Quote:
|
The question isn't who should or shouldn't be protected, but who should be doing the protecting.
|
That is a question, not necessarily a deal-breaker though.
So you think parents who care will stop? Or that parents who don't will fell less inclined to start? I suppose the latter is possible but those parents have issues and are looking for excuses. I'm sure they'll pop out of the woodwork and use this on Springer et al, but look back and they're the ones always finding excuses for their faults. Those who don't look beneath the excuses are just as guilty as the parents so I can't give that reason any weight. Yes, we'll still need to address family influences.
I agree the proposal isn't perfect. I don't think it could be perfect with the complexities of families and culture. But with age comes some allowance for solutions over perfection. I'm not necessarily for this one. But I don't buy the argument that vendors shouldn't be put in this position as a reason to defeat it. They do it for other products for various reasons. Alchohol, tobacco, firearms, gunpowder, videos, theatres, etc. What's religious about video games that are found by some standard (another topic) to have passed an "adult" threshold? We need to find better reasons if you want to convince anyone but retailers and minors.
Something else I want to be open about is motivation. That's why I brought up the ESA topic earlier. Using ESA's rallying cry as defense is little but an industry "pretty please". To me their artistic rights argument is silly. They can still produce whatever they want. Just label it like all the other things society has determined are edgy. This is about standards (that other topic) and who's able to make the buying decision on "adult" items, not about what they're free to create.
The consumer argument is more about choice. As an old dude my priorities are different. I'm still into games, but other concerns have become more important. Games are way below people I care about. That's why I'm open to the idea of restrictions that might help me guide a child's development in this sucky world. I would have slapped myself for the thought 15yrs ago. In younger days games were nearly everything. Really, much of life was about not wanting others to control my choices. I certainly never wanted another layer of authority. Being intellectually honest about control issues was the most difficult part. Freedom trumped all, and that perspective didn't start to change until I was an adult and had exited my home state. I'm not saying that's affecting everyone here but it's something for each person to consider before trying to sway opinions.
I'm all ears for reasons this is a bad idea. The biggest I can see the potential hit on the gaming industry which is already in a tight race. Employment, the economy, we aren't exactly overflowing with new industries. This might not hurt exports now but it would probably affect game design and therefore could make US designers less competitive internationally later. If you want to make a difference right now, come up with numbers. You can bet the ESA lobby is throwing this hard behind the scenes. If the law were national and enforced I don't doubt it would speed industry fallout.