Buzz
The ESRB is a classification system for video games. DiMaggio/Kalish / Getty ImagesThe rating system for video games is relatively new when compared to the more established systems in other forms of entertainment, and it has faced its share of challenges. The Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) is frequently criticized, with one of the most notable controversies being the hidden 'Hot Coffee' mini-game in 'Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.' With video game sales exceeding $7 billion in 2004, the spotlight on game ratings continues to grow [ref].
This article will delve into how the ESRB assigns ratings to games, how they ensure compliance, and the impact these ratings have on sales. Additionally, we will explore the fallout from the 'Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas' controversy and its implications for the gaming industry.
The Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) is a voluntary organization that assesses the content of video games, including those for consoles (such as Xbox, PlayStation, etc.) and personal computers. The ESRB was established in 1994 by the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), the primary trade body for the video game industry.
The ESRB's role is not to evaluate the quality of games but to objectively categorize their content and identify any potentially inappropriate material. Each game receives a rating along with specific content descriptors such as 'Strong Language' or 'Edutainment.'
Each game is rated by a team of at least three trained raters. Their identities are kept confidential to maintain the integrity of the process, and the ESRB ensures that these raters have no ties to the video game industry.
When a game publisher plans to release a game, they submit a request to the ESRB. Along with the request, they send a video showcasing the game’s content, including the most intense examples of potentially offensive material. The raters review this footage — they never play the game themselves — and assign an appropriate rating (e.g., E (Everyone) for games suitable for players 6 and older).
If all the raters agree on the rating, it becomes official. If there is disagreement, additional raters review the footage and attempt to come to a consensus. The ESRB also checks game packaging to ensure the correct rating is displayed and adheres to ESRB standards.
This page on the ESRB website provides details about various ratings and content descriptors. Additionally, online games with user-generated content (such as chat features, maps, and skins) include the warning 'Game Experience May Change During Online Play' to inform consumers that player-created content has not been rated by the ESRB.
Next, let's explore the differences between voluntary rating systems like the ESRB and legal regulations on media content.
Legal Restrictions
Recently, the video game industry has faced criticism from parents and lawmakers due to concerns about the potential link between violent video games and real-world violence among children. This controversy has fueled ongoing debates over the imposition of legal restrictions on video game content.
The establishment of the ESRB was partly driven by a desire to avoid legal restrictions, opting instead for voluntary, industry-approved controls, following similar patterns seen in other media sectors.
In 1968, the Motion Picture Association of America took a similar approach by implementing its own rating system (administered by the Classification and Ratings Administration, or CARA). In the 1980s, the music industry voluntarily started adding 'Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics' stickers to albums with explicit content. In 1954, the publication 'Seduction of the Innocent' argued that comic books were corrupting the minds of young Americans, prompting a Congressional investigation. In response, the comic book industry quickly formed the Comics Code Authority, which imposed a list of prohibitions, such as drug use, nudity, and disrespect for authority figures. The CCA’s guidelines were largely discarded by major publishers by the 1990s, with Marvel Comics introducing its own ratings system in 2001.
Have ESRB ratings effectively shielded the video game industry from restrictive laws? Not entirely. Some state and local governments have passed laws that require parental warning labels on certain games, with penalties for retailers who sell games to children. These laws have often been struck down by courts, which found the regulations confusing and difficult for retailers to follow. Moreover, courts ruled that these laws violated the First Amendment. In 2003, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals declared that video games are protected by the First Amendment, just like books, music, and television [ref].
Next, let's explore whether game ratings influence sales.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
-- The First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Laws banning the sale or rental of violent video games to children under the age of 18 have been passed in California, Illinois, and Michigan, but federal courts determined that these laws infringed upon First Amendment rights. Louisiana's similar law was recently struck down by District Judge James Brady, who wrote that "depictions of violence are entitled to full constitutional protection" [ref]. .
The Impact of Ratings
The ESRB itself has proven to be the most influential regulator of video game content. As stated on its website, 'The ESRB has the authority to enforce corrective actions and impose various penalties, such as fines. These actions could involve pulling ads until the rating information is corrected, re-labeling packaging with the proper rating, recalling the product, and other necessary steps the publisher must take' [ref].
