Do ESRB Ratings Need to Change Just a Bit?

[ignition365]

I actually agree with the recent tomb raider games getting the "M" rating, they are fairly violent games with obvious dark undertones.  The context of the original TR games is nowhere near the context of the reboot.

Understand what I'm saying though.  I believe a child under the age of 17 shouldn't be allowed to just walk into any store and pick up the game.  If a parent wants to let their child play the game, then fine, that's their prerogative.  The system exists to inform parents, and if they are too lazy, at least it suggests what is and is not appropriate.  It literally takes 2 seconds to flip the case over and read the rating and make a decision.

[ignition365]

I never really found an issue with ESRB. However, the games I played growing up weren't as violent as others. The ESRB could use some modification, but for the most part I don't see too many issues with it. As long as parents do their research and don't act-a-fool, then all is good.

Yeah but most parents don't want to invest time in something like that, they would rather say yes just to shut their kid up and keep them busy during the summer while they work, or look at the rating without even reading why it has gotten that rating, maybe for comic mischief, and be like oh, hmm, nope, your 9, not 10, you can't get this game. It's like a blow to the kid, let's say they like Kirby and want Kirby's return to Dreamland. Nope.

Plus I think that games like Tomb Raider and Halo getting a M rating quite stupid, I have a five year old sibling who loves to play Tomb Raider, granted, they just like to move around in the world ans stuff, my parents were like Oh yeah it's fine, it's just Tomb Raider.

And what type of modification are you suggesting?

If parents don't want to invest the time before making a purchasing decision, than that's the parents' fault. Of course, I've never met anyone in all of my years of gaming that follows the rating systems to the letter when purchasing a game. In other words, I never heard of someone denying their kid an E10 if they're only nine years old or denying them a T game if they're 12 years old.

On the other hand, I've seen many occasions where the parents don't give a flying fig about an M rating. Again, this is more of the parents wanting to shut their nagging kid up about a certain game. Like ctracy said, parents need to do their research before buying a game. It could be something as simple as reading the back of the box and looking at the screenshots.

As for modification, they simply need to research the product. Mega Man X4 is rated E, but there are animated scenes with blood and incidents of using swear words. Actually, I'm sure it's oil but it's a blood-red color. Breath of Fire III is rated T, but there are only a few pixels of blood, very brief pixelated nudity and no swearing. Just taking a bit more time to see what the game has would help with their accuracy.

My wife's aunt for the longest time followed the rating.  She wouldn't let her 9 year old play Minecraft because it's rated E10+.  It took a lot to explain the system, and she eventually came to the decision that I would make the decision of what her kid could play.  Now I think she doesn't care and just lets them play whatever, because she doesn't ask any more.

[tripredacus]

It probably would be easier, in the US at least, if the ESRB had used the same rating values as movies do.

[marvelvscapcom2]

I've noticed ESRB ratings are out of place, I have a list of games and proof on how ridiculous it has gotten.

First up, Metroid, Prime and Fusion released on the same day. Their first release was in NA on Nov 17, 2002. Prime is rated T and Fusion is rated E. They got their ratings due to violence. VIOLENCE. What else? Tomb Raider Legend (GBA) is E10+(Violence). The DS version, which I presume is the same thing but different graphics, is rated T with MILD violence.

The Bayonetta series should have a rating of A considering everything that happens during this game...

Smash Bros. Meele is rated T (Comic Mischief, Mild Violence) Smash 4 is rated E10+ (Cartoon Violence, Comic Mischief, Mild Suggestive Themes) These ratings should be switched. But, I guess it does show how our "shield" has weakened.

Best thing, I am unable to buy rated M games, (Only a couple years short no problem) I was with a legal adult, i.e. my dad, and I showed him two games I wanted to get for my Vita. Corpse Party Blood Drive (rated M for Blood, Partial Nudity, Strong Language, Suggestive Themes, Violence)  and Mortal Kombat (Rated M for Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Partial Nudity, Strong Language) I got Mortal Kombat, but NOT Corpse Party, reason? Partial Nudity. Now my Dad read the ratings and he understands them to a T. They have these things in common, Blood, Partial Nudity, Strong Language, and Violence. I have a bunch of games with suggestive themes, that they have GIVEN me or ALLOWED me to buy. So no difference if I were to get it or not.

I go to a local game store and it doesn't matter the rating I can buy the game. I've bought Metal Gear Solid games from the store and the owner never bat an eyelash, he was like, "These games are rated M, you sure you won't be in any trouble?" I responded with "It's totally fine.". Now there are some games that deserve the ratings they hold, like GTA and Mario. But I feel like they should have their grading scale be "weak" on some games and strict on others.

Ao for Bayonetta? lol. 

GTA 5 is rated M though. Do you think Bayonetta is more violent or suggestive than GTA 5? If any game deserves Ao it would be that imo.

All these ESRB rating you are showing seem pretty spot on to me bud.  At the end of the day it is a parents job to supervise and manage what games their child buys. If a parent allows their child to play Bayonetta it wouldn't matter if it were Ao or M. Clearly the parent didn't care to let him play an M rated game.  Bayonetta is a game you get carded for. If a parent says "I don't care, he can play that"  what difference would making it Ao make?

Ao is the lochness monster or big foot of video game ratings lol. I cant even name 4 games that have Ao ratings. I have never seen an Ao hard copy in person.  It is fairy tale to me. I am not sure what has to be done to obtain that rating. I think games would get banned before getting an Ao rating. I am not sure why they don't just abolish that rating entirely. If GTA 5 didn't get one nothing can.  GTA 5 is a game that promotes robbing banks, prostitution, drugs, canabilism, murder.  The things depicted in that game are beyond gruesome. and even that is only M.  Bayonetta could even almost pass for a T game If not for all the swears and nudity.

But I feel where your coming from. My mom wouldn't let me play GTA at all growing up. It sucked. All my friends had them and I wasn't allowed to sleepover their house because of it. But I can understand her decision looking back and I sure can understand the rating. Corpse Party and Mortal Kombat are M rated games at the end of the day.  I agree that if a 9 year old wants to play smash and the parent says "no, you aren't 10" then they should get the batman/robin meme pimp slap lol.

But ESRB is just a letter at the end of the day. A parent can let their 4 year old play GTA 5 or a parent can refuse their 16 year old to play bayonetta.  Parents are to blame for any Miscommunicated ratings or underestimations of maturity. It says what the game contains in it. If the parent wants their child to play it then they will, if not than that is how the cookie crumbles.  That is the joys of being under estimated by adults until your 17+. That is just the way humans work. ESRB is just the messenger. Don't shoot the messenger lol.