US Supreme Court Says Games are free Speech

[Hugh]

It's already been found unconstitutional by lower courts, and now the Supreme Court of the United States has finally weighed in on the infamous California state law that sought to ban the sale of violent video games to minors. In a seven-to-two ruling on the Brown v. The Entertainment Merchants Association case, the Supreme Court said that video games are indeed protected as free speech under the First Amendment, and noted that under the constitution, "esthetic and moral judgments about art and literature . . . are for the individual to make, not for the Government to decree, even with the mandate or approval of a majority." Inevitable, perhaps, but still a fairly historic day or the video game industry -- and one that we're guessing will be a bit more positively received than a certain other milestone involving violent video games this year. You can find the complete ruling in PDF form at the source link below.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/27/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-california-law-says-video-games/

I don't now how or iff this will effect anything but its settled now.

[flaagan]

My favorite bit:

Since California has declined to restrict those other media, e.g., Saturday morning cartoons, its video-game regulation is wildly underinclusive, raising serious doubts about whether the State is pursuing the interest it invokes or is instead disfavoring a particular speaker or viewpoint.

Never have I heard someone tell a politician to get bent so eloquently.

[Darth Tomi]

And we'll still have the immature 13 year olds playing Modern Warfare on line.

[Mark Dygert]

It's a big win for the industry and loss for lazy parents and dip shit legislators.

As a parent I really don't need any governmental help regulating what games my kid(s) play. Considering that stores are within 80% compliance with the ESRB's suggested rating system, (which is higher than any other form of media) I'm not worried about the enforcement of the ESRB and I certainly don't want to some other system put in place that would confuse players and parents.

[Joshua Stubbles]

I don't have an issue with mature games being kept from kids, but it's something that should be enforced by the stores and parents, not the government.

I wish the government had this much common sense concerning net neutrality :(

One victory at a time, I suppose. Good news either way.

[Hugh]

so does this mean the esrb will not exist soon? What exactly changes?

[Pseudo]

The ESRB is entirely voluntary, video game publishers and retailers opt into it.

The regulation in question was making it illegal to sell a mature rated game to a minor. The supreme court ruled that it's not illegal, however the video game retailers will still continue to have company policies where they abide by the ESRB ratings.

[LMP]

so does this mean the esrb will not exist soon? What exactly changes?

It means that nothing changes. California is not allowed to decide what games are "too violent" for children. It has nothing to do with the ESRB, it will keep doing what it's been doing.

[Super Happy Cow]

Regardless of whether this is in our favor, or not, it's kind of laughable to trust what the government considers free speech.

[ZacD]

The ESRB is entirely voluntary, video game publishers and retailers opt into it.

The regulation in question was making it illegal to sell a mature rated game to a minor. The supreme court ruled that it's not illegal, however the video game retailers will still continue to have company policies where they abide by the ESRB ratings.

Saying the ESRB is voluntary is a huge stretch, all consoles require ratings and every major store chain in the USA requires it.

[Ace-Angel]

Unless you're indie, in which case, they rate you by your beard size.

[leilei]

Indies get TIGRS. Hardly anyone ever uses that :(

[e-freak]

http://cdn.steampowered.com/v/gfx/apps/901682/capsule_616x353.jpg?t=1309195445

Steamstore frontpage

[Richard Kain]

A bit of a foregone conclusion for any sane court, but it is still encouraging that cooler heads prevailed. The California alarmists are persistent, but have once again achieved nothing but wasting taxpayers dollars.

[flaagan]

A bit of a foregone conclusion for any sane court, but it is still encouraging that cooler heads prevailed. The California alarmists are persistent, but have once again achieved nothing but wasting taxpayers dollars.


Yup, just went through this BS with SB798, which attempted to pretty much shut down the airsoft industry (much of which is based in CA). We managed to stop it, but the joker who wrote it has "vowed" to come back and try again in the fall... :poly141:

[Ace-Angel]

Whats with California and their alarmists?

[flaagan]

There's plenty of normal people out here, just we spend our time living our lives instead of butting into everyone elses. :P

[DeadlyFreeze]

Australians take notes.

[Hugh]

Australians take notes.

i don't think it would matter. Constitution and all.

[Ace-Angel]

@flaagan: I don't mean the people generally, just those that cause problems, why are they after the entertainment industry so badly? Did a GameBoy go around molesting people or something with an air-soft gun?

