The ESRB: Bringing Out the Big Guns, or Pandering to the Masses?

We all know violence in video games has been an issue for a long time. I won't bother linking any documents here, because you're a big boy/girl who can use Google for him/herself.

Through all of this, one of the things that seems to be forgotten by most people who are not as closely associated with the gaming industry as people like I am is the Entertainment Software Ratings Bureau. Just as films have a ratings board, so does the gaming industry. There is a clear rating system and reasons for why a given title got the rating it was given. Even Europe has PEGI, which fulfills the same function.

As a parent, I've always felt that we parents should be involved in the games we and our children play. Even parents who are not gamers, it is in your child's best interests that you at least somewhat understand what they are playing. The reason being that even though not true causal link has been observed between violent games and increased aggression in people, all media has an effect on us. These effects can be either positive (e.g. increased hand-eye coordination, problem solving, or even fighting dyslexia) or negative (increased levels of frustration mixed with adrenaline can lead to some lashing out -- ask any gamer and they have probably thrown a controller in frustration at some point). Regardless, there has been a ratings system in place for decades to provide parents and other consumers a guideline about the content of a game. But, most politicians are either unaware of this system or think it is ineffective.

As a result, the ESRB has decided to make a change to marketing requirements for games. To summarize, trailers for Mature-rated games will soon be required to provide a clear ratings statement at the beginning of said trailers. It is being likened to the green "this preview has been approved for all audiences" ribbon at the beginning of most movie trailers:

The general consensus I've noticed in comments on various sites is that this change is regarded as pointless. Personally, I really like this change. Making this disclaimer appear more like the MPAA rating screen will likely make the ESRB rating screen more accessible. More Americans are used to the MPAA rating system and making the ESRB rating resemble it as best as it can will somewhat equate the two in the minds of an audience. In these examples, though, there are not details or reasons for the rating like there are in the MPAA screen or as they appear on a game box. I hope to see that in here, too.

One of the possibly unintended side-effects of this is that game developers and distributors may start to do a gaming-version of a "red band" trailer. This hasn't appeared to have any effect on the movie industry, though with the emphasis on violent games in today's culture, the gaming industry better step carefully before doing something like that.

There are some other ramifications of these new rules, such as allowing game websites to now show ESRB ratings next to ratings by other ratings boards like PEGI. I can understand not wanting ratings that are not necessarily equivalent to be shown next to each in order to minimize confusion. However, as the article states, many websites weren't showing ratings at all. Lifting this regulation now allows websites to show all ratings, which is better than showing none whatsoever.

Glad to see that the ESRB is trying to change up their game. Kudos!

Gnome out.

Player? I hardly know her!

My wife and I got the collector's edition of Tomb Raider last week. I'm busy digging into AC3 (finally), but she's been having a blast with it. I can already tell, even without touching it, that I'm going to love it when I get around to playing it.

Lara Croft has always been an interesting character and gaming icon. She's had her ups and downs, certainly, and it seems that Crystal Dynamics has found a formula for her that works in the modern gaming market. Sure, it may borrow heavily from Assassin's Creed and 3rd Person shooters, but there is a reason those games work and are popular. I hope to see a bit more focus on tomb raiding in future games that is more along the lines of the original games, but that will have to be a balance CD will have to strike on their own.

As a character, though, I can still see a bit of Old Lara in New Lara. They do seem like very different people, though. At the end of the game, Lara expresses a motivation for her raiding of tombs that seems different than what is has been in the past. I'm still waiting for the coy and aloof Lara we came to know, but maybe that will never happen. I'd just hate for her to be stuck as a tragic heroine forever.

New Lara in all her gritty and bloody glory. This girl takes a serious beating and keeps on going.

I think the gaming world's eyes are on Lara right now, since she is one of the only widely-recognizable female protagonists in gaming, and her reinvented persona/image has everyone curious. It seems developers are already getting the third degree about female protagonists. OXM recently discussed a female protagonist with Epic Games. According to the interview, Epic doubts that they will be making a female protagonist the focus of any future Gears entries. For one, I think this is a shame. While I don't think a character has to be "butch" to counteract the stigma that they have to be sexy to be entertaining, I think GoW3 did a good job of providing an alternative to the traditional model.

