Bashing the entire games industry for the content of a few has been fashionable for awhile now, and I guess the trend is bound to continue. This week several video game regulation happenings took place. Two laws passed in Louisiana, there was a congressional hearing, and the ESRB re-outlined its commitment to informing parents of games’ content.

In Louisiana, two laws passed. The first, a law I outlined in another post, was the bill co-penned by Anti-game crusader (read:... I don't have an insult clean enough for print.  Just know that I think this man is an extremely large string of dirty words.  A pile of them, if you will) Jack Thompson, and has already been contested by the ESA. An injunction has been levied against the law while its constitutionality is debated in court. The other is one that the ESA actually supports. It adds games to the “Harmful to Minors” statute of the state, which deals mainly with pornography. Because the law places the same restrictions on games as their entertainment brethren (restricting games that have sexually explicit content, like pornographic movies), it has the blessing of the games industry.

The House of Representatives held a hearing mainly about the ESRB’s ratings system. Both Congressional and Industry representatives had some constructive comments, from suggestions that the ESRB’s system was too haphazard and that all industries need to utilize the same ratings’ system to the comment that opinions of the Games industry should not be based solely on its most violent products. Of course, these were the bright spots. Most of the talk centered around Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, or had purely speculative comments about how games like that harm the nation’s youth.

Lastly, the ESRB outlined a “Commitment to Parents” program that it’s starting. The retail council of the ESRB, whose members hold approximately 80% of the retail gaming market, began the program. It is essentially a re-commitment to enforcing the ratings system designed by the ESRB. Every member of the retail council, which would be basically any major retailer or renter of games that you can think of, will not sell M or AO rated games to minors, will allow themselves to be audited on these policies at least twice a year, and will allow for returns if an underage person is allowed to purchases an inappropriate game.

Now I understand that the people calling for government regulation of video games are generally not people who have experienced them. They fear something that they don’t necessarily understand. But with absolutely no evidence that games harm anyone in any way, what makes these people believe that games require any more legislative action that movies do? As a side note, enforcement of the ESRB’s ratings system is about 65% among retailers, which is on par with movie theatres enforcement of the MPAA’s regulations. I would say that the industry is doing a fine job of regulating itself and is at least on par with other forms of entertainment, especially given that after numerous studies there is no scientific evidence to suggest that games are any more or less harmful to minors, or that they’re harmful at all.

Below you can find, among other things, a report on the congressional hearings and a link to a blurb on and video of a Daily Show segment on that hearing. It was pretty funny, though if you disagree with any of my statements here you won’t think so. Enjoy!

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6152938.html (Blocked Louisiana Law) http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=13000 (ESA supported bill) http://ps2.ign.com/articles/712/712891p1.html (Congressional hearing) http://www.joystiq.com/2006/06/22/jon-stewart-blasts-congress-ignorance-towards-video-games/ (Daily Show report/Clip) http://www.gamespot.com/news/6152998.html (commitment to parents)