Mature. It's that little two-syllable word that drives politicians crazy and leaves teenage boys thirsting. In this case, it has nothing to do with fruit, bonds, or the elderly, but rather it is used to describe interactive content intended for older audiences. When it comes to games, "intended" probably isn't the best word to use. After all, Brain Age isn't rated M and it's intended for an adult audience, while the Grand Theft Auto titles are sought out by boys whom few people would describe as mature.
The Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) designates a Mature rating to any videogame whose content is suitable for anyone aged 17 or above. Yet, confusingly, games intended for adults aged 18 and up are rated AO, or "Adults Only." Very few games are slapped with an AO rating, so it makes one wonder why it's even a classification to begin with. There is no reason why provocative dating simulators should have stronger ratings than realistic war sims. The difference between 17 and 18 can't be so overwhelmingly large that there is a need to make a distinction between the two. The only reason to have both M and AO would be if the latter were more of a rule to follow, while the former is merely a suggestion.
A year ago, that logic might have made sense. However, ever since the hot coffee incident, retailers have really stepped up in enforcing the ESRB ratings by checking the ID's of youthful-looking gamers trying to buy M-rated games. Overnight, the suggestion that blood and violence are for those aged 17 and up became a rule. Where does that leave the little known, and seldom used AO rating? Recently, the ESRB did update its rating system to create the E10+ rating for games that sit between being suitable for everyone and being for a teen audience. Using that same logic, perhaps the M rating should be the bridge between teen titles and those strictly for an adult audience, for the Dead or Alives out there that are neither light-hearted Dragon Ball Zs, nor gory Mortal Kombats.
Such a transition wouldn't be an easy one as the stigma around an AO rating isn't one that can disappear overnight. Microsoft and Ubisoft wouldn't want Gears of War and Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell to be up there with AAA titles like Playboy the Mansion: Private Party and Water Closet: The Forbidden Chamber. They would also want retail support from Wal-Mart, who sells one in four videogames in America. The monster retailer has strict policies against selling inappropriate videogames to minors and won't even carry AO-rated titles.
Preventing kids from buying games at retail is only half the battle. The other half deals with parents. Studies show that the majority of parents buying games for their kids do check the game's rating, but unfortunately, not all of them know about or understand the ESRB rating system. It was a big deal in the late 80s when the music industry started labeling cassettes and CDs with parental advisory logos. Two decades later, the explicit content logo (which is larger than normal on Eminem albums) still catches the eye because it isn't found on every album cover.
In comparison, the ESRB rating is the same size and color on every single game. It is easy to ignore or even to miss altogether. The ESRB has been trying to increase awareness of its rating system with the use of in-store posters that simply ask, "ok to play?" Chances are if someone were just picking up a game from a loved one's wish list, he or she would just ignore the ad thinking that it doesn't concern them.
These ads make their way into gaming stores and magazines, places where the average parent will never venture.
In order to grab the attention of those who don't always wonder if a game whose cover art is made up of blood and bullets is appropriate for their 11-year old relative, the ESRB should consider taking a page from Nintendo's reasoning for the GameCube controller's button design: different shapes, sizes, and colors for easy identification. Retailers should also be ageist against older-looking customers as much as they are against their younger ones; somewhere between, "Would you like to guarantee this game for an extra $2.00?" and "Are you sure that you wouldn't like to pre-order this awesomely average, upcoming game?" they should mention, "Just so you know, this game that you're buying is rated M and is intended for people over the age of 17."
This simple warning would have been useful for my aunt, who recently bought WrestleMania XIX for her children, aged 5 and 8. It seemed an appropriate game seeing as they watch WWE with their father, but she was shocked when she discovered her 5-year old son "beating the pants off of [some] woman!" Now my cousins have one fewer game to play.
EB Games is already thinking about taking more responsibility when it comes to drawing attention to a game's rating. Glancing through their DS section, the first thing that caught my eye was Resident Evil: Deadly Silence. My eye wasn't drawn because of a beautiful box art or because it occupied a whole shelf (actually, there was only one copy), but because it had a huge magenta sticker in the lower left-hand corner, asking "Are you 17?" Since then, that large obnoxious sticker has found its way on to other M-rated titles, like Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.
EB doesn't really need to put even more stickers on their game boxes, but it does bring up another avenue for retailers or the industry itself to point out for which audiences their games are intended. Like the music industry and their desire to let you know that Artist X's hot single is on new CD Y, the game industry could slap rating stickers on their cellophane-packaged games.
Just like the industry itself, both videogames and gamers have matured. In this past generation, store shelves saw an unprecedented number of mature titles. This is thanks in part to more powerful consoles that are more capable of depicting violence, huge urban environments, and realism, and in part to the older gamer whose tastes are different than they were at the genesis of 3D gaming. Into the next generation, we have even more sophisticated machines and more immersive controls that are targeted not at the younger bracket, but at the older audiences who tend to have more disposable income. In the Xbox 360's first six months, there were zero games rated E or E10+ on store shelves, sports titles notwithstanding. PlayStation 3's early release list doesn't look to be much more inclusive. Even Wii is poised to see more T and M-rated games than GameCube did in its first half year.
Transitioning into the next generation, the overall number of games for "everyone" will drop at the expense of potentially more profitable mature titles. Because of this, it becomes more important to accurately define for which audiences these games are suitable for. This can be achieved by removing the stigma around the AO rating and giving it a more prominent role in the classification process. Part of this process can easily involve Wal-Mart deciding on a case-by-case basis which titles to carry. Those titles that do get rejected would probably be delayed and cleaned up to meet the retailer's standards.
In order to make sure that games reach their target audience, both the industry and retailers alike need to make the game's rating more visible and make sure that the buyers of the games, who are not always the end user, understand the game's content. This can be as simple as a one-liner at the cash and putting warning stickers on packaged games, or by diversifying the shapes, sizes, and colors of the ESRB rating on the front of the game.
Simple changes can go a long way to making videogames less of a guessing game for parents while at the same time quelling some of the noise being made by politicians and groups who don't see gaming for what it truly is. The battle isn't about eliminating sex and violence from the medium, but about delivering the right content to the right player. Videogames, just like movies, books, and music, are a form of entertainment that offer something for everyone.
