This week a Florida Rep named Cliff Steams introduced a bill entitled the “Truth in Video Game Rating Act.”  This “steaming” pile (get it?  I just used his name as partial slang for feces because I don’t like his bill!  Man I’m brilliant.) of a bill would require the Government Accountability Office to examine the effectiveness of the ESRB, and would require the ESRB to fully play through every game it rates.  Currently, the ESRB is sent a video by the game’s publisher showing the game in general and its most outrageous moments and is played for a short time by the ESRB staff to determine the rating.

Not only is a survey cited in the article below that names the ESRB’s ratings system as the most useful of all entertainment ratings, there’s no way the organization could play through every game in its entirety.  I mean, how many seasons of Madden would you have to go through before the game could be considered “played through?”  Does Ratchet and Clank need more than a cursory glance at its content to determine a rating?  Games like that and Grand Theft Auto only need an honest look at their content to determine their rating.  In Ratchet and Clank, the rating would be between E and T.  Grand Theft Auto would obviously fall between M and AO.  While some games might straddle the line, playing through them is quite excessive.  All that’s required of the current system is that the companies sending the material are honest.  After the Hot Coffee snafu, I’m sure publishers are willing to be a bit more forthcoming regarding game play.

ESA President and my personal hero Doug Lowenstein had a few things to say about the bill that I didn’t think of.  In the gamedaily article below Dee-Lo says, “…as introduced, we do not believe his legislation will serve consumers and parents. For example, the proposal that every video game be played through in its entirety before a rating is issued means that the only people rating games will be professional gamers with the skills necessary to play through games that can take more than 100 hours and who are not likely to be representative of the mainstream American parent.”  Very true.  If the ratings system is for parents, the hardcore gamers that would surely be hired to rate games probably wouldn’t be the people best suited for rating them.

Despite mine, yours, and the industry’s opinions, this “steamer” (too bad Cliff isn’t from Cleveland.  Is this article rated E or T now?  My mind is boggled!) will still be debated at great length in Congress I’m sure.