Do you believe the ESRB rating requirements to be too strict (yes) or too lenient (no)?

  • What is considered Sexual is too strict.

    It considers Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim to have sexual themes. I have played that game for 6 years and have never considered anything in the game sexual. What it considered sexual was you could take off the clothes of people and they are in their underwear. I would understand if it was sexualized but it is very basic stuff just to cover the people up.

  • Yes they are thanks to adverting and the USA over the top Puritan "values"

    Well there are many parents who ignore the ratings and let their 6 year old play games like Call of Duty or (insert M rated game here). Which in a way proves that it doesn't matter. But in the end it really does matter.

    The rules for advertising video games is pretty strict. M rated games are harder to advertise than a T rated game. And thanks to that, Some games will self-censor. They will "change" or remove a scene(s) enough to lose than M rating. This in itself is bad.

    Changing a scene is more common when Japanese games come over. More so with JRPG's (that don't focus on fan service) as they will change one scene that would make the game an M into a T game. (Xenosaga 1 Ma Belle Pêche comes to mind). Another example would be like Tales of Bersria an important scene was changed from impaled to magic orb of doom. There are a lot of cases, They will remove blood just to get T.

    Well I do think kids need to be protected from some games. It's more that the rating system needs to be updated. Right now iit's set up with odd ages; 10, 13 & 17, Which leaves too many gaps. It really should be 12, 15 & 17.

    Sort of like how other countries have it. This I think would make the ratings less strict. Sure it's more strict on the bottom end, But that's the age they need more protection. But it would "fit"in more with life (like driving and working)

  • The Issue Regarding Nudity

    Considering how M rating only allows partial, Its considered upsetting. Violence, Gore, Destruction, Every sinful asset is available, Except for nudity? Why is such a form disallowed when one sees the most distasteful in most Rated M? Its unfair to say the least, But morally so when it comes to region lockings, Where one region is allowed to see what another cannot.

  • Yes and no.

    Most of the ratings are warranted (with exceptions, Such as Skyrim), But alcohol really isn't "adult content. " Apparently my mom is now rated M because she drinks wine once in a while. Some of their criteria can be outdated (alcohol) while some can be important (extreme violence). All in all, They simply need to revamp their system to more accurately depict how age-appropriate a game is.

  • Not good enough

    Q w e r j ki HD eh. Kid I'd jd j s ksi jow jjwn jenn jeirbb j e bndn en e f f g e r g g h. D d s g. H bh. S. W. E f g HHS s ffghhtr. E f f f r

  • ESRB ratings are too strict

    In reality most kids in this generation are a lit more mature than they were back when esrb started to rate games since we have more access to the internet we can see more things so since we have seen more we know more. When esrb rates some games they overlook things such as who the intended audience is and why the game was made. More and more kids are maturing faster and earlier than esrb can keep up. As the years have gone on movie ratings have changed why not do the same with video games

  • Think about what the rating means.

    Many games are rated unnecessarily high. Games like super smash bros melee get T rated for near nothing, just because its a fighting game. Games get ratings just because many of wii U games get E10 when there target audience is obviously a bit lower. The ESRB rates games by the very worst part of it, if you had 20 numbers 1-100 would you rate the entire bunch by the highest number when the majority could be under 30?

  • Theme/difficulty restrictions on ratings.

    The ESRB's strictness comes not just in the AO vs. M incident, but also in EC/E/E10+ field. Earlier (when I was a kid), I was checking out what games are rated as EC (Early Childhood), and these were games like My Little Pony themed ones (watch out for bronies!), Dora the Explorer themed ones etc. Most games I played and still play are E/E10+/T (even if I don't see any reasons for T rating). However, I don't see any reason in dividing E, EC and E10+. Sometimes games that own these three ratings may be just same thing, but with different themes ("realism" vs "cartooniness", relations to shows/merchandises etc) or difficulties (which as a fact can still be adjusted). It's like saying that kids can play with Barbies but cannot play with monster highs (mind that there are barbie collectors as well, and I hate Mattel Inc overally). Or they can listen to 1D's One Way or Another but cannot listen to Blondie's version (it's a cover, after all!!!). Prior to labeling a game with age restrictions, mind peripheral demographics, just like these examples with dolls and a song.
    Age restrictions are not necessarily made to just protect kids. Sometimes their effect is just satisfying parents that kids are under their control. Under "protecting kids" agenda, we may do various things that do more suppression or restriction for kids broadmindedness, narrow interest circle, and overally hold them back than leading them forward. While I respect people who try to protect kids from inappropriate content, the whole point is what content should be considered as inappropriate or not. When we try to label everything as inappropriate, we could suddenly come up with question: "But what is appropriate for kids then, if ... Is inappropriate?".

  • Yes, the ESRB ratings are unneccassrily strict.

    The ESRB rating requirements are an effort to control the level of violence and profanity available to young children. The reality is that these ratings do the exact opposite. By labeling a game or software as unsuitable for children under the age of 18, they make it extremely desirable to the exact crowd they are trying to keep it from. Teenagers will always be able to get their hands on any game one way or another. If the ESRB would not be so diligent in labeling games, teenagers might be less interested in them.

  • Some games have things that warrant an m rating even tho they aren't listed. Making them t

    I've seen a lot of games that have really messed up themes and concepts in them but still get a T or light m rating. Like dark souls and bloodborne for instance. In dark souls, there many twisted consepts like people getting cursed with a widespread spell that makes them die over and over again until they snap and start murdering everybody to even get a short glimpse of what it was like before they secomed to the curse. Or in bloodborne where normal people like you or me were horrifically turned into these monsters against their will. And everything in the third quarter of the game. I think there should be a new content discriptor for this kind of stuff like dark themes. Or something like that, because there are games that were rated t and had themes in them that could easily warrant a m rating.

  • No the ESRB ratings are not too strict.

    ESRB rating requirements are not too strict. I believe that the ratings requirements are just fine for the purpose that they serve. Censorship is never a good thing but there is a need to protect children from some of the graphic violence, sex, and language that occurs in everyday life and in games.

  • Ratings Mean Nothing

    I do not believe the Entertainment Software Rating Board is either too strict or too lenient mainly because the vast majority of people pay no attention to these ratings at all, they my as well not even be there. People will always argue one way or the other on their ratings, such as the movie industry does to their board. To me, these systems are useless and serve no real function. They are merely in place because people can't handle themselves properly or want to depend on other people to censor things for them.

  • They're just about right, maybe a little lenient.

    I think that the ESRB ratings system is just about right. It really depends on the individual or the parent, which is why those ratings can only be a general guideline. The ratings system that's in place therefore has to tread a very moderate line so that it can be taken seriously.

  • They do not protect kids.

    No, I do not believe that the ESRB rating requirements are too strict, because they do not do enough to protect children. The ratings do not make it clear enough to parents that the games have adult themes, and that even older children should avoid them. A parent who is watching would make the decision on their own. A parent who is disengaged really needs a strong warning.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.