[Wrath]

It's a big win for the industry and loss for lazy parents and dip shit legislators.

As a parent I really don't need any governmental help regulating what games my kid(s) play. Considering that stores are within 80% compliance with the ESRB's suggested rating system, (which is higher than any other form of media) I'm not worried about the enforcement of the ESRB and I certainly don't want to some other system put in place that would confuse players and parents.

I'm less concerned about the how compliant the stores are because 1) my kids don't have $50-$60 of pocket money to spend on anything 2) There's no way they could buy a game without our knowledge, and 3) there's no way they could play said game without our knowledge.

I would love to see some studies done on competetive sports and aggressiveness in children. I'm willing to bet there's some correlation there.

Stupid law got smacked down for being stupid. It's refreshing to see the courts get something right for a change.

[Ninjas]

Sweet. I can continue to make games without worrying about being put in prison for it.

[Wrath]

Whats with California and their alarmists?

California is a big state with a lot of people.

[Jackablade]

Australian government take notes.
Fixed.

[Compo]

For thoes who are not on a computer with Steam or just want the link that clicking e-freak's picture takes you from Steam here goes:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/08-1448.pdf

A 92 page pdf so far descirbing the reasons for the verdict (as of having only read 4 pages so far) will probably read the whole thing over the next few days out of curiosity. Anyway there it is.

[jimmypopali]

R rating for games in Australia etc etc...
Aussie Government seem to have too much other stuff on their hands to worry about one of the biggest industries. bah.

[Ace-Angel]

Didn't you hear?

The Australian Government believes anyone who plays digital games, is under 40, and has access to the internet, is a rage, pedophilia, rape case waiting to happen. Why else would they be censoring the internet, not allowing certain games or letting people have lives with any technological liberty?

That, or the IPads must be really trampling the lawns of the politicians this year.

[Ben Apuna]

Yay, games first considered "art" and now are protected under "free speech" too a great day indeed :)

[Jackablade]

It sounds like we might actually be getting closer to the R-Rating. Relatively speaking, at least. There's a significant amount of support in both state and federal government. It sounds like it's mostly just red tape holding things up now, so we might actually have some progress within the next couple of years.

That said, Ace Angel's description is fairly accurate.

[Super Happy Cow]

It sounds like we are actually getting close to the R-Rating. There's a significant amount of support in both state and federal government. It sounds like it's mostly just red tape holding things up now, so we might actually have some progress within the next couple of years.

I'm not sure how AU's rating system works, really. Can you elaborate a bit more? Is it more like America's ratings on movies? And are games that would be rated R banned?

[Jackablade]

Games are rated by a federal government body called the Office of Film and Literature Classification. I don't know much about the US system, but I assume it's much the same as your MPAA.

Our classifications are a little different to yours. We have a recommended and restricted rating at 15 (M and MA respectively) and a restricted rating at 18 (R). currently, if a game is considered to explicit for an MA rating then it's refused classification. That's a little different to an out an out ban, but it means that the game can't be sold in this country.

The review process for these games is completely inconsistent which makes this business even more galling. Get Up: Under Pressure got banned because it encouraged grafiti, while the GTAs typically get through, though on several version, only after the prostitiutes had been removed. Likewise, Left 4 Dead 2 was refused classification until it was heavily modified to the detriment of gameplay, while plenty of other gorier games get through without an problem.

[The Flying Monk]

I'm not sure how AU's rating system works, really. Can you elaborate a bit more? Is it more like America's ratings on movies? And are games that would be rated R banned?

Basicaly games, movies ect need to have been rated to go on sale. If a game dosn't fit into any of the ratings catagories (G, PG, M, MA 15+) it gets refused classification.

Anything thats stamped RC is banned from sale. Last I heard there was some noise about setting up an industry regulated system like the US and EU. Its probably the best option since the some parts of the government seem bent on having all phone and downloadable game go through the classification system too.

The other part of the problem is that most of the public don't care about this and the gaming vote isn't worth much. Best only fix policies that affect 'working families'

[Mark Dygert]

Interesting, so how do Australian ratings effect your online purchases? Does it only effect retail stores or do they have special online versions? Are the gimped up versions even compatible with the other versions or are you locked away on special servers and can't play online with people from other countries?

[[HP]]

Amen.

