In the popular mindset, video games are still a child’s medium, which makes them especially vulnerable to censorship efforts by the government. These attempts to restrict the sale of “violent” video games persist despite the fact that they’re routinely struck down by the courts, and thankfully, that’s what happened to a similar law in California:
The law would have prohibited the sale or rental of violent games to anyone under 18. It also would have created strict labeling requirements for video game manufacturers.
In a written opinion, Judge Consuelo Callahan said there were less restrictive ways to protect children from “unquestionably violent” video games. For example, the justices said the industry has a voluntary rating system and that parents can block certain games on video consoles.
The video game industry is sensitive to this, and they’ve taken great strides to implement a rating system that gives parents an accurate idea of what they can expect from a particular game. Furthermore, modern game consoles provide parents with the means to implement controls to ensure their kids play games rated appropriately for their age.
Increased government regulation would impose additional unnecessary costs on game manufacturers, who already budget millions upon millions of dollars for game design and production. Furthermore, it would impose an unnecessary burden on retailers, who can legally sell rated-R movies to minors, but wouldn’t be able to sell them a copy of Halo 3. In other words, minors could spend $15 to buy a DVD of Hostel,in a genre widely referred to as “torture porn,” but couldn’t spend $60 to buy a game where you play the role of a futuristic cyborg-soldier fighting aliens.
While we’ll no doubt see nanny-staters seek to implement similar laws throughout the country in the future, at least this time, the good guys won.