A bikini and a belt? All the protection an adventurer needs!
Also, what is up with that right wrist!?

The issue of female characters in video games is not just about sexiness or clothing (or lack thereof), though. Their portrayal and personality is equally important, if not more so. A game could be chock full of women clad is reasonable clothing or armor, but if they remain weak, subservient, or otherwise less interesting than their male counterparts, the effort is wasted. For an example of this, we need to look no further than Metroid: Other M. Samus Aran is arguably runner-up in terms of popularity and notoriety (ignoring the fact that hardly anyone knew she was a woman in the first Metroid game, due to her armor). Due to the distinct lack of sexualization of her character, she has been one of the more respectable and empowered women in video games. The Metroid Prime trilogy is one of my favorite examples of how a female protagonist should be portrayed in a game. However, Other M got harangued by critics because the upgrade/progression "system" in the game undermined decades of her character development as a strong woman. Though she is outfitted with all the tools she needs to do her job from the first moment the player takes control of her, she is limited in their use by her male CO. Abbie Heppe from the now nearly-extinct G4TV explains:

In the world of Other M, Samus stumbles upon her old Galactic Federation squad mates while answering a distress call on a seemingly abandoned vessel. Among the people she encounters is her former captain, Adam Malkovich. In the most contrived manner possible, Samus loses her special abilities. How? She opts not to use them. Why? She wants to show Adam she can follow orders.
Yes, that’s right. The woman who in the first five minutes of the game gives the squad access to the ship by using her missiles is restricted from using her abilities -- some which could open a path or save her life in the future -- until a bland male character dictates it to her. She does this because she likes him, but only as a friend.
No matter what way you rationalize this mechanic, when you're 10 minutes into the lava sector and you can't use your Varia Suit yet, you will understand how painfully stupid this plot device is.

In short, you're asked to forget that Samus has spent the last 10-15 years on solitary missions ridding the galaxy of Space Pirates, saving the universe and surviving on her own as a bounty hunter. Instead, Other M expects you to accept her as a submissive, child-like and self-doubting little girl that cannot possibly wield the amount of power she possesses unless directed to by a man.  (http://www.g4tv.com/games/wii/61992/Metroid-Other-M/review/)

While I tend to believe this was not necessarily an intentional decision made developer Team Ninja, it does make me believe that developers sometimes do not fully consider the impact of their storytelling and design decisions.

That's it, Samus. A thumbs-down will show them you mean biz-nass.

Despite the debacle that was Metroid: Other M, the current gaming generation has produced many attempts at female protagonists. Games such as WET, Velvet Assassin, Assassin's Creed 3: Liberation, Heavy Rain, and Bayonetta have all attempted this with varying results. However, my favorites have been Mirror's Edge and Heavenly Sword. Faith and Nariko are both strong women who are only moderately sexualized, though Nariko is more sexualized than Faith. Previous generations also gave us Cate Archer of No One Lives Forever and Jade of Beyond Good and Evil. Again, two moderately sexualized characters with strong, independent, and commanding personalities. All four of these characters starred in good games, too. The formula can work. But, it's up to the developer to make it happen. This is all part of the reason I hope Remember Me can make it big, and why I'm happy Tomb Raider has turned out as good as it has.

Nilin will hack your brain while kicking your ass. Sure, she may be wearing really tight clothes, but she's no Bayonetta.

Case in point.

Besides often being over-sexualized and portrayed as weak, women also tend to get the crazy roles in video games. I was reminded of this when I came across an announced project by Keiji Inafune, wherein he has invented a fictional niece for himself. As his niece, you are forced to take part in a terrorist's twisted games in order to save your "uncle's" theme park. But, here's the kicker: It's an otome game, so there will be plenty of flirting and melodrama.

It's definitely not the weirdest otome game I've heard of, but it's up there.

That's all for now. Gnome, out.