[Hugh]

Interesting, so how do Australian ratings effect your online purchases? Does it only effect retail stores or do they have special online versions? Are the gimped up versions even compatible with the other versions or are you locked away on special servers and can't play online with people from other countries?

well most australians i know say it doesn't them as there are internet "loopholes".

[Ghostscape]

In the eyes of the law, I'm not a pornographer (at my day job:))

Now we just need to get cracking on making a game that illustrates why we are protected speech.

[The Flying Monk]

Does it only effect retail stores or do they have special online versions? Are the gimped up versions even compatible with the other versions or are you locked away on special servers and can't play online with people from other countries?

Only if the game had to be modified to fit our arcane rating system. The AU version of L4D2 is slightly different from everyone else IIRC. In most cases the game gets an MA15+ rating and get through unmodified. So when the rest of the world gives a game an R rating we just slap an MA rating on it.

I think that since L4D2 had a retail boxed version refused classification, that then carried on to the online version. Besides the big AAA games on steam I don't think anything else gets rated (yet)

But then we have grey imports and online only retailers to keep us going.

Basically our government are a bunch of idiots who have no idea what there doing or the logistics of what it would take to have everything go through the ratings system.

[Nizza_waaarg]

tbh im less bothered by the r rating for games, and more concerned with games being sold online (ie through steam) being marked up to USD$90 to match retailers here. Every game on steam is fuggin expensive now :(

[The Flying Monk]

Letting publishers set pricing by region is the worst thing they ever did to Steam.
Or worse locking them out by region. Its like they don't want my money all of a sudden.

[Firebert]

continue.

[Richard Kain]

In the United States, games are rated by the games industry itself. This is part of the reason why there are still politicians like Leland Yee crying foul and raising a stink over the sale of games.

Oddly enough, the original stink that was made over violent video games was what prompted the formation of the ESRB. Way back in the 90's, Senator Joseph Liberman protested the sale of violent video games to minors. The video game industry responded to this political pressure by creating the ESRB.

Politicians like Leland Yee feel strongly that control over video game ratings and regulation should be in the hands of the government. (the way it works in Australia) However, there are certain advantages to the current ESRB that Mr. Yee seems to be ignoring.

1. Cost: Since the ESRB is run by the video game industry, publishers and developers foot the bill for the current game ratings system. A similar government institution would be a constant financial burden on the taxpayers.

2. Expertise: Politicians have absolutely no credibility when it comes to understanding or evaluating video games. Many of them are older, and come from generations that were never exposed to this form of media. Their qualifications for laying judgement on submitted video games are suspect. As an industry-run institution, the ESRB has easy access to personnel that are qualified to effectively evaluate video games.

3. Retail Support: The greatest success of the ESRB is that retailers openly embraced their ratings system. Even to the point of refusing to stock any titles that got the dreaded AO rating. At present, retailers in the United States are doing a better job of "protecting" children from M rated games than they are of "protecting" them from R rated movies. Attempting to supplant a system that is already seen as successful with a government-regulated system would be an additional drain on retailers.

[ZacD]

There is also a lot of negatives about the review systems in the US.

The ESRB and the Motion Picture Association of America are both rating groups that are separate from the government, you guys should watch this film http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/This_Film_Is_Not_Yet_Rated/70043954?trkid=2361637

"The film discusses disparities the filmmaker sees in ratings and feedback: between Hollywood and independent films, between homosexual and heterosexual sexual situations, between male and female sexual depictions, and between violence and sexual content."

[easterislandnick]

I think this is nuts! A 12 year old can buy the new Duke Nukum in the USA and you have no problem with it? Gasp.... maybe your constitution is wrong! You can't monitor kids 24/7 it's not possible. My parents were amazing but they didn't know everything I got up to, of course they didn't. I am a big believer in free speech but stopping kids buying mature games is just common sense. Harsh rules in the UK means that more adult content can be released with out the papers kicking up a fuss as its hard for kids to get hold of violent/inappropriate films and games. It helps freedom of speech.

The only reason games have kicked up a fuss is that they survive on kids playing generic violent games that are too old for them. It's easy to sell COD to a 13 year old and lots of sales go to kids. This isn't freedom of speech, it games developers fear of the fact that if violent games didn't sell they wouldn't have a clue what else to make and sell to 13 year olds!

