Awntawn said:
is it really necessary to have two different ratings for a 1 year age difference?
it's like M is 17+ (winkwinknotreallylol) and AO is the exact same thing except okwe'reseriousthistime... i mean wtf is the point >.>
Right there is the problem with the ESRB. "M" Rated is an absolute joke and everyone knows it.
You see the industry kick, bite, claw, and cry everytime someone tries to give M-Ratings any sort of teeth (such as penalties against retailers who sell them to minors) precisely because they know that a significant portion of the audience for these games is underage.
It's Joe Camel all over again.
So the AO rating, as I see it, is nothing more than a way for the industry to stop the whole house of cards from tumbling down. It's the invisible line in the sand which they know, if crossed, would light the match that would explode the bullshit and lies of a completely farsical ratings system that's as open and exploitable as they can possibly manage to keep it.
It's a way of seperating out the content that is so graphic, so extreme, that no one could possibly be in favor of allowing children access to, and as such, it gets austracized and punished to set an example for others that may follow.
Because if a game like Manhunt 2 was unleashed into the current M-Rated environment, children across the country would be playing it within days, and suddenly everyone would realize exactly how hypocritical this entire industry's feeble attempts at self-regulation have become. The ESRB would be doing nothing more than signing it's own extinction.