I think the ESRB rating is holding great games back. Let see, most of the great games that are great hits usullyare rated "M". Like Halo, MGS, RE, Splinter Cell, GRAW, Gears of War and the list goes on and on... Now, a lot of people like violnce and that's why there is a lot of violnet games that are rated "M" and that's what makes them great. Now i say that the ESRB is holding games back because there might be a lot of rated "E" games that would be greatif they were rated "T". There is another problem, that the ESRB made the "E10+" rating. Why would they do that instead of making the game rated "T"??? It might be beacuse of parents??? But I don't know. Also the game producers are so worried of keeping the game a rated ''E10+" so parents won't be so worried about their kids getting "bad" games that they take a lot of the good stuff out to keep it at that rating. I also think that the "E10+" is so close to the "T" rating thatit doesn't really work. It's more of a scam to keep parents calm so the would buy"safer games" and not the "bad games". And that's why I think the ESRB rating is holding back great games.
I don't know about your argument...games like Zelda always do well and they aren't rated M. The only thing that's certain now is if you get the AO rating, you're done. Yet we need the ESRB ratings, because without them, what's the alternative? Rockstar had it coming with Manhunt 2. I'm sure they knew they were going to get heat for their game, but maybe they didn't expect the AO rating. I hear the Wii version is more...interactive. I'd probably feel dirty playing something like Manhunt, to be honest. I don't mind violent games, but a line has to be drawn somewhere. You talk about games being held back? Does Manhunt push the industry forward?
I think the ESRB rating is holding great games back. Let see, most of the great games that are great hits usullyare rated "M". Like Halo, MGS, RE, Splinter Cell, GRAW, Gears of War and the list goes on and on... Now, a lot of people like violnce and that's why there is a lot of violnet games that are rated "M" and that's what makes them great. Now i say that the ESRB is holding games back because there might be a lot of rated "E" games that would be greatif they were rated "T". There is another problem, that the ESRB made the "E10+" rating. Why would they do that instead of making the game rated "T"??? It might be beacuse of parents??? But I don't know. Also the game producers are so worried of keeping the game a rated ''E10+" so parents won't be so worried about their kids getting "bad" games that they take a lot of the good stuff out to keep it at that rating. I also think that the "E10+" is so close to the "T" rating thatit doesn't really work. It's more of a scam to keep parents calm so the would buy"safer games" and not the "bad games". And that's why I think the ESRB rating is holding back great games. drkdragon_2007
I'm totally against the lowering of the AO rating to appease the politicians, soccer moms, and christians, but a video game does not need to have blood and gore or violence to be good. :lol:
I don't know about your argument...games like Zelda always do well and they aren't rated M. The only thing that's certain now is if you get the AO rating, you're done. Yet we need the ESRB ratings, because without them, what's the alternative? Rockstar had it coming with Manhunt 2. I'm sure they knew they were going to get heat for their game, but maybe they didn't expect the AO rating. I hear the Wii version is more...interactive. I'd probably feel dirty playing something like Manhunt, to be honest. I don't mind violent games, but a line has to be drawn somewhere. You talk about games being held back? Does Manhunt push the industry forward?King9999
Good point. The developers shouldn't be hasseled if they are a expecting some form of of rating. Manhunt 2 is expecting an "M" rating but they still do their work because they are expecting that rating. Good point. :)
Log in to comment