[ZacD]

If violent video games cause any harm to kids or society, could have a point...

http://i.imgur.com/tpBrG.jpg

[eld]

I think this is nuts! A 12 year old can buy the new Duke Nukum in the USA and you have no problem with it? Gasp.... maybe your constitution is wrong! You can't monitor kids 24/7 it's not possible. My parents were amazing but they didn't know everything I got up to, of course they didn't. I am a big believer in free speech but stopping kids buying mature games is just common sense. Harsh rules in the UK means that more adult content can be released with out the papers kicking up a fuss as its hard for kids to get hold of violent/inappropriate films and games. It helps freedom of speech.


I wouldn't have much of a problem with it, it's the parents that should choose to have problems with it, they can't monitor their kids 24/7, but kids will play their games in the house they live in, the house of their parents, on their parents tv, and most often for hours until the parents go in and tell them food is ready.

It's not any much harder for a parent to check up on what their kids play than check up to see that their kids aren't getting into predatorious territories on the webs.

Kids will have quite a hard time getting the money to buy both a console/computer and the games they play on it, it's the parents that give their kids these things in the first place.


The only reason games have kicked up a fuss is that they survive on kids playing generic violent games that are too old for them. It's easy to sell COD to a 13 year old and lots of sales go to kids. This isn't freedom of speech, it games developers fear of the fact that if violent games didn't sell they wouldn't have a clue what else to make and sell to 13 year olds!

They make games after what the market wants, the industry adapting has always been needed, just look at the shift to the casual market. If anything the shooter market has always been heavily targeted towards the college crowd.

[Super Happy Cow]

If violent video games cause any harm to kids or society, could have a point...

http://i.imgur.com/tpBrG.jpg


Honestly, I wonder if anyone has done a longitudinal study on people that played first person shooters intensively, and how they developed into adults. Lots of those people, like myself, are largely in their 20s, and if they are older they were not developing while playing such games.

So you never know, really.

[easterislandnick]

I'm not sold either way on violence affecting kids, it could do but it probably doesn't. The whole games are expensive and kids don't have any money doesn't wash, £20 will buy you God of War and plenty of kids get consoles for Christmas with a £20 quid HMV (sells games, dvds and cds) token from their Gran. The parents might want to restrict what games they play but if both parents have to work then it's almost impossible unless kids aren't allowed to buy that game in the first place.

[eld]

...

Once again, all the money traces back to the parents, whom willingly gave their child a console. If they worked super hard to earn that money themselves to buy a console and a game, then all the more power to them.

But they'll still need to play it on their parents tv.
Now if their child worked hard enough to buy a console, games and a tv, then let them play god of war!

Work is not an excuse to neglect any kind of parenting requirements, having an insight and sit there with your children when the play games or browse the internet is one of these requirements.

[easterislandnick]

Work is not an excuse to neglect any kind of parenting requirements, having an insight and sit there with your children when the play games or browse the internet is one of these requirements.

Course its not but no one can monitor a teenager 24/7. They are cunning and have game consoles and TVs in their rooms. They lie to their parents, they will play violent games and parents will be none the wiser. I was a teenager and I lied to my parents, but games were a lot less visceral back then. Anyway, I think I have a different opinion to most of you so I will leave it here.

[Richard Kain]

Course its not but no one can monitor a teenager 24/7. They are cunning and have game consoles and TVs in their rooms. They lie to their parents, they will play violent games and parents will be none the wiser. I was a teenager and I lied to my parents, but games were a lot less visceral back then. Anyway, I think I have a different opinion to most of you so I will leave it here.

If children have been raised in such a way that they regularly lie to their parents, get away with it, and never suffer any consequences, then whether or not they are playing violent video games is a moot point. Their parents have already failed. They have raised their children without teaching them basic moral and ethical values, or established proper boundaries for behavior. Violent video games should be the least of their worries, and those spoiled brats need to be taught where the lines are.

When I lied to my parents, I got caught. And I was actually a really good liar. My parents simply weren't stupid enough to swallow everything I said. They remembered being kids, and they knew all the tricks. So I got caught, I got punished, and boundaries were established. There were several times that they punished me by taking away my access to the family video game console. The infractions in question didn't even have anything to do with video games, they just knew it was an effective form of punishment.

Good parents pay attention. Good parents don't just let their kids get away with things.

