small amount of animated human blood, it gets the stricter rating. To me, it seems a little ridiculous that a game like Medal of Honor is thought to be appropriate for a 13 year old, while Halo is inappropriate for someone over 16. In this same vein, after beating Mass Effect, all I could think about was that this game, while rated M, was probably less violent than Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, which was rated PG-13.

It is my opinion that we have a problem with the current ESRB rating systems. Right now, we are lumping 13-17 year olds into one big group, even though the level of maturity between those age groups is vast. Games like Halo and Mass Effect are most likely fine for 15 and 16 year olds to play, but titles like Dead Space 2 probably are not, and so our ratings system should reflect that. I think there needs to be a fifth rating value, something between Teen and Mature. This system is supposed to give parents the tools to make appropriate choices for their kids, and anything that can be used to make that easier should be encouraged. Right now, while things aren’t confusing, they aren’t as clear as they could be, which is a shame. This is just wishful thinking on my part, so if you are a parent with older kids, your best bet in figuring out whether a game is appropriate or not is to take the time to check reviews and figure out precisely what it is you are buying before you hand it to your kid. Remember, just because a game has a certain letter on it doesn’t mean that it is necessarily a good or bad title for your child.