"Game Rating and Descriptor Guide"
This is your basic video game rating explanation piece, if you can call it that. It gives breif descriptions of all the individual ratings, consisting of: Early Childhood, Everyone, Everyone 10+, Teen, Mature, Adults Only, and Rating pending, which means the game hasn't been officially rated yet, obviously. Following this is a list of terms used by video game rating systems and explains what it is that they specifically mean as well. It looks that there are 31 terms listed, ranging from alcohol references, to mature sexual humor to drugs, tobacco etc.
There is not much to speak of about the actual piece, but after reviewing what the ratings actually consisted of, I found myself to be quite surpised at what younger people are allowed to be exposed to, especially the Teen category. The rating system has deemed material suitable for persons ages 13 and older which at least to me, seems rather questionable. I don't believe that many people would disagree with the notion that one's adolescent years are by far the most critical years of a persons growth and development. Is it then reasonable for us to deem, "...violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, ... blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language..." suitable for children as young as 13 years of age? All others seem in order, however this category seems a bit out of sync with its respective age group. It makes me wonder if this has anything at all to do with money.
It is safe to say that the video game business's leading consumer would be the teenage age group precisely. Not all parents would be inclined to read the fine print, perhaps the word "Teen" or big letter "T" would be enough to convince them. It is interesting to wonder how much money the video game industry would lose if it raised its standards a little bit concerning that "Teen" catergory. Perhaps I am just digging to far for my own good, this is just one are that stuck out to me in particular.
One other thing that I found interesting was a term found in the list of terms proceeding the game rating descriptions. It is the term "Edutainment." This refers to games designed for educational purpose, mainly for children I would assume. As it is that there were no real video games to speak of when I was a kid, I sometimes wonder how educational it really is for a child to learn from a video screen rather than a book or actual experience. Is it the same thing as a college student learning online rather than in a classroom, or is the difference more vast? These are the questions that come to mind as I have reviewed this informational.
3 comments:
As far as the teen group goes I agree with you. I know there were quite a few games rated "teen" that my mom wouldn't let me go near when I was that age, and now that I have played them I can definitely see why. I do think it has to do with money. The wider the age group for the games the more people will buy it. I think it would be safe to say that most parents don't even look into the game, as long as it says teen they think it is ok. I actually did a project on this in highschool and came to the onclusion that the rating system needs some tweeking.
Onto the "edutainment." I think video games are a great source for learning as was discussed in the video we were supposed to watch. My neice, who is 3 years old, has the educational video game system V-smile and I think it definitely works, infact she is smarter than I am sometimes. But, it definitely depends on the game. Some are strictly entertainment and nothing more.
Both of your comments on the unsavory nature of the teen category reinforce my thoughts on this piece: doesn’t this seem a little arbitrary and subjective? This system has no way to take into account cultural or religious values, or any variance in mental capacity vs. age: These guidelines are discerned by a panel of sociological “experts,” I am sure, and cannot be fully comprehensive of the content of every game--what people see as offensive is on a sliding scale, and it seems cultural idiosyncrasies move as fast as the technology the games are being played upon.
In addition to Dale's questions, who is placing these labels on games? Do they have people play them, write up a quick game summary of what goes on in the game, and then give a recommendation to be approved by someone who hasn't played the game? How many different people, all with the same ethics (a demographic of these individuals would be interesting) or morals are there around that have this job? What one parent finds suitable, another parent wouldn't. I am sure the same goes with individuals who are rating games.
John
Post a Comment