[Mark Dygert]

I'm not sold either way on violence affecting kids, it could do but it probably doesn't. The whole games are expensive and kids don't have any money doesn't wash, £20 will buy you God of War and plenty of kids get consoles for Christmas with a £20 quid HMV (sells games, dvds and cds) token from their Gran. The parents might want to restrict what games they play but if both parents have to work then it's almost impossible unless kids aren't allowed to buy that game in the first place.Well, I think you have a bit of a misunderstanding of how it works, and it seems like you think any clerk is going to hand any kid a game. Maybe my area and the areas I've visited are special and unique (highly doubt it).
I've been carded (I'm 34) just about every time at every store I've bought M rated games. Best Buy, Target, Fred Meyer, WalMart, GameStop, even Sears. Different clerks at different times over a long period of time. They started doing it when the ESRB went into effect and haven't stopped.

I've seen people younger than myself drive up to a game stop, go to buy a game and get carded then turned away.

According to the Federal Trade Commission (this isn't the industry cooking up stats, this is the US gov) which conducted undercover sings, stores are within 80% compliance of the ESRB, which means they card more than they do for other forms of media that have strict laws behind the ratings. Stores comply because its in their best business interest to be compliant with the ESRB.

80% voluntary compliance. The ESRB works period. That's better than other forms of media with strict laws.

The law, rode rough shot over our constitution, ignored the ESRB, sought to establish an unnamed, unfunded, not planned out agency at the tax payers expense, in a state that hasn't been able to balance its budget in decades... It stepped to far, ignored too much and wasn't thought out. Also this law effected only one state, other laws like this are federal which govern over all the states.

Now if at some point they wanted to take the system that works (The ESRB) and write that into FEDERAL law while not putting the tax payers on the hook then that would be a MUCH smarter option. But it was an incredibly poorly written law, that has been struck down 2 times already. Each time he dusts it off changes the title and resubmits it.

If the ESRB works (and it does according to the FTC) then why bother writing junk bills that won't be as effective? Maybe this guy needs to focus on his states budget which hasn't been balanced in decades, maybe he could work on setting up after school programs for kids instead of cutting them? Maybe he can work to create public parks and pools open so kids have places to play instead of sit inside play games or go out and get into trouble? Or maybe he should work on his states prison system which was recently deemed unconstitutional due to:
Over crowding (prisoners in cages for days with no toilets).
Crumbling facilities (leaking sewage pipes in the dinning hall).
Lack of basic medical care (inmates dying of things that are easily treated).
And a bunch of other BS that needs to be fixed.

His state legislature passed a series of "tough on crime" laws that turned the once pinnacle of rehabilitation into the worst. The only thing that can reverse that, are the law makers. But this guy is off peddling his "think of the children" bills just before election season... Where are your priorities man? Fix your society by working on the big problems don't go fixing problems that don't exist.

[Ace-Angel]

Couldn't have said it better myself Mark.

[Mark Dygert]

Course its not but no one can monitor a teenager 24/7. That's the difference between jail/bubble wrap parenting and actual parenting. By the time your kids are teenagers, they should be prepared to handle that kind of content, if you've done your job as a parent. You stop bubble wrapping your kid when they start to think and reason. Sadly too many people stop growing as parents when their kids are potty trained... Total parental failure... as a parent, you need to grow as they do.

They are cunning and have game consoles and TVs in their rooms.They lie to their parents, they will play violent games and parents will be none the wiser. Spoiled, self entitled little twat monsters, who can't handle the responsibility, shouldn't have that stuff in their rooms. It's not a right, its a privilege that is earned.

[Ghostscape]

I think this is nuts! A 12 year old can buy the new Duke Nukum in the USA and you have no problem with it?

This is wrong. Kids can't just walk into Gamestop or Walmart and buy an M rated game.

It is on the retailers to enforce the ESRB ratings, not the government.
Movies are the same way in the US.

Retailers enforce these ratings, which are attributed to the games by an independent system (the ESRB).

This means that the government can't censor a game with subversive content (ie, the Sims with same sex love, or a hypothetical game criticizing the US - I think Blacksite was trying to do this?) and keep it from being sold.

Nobody is advocating kids playing M rated games or watching R rated movies - it is a fight to keep the industry as the censor rather than the government.

[Justin Meisse]

I was younger than 12 when I saw a watched a fat kid get crushed by a giant bolder - in my brain - because I was reading Lord of the Flies. Adults need to stop being such sissy-babies and realize kids aren't the fragile china-dolls they think they are.

[JacqueChoi]

ESRB should still exist because movies ratings still exist.