A publisher could bypass the ESRB process entirely by releasing a game without submitting it for rating. However, they cannot use a false rating, as the ESRB’s rating symbols are trademarked. The game box would simply lack an official rating symbol unless the publisher decided to assign their own. Most major retailers, however, will not sell games that lack an official ESRB rating.
Games rated Adults Only face a similar issue. These games are not typically marketed to the general public and are seldom available through major retailers. If retailers were to stop stocking M-rated games, it would prompt a significant reaction from publishers, likely impacting the content of future games. A comparable situation occurred when Congress pressured the film industry to stop marketing R-rated movies to children and teens. To avoid losing a major audience segment, studios went to great lengths to obtain PG-13 ratings for films they would have otherwise rated R.
Without such dramatic shifts, it appears that a game's rating has little influence on its overall sales. In 2004, the ESRB rated 1,036 games, the majority of which were given E or T ratings.
- 54 percent received an E (Everyone) rating
- 33 percent earned a T (Teen) rating
- 12 percent were rated M (Mature)
- Less than 1 percent achieved an AO (Adults Only) rating [ref]
The 2004 sales statistics for video games show a similar trend—games with an M rating appear to sell slightly better than their counterparts, based on the percentage of games released:
- 53 percent of the games sold were rated E
- 30 percent received a T rating
- 18 percent earned an M rating
According to the ESA, the average video game purchaser was 39 years old, suggesting that parents typically buy games for their children. The organization also notes: '83 percent of players under 18 report that they get their parent's approval before purchasing a video or computer game' [ref].
Next, we'll delve into a recent controversy surrounding video games.
Congressman Cliff Stearns from Florida has proposed HR 5912, the "Truth in Video Game Rating Act," which would mandate that "any person or organization (such as the ESRB) must play through an entire game before issuing its final rating. Essentially, every game would need to be fully completed prior to being rated." [ref].
The "Hot Coffee" Scandal
Image courtesy MorgueFileIn early 2005, it came to light that "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" included a hidden sexual mini-game (referred to as "hot coffee") that was not considered in the game's M rating. This mini-game was part of unfinished content that had been excluded from the final game, much like deleted scenes in a film. For unknown reasons, this content remained on the game disk, though players couldn't access it under normal circumstances.
Initially, Rockstar Games, the developer of "Grand Theft Auto," claimed that the scenes were created by an external party. However, some players discovered that the explicit content could be unlocked with a special modification available online. Using this mod, players could engage in intimate activities with a girlfriend character. The term "hot coffee" originates from the character's opening line, where she invites the player to come in for coffee. Rockstar Games later acknowledged that they had indeed created the content.
Image courtesy Mytour ShopperWhen news broke about the hidden mini-game, Take-Two Software, the game's publisher, faced significant backlash. In response, the ESRB reassessed the game and revised its rating to AO, marking the game as the highest-profile title ever to receive that rating. Take-Two also released patches to prevent players with older versions of the game from accessing the "hot coffee" content. While specific details were not disclosed, it is likely that the ESRB imposed sanctions on the company for breaching the rating system's guidelines.
In June 2006, Take-Two Software and "Grand Theft Auto" creator Rockstar Games reached a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission regarding the controversial scenes. As part of the settlement, the FTC required the companies to inform consumers of sexual content in future titles and prohibited them from misrepresenting ratings or content descriptions. Failure to comply could result in fines of up to $11,000 per violation. Civil lawsuits related to the issue are still ongoing.
The ESRB itself came under fire as well. California state assemblyman Leland Yee criticized the organization, stating in a press release, "Clearly the ESRB has a conflict of interest in rating these games, plain and simple, parents cannot trust the ESRB to rate games appropriately or the industry to look out for our children's best interests" [ref]. Since the ESRB only reviewed video footage provided by Rockstar, and Rockstar omitted the hidden content, the raters were forced to assign a rating based solely on the incomplete information they had at the time.