The thing that was proposed, was that violent games had to be regulated like cigarettes and alcohol, where selling them to minors opened the door to $10k+ fines and is criminal offense.



I think the freedom of speech thing changes a LOT of things.


Opens games to being about public discourse.


You can now make your games to have a political agenda. You can defame politicians, celebrities, or any public figure.


It's pretty much what Larry Flynt did for sattire.

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/jerry-falwell-talks-about-his-first-time.jpg

[easterislandnick]

Nobody is advocating kids playing M rated games or watching R rated movies - it is a fight to keep the industry as the censor rather than the government.

I'm not sure self regulation works, an industry is mainly interested in money not restricting what buyers can purchase. It may work well in the US, in games though.

80% compliance - sounds like one in five kids can buy inappropriate games to me ;-)

I'm from the UK where we have a very different attitude to government than the states. If we didn't have legal restrictions on purchasing adult content then the newspapers would make even more fuss about GTA etc than they already do. Games are rated and can't be sold to kids so it takes the wind out of the papers argument. Only one game has been censored in recent memory, Manhunt 2. Very few films get censored, only rated. It works in the UK and means we can operate in a country where we can express ourselves in the most part without looking as though kids would be harmed. We live in country of satire and ripping the piss out the government without fear of censorship or retribution. I'm not saying this system would work in the US though.

[Justin Meisse]

it's just a scapegoat to appease voters - there's no evidence it harms children at all. Controversy over books and comics corrupting children has all but disappeared, I wouldn't be surprised if we dropped movie & video games ratings all together in 30-40 years.

I could be wrong though, perhaps the fear will amplify in the future and children will be put into comas until they are 21 so they won't accidentally bump into a corner and get a boo-boo

[Ace-Angel]

I know whatever thing my children are into as a new 'fad' won't be getting a easy ride anytime soon.

My generation suffered for games, let alien interspecies sex suffer too I say (unless I turn out to be into alien STD's).

[Talbot]

My teacher brought this up today. But she hadn't heard the verdict. I didn't even know this was going on. Anyway I just sat there shaking my head. Honestly. Are you gonna go ahead and ban violence from movies too? No? Then leave us alone and pay more attention to what your kids are doing.

[glottis8]

http://kotaku.com/5818217/violent-video-games-and-the-rights-of-parents

I don't think they understand that this is not saying it is ok for the industry to sell games to minors. It is up to the retailers and most importantly up to the parents to have an awareness to what their children play. If there is anything that a lot of parents lack now a days is awareness and good values. They really don't pay attention to what children play or watch, some people are so detached from their kids.

Some other examples? cigarettes sold to minors... movie theaters that won't let minors go in to watch a rated movie that is not fit for them. I believe is up to the retailers to give a warning. But it's up to the parents to understand what they are getting into as well. I am sure here at polycount people that are fathers understand that, and that if they let a kid play a game that might not be suited, that at least they take the time to talk to their kids about the representation and reality of the game. Making sure that they understand that it's a game!

anyways... i don't think this will be the end of this. Unless some other form of entertainment that is more brutal comes out. what comes to mind is a new american gladiator with real guns. haha

[McGreed]

http://kotaku.com/5818217/violent-video-games-and-the-rights-of-parents

I don't think they understand that this is not saying it is ok for the industry to sell games to minors. It is up to the retailers and most importantly up to the parents to have an awareness to what their children play. If there is anything that a lot of parents lack now a days is awareness and good values. They really don't pay attention to what children play or watch, some people are so detached from their kids.

Some other examples? cigarettes sold to minors... movie theaters that won't let minors go in to watch a rated movie that is not fit for them. I believe is up to the retailers to give a warning. But it's up to the parents to understand what they are getting into as well. I am sure here at polycount people that are fathers understand that, and that if they let a kid play a game that might not be suited, that at least they take the time to talk to their kids about the representation and reality of the game. Making sure that they understand that it's a game!

anyways... i don't think this will be the end of this. Unless some other for of entertainment that is more brutal comes out. what comes to mind is a new american gladiator with real guns. haha

I personally leaning towards Robinson or Survivor, with real cannibals :)

[glottis8]

I personally leaning towards Robinson or Survivor, with real cannibals :)

or the Running Man! "THE PRIZE IS HIS LIFE!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ceegnWSENQ

[Super Happy Cow]

Was anyone else nauseated by the first few lines of that video's description? : [