There is no California video games ban in effect yet, but video game law could change based on the current case before the Supreme Court. We've brought you the oral arguments, the Supreme Court transcripts and our opinions in Adam's post from D.C. and his Soapbox, but there's always more, folks.
Our own sharply-dressed Sess took to the steps to chat with California state Senator Leland Yee, who believes that more oversight is needed when it comes to policing video games. Senator Yee also feels that the framework is set for even more fundamental change that he sees as required to protect children from violent video games, but we'll let him spill the beans himself in this interview:
For more on this issue, be sure to check out Video Games on Trial at g4tv.com/gamesontrial!
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 61–80 of 110
31234565
MrRockstar2U
Sounds like Mr. Yee is talking out of his butt. This is not a matter for the states to take interest in, rather this is a matter for the parents to take interest in. There are enough safety precautions to shield minors from coming in contact with these types of games, but it's not up to the retailer to tell the parents how to parent. The ESRB labels CLEARLY state whats in the game. Clearly! But the parents still buy M rated games for children. Other kids can get there older brother to buy the game for them etc.
I have friends who work at Gamestop and Play N' Trade. They are required to tell the parents whats in the M rated game and whats included etc. There is no direct sale to minors, that's almost an impossibility. It makes me sigh when I can turn on syfy channel and watch some dude get his guts eaten out by a mutant dinosaur and not hear a PEEP about Ultra Violence on TV, but little Timmy plays Modern Warfare 2 and the state of California goes bananas.
JohnM79
Just goes to show you how out of touch he is with this subject.
AAAffect
The folks at MSNBC, Fox, and CNN could all learn a big lesson from Sess in that interview. Be polite, ask topical and non-judgmental questions, and attempt to determine the person's exact point of view without interjecting your own opinions. Keep up the good work...but not for too long. I'd hate to lose Sessler to Nightline.
NocturnalX
Ah yes, of course Mr. Le. It's all about "a bit of the old ultra-violent". I can't help but feel like he just read A Clockwork Orange before writing the bill or doing the interview.
Sara5x5
He seriously said "on their keyboard or JOYSTICK." Joystick really? I don't know anyone who stills uses a joystick anymore. It just goes to show how much these people actually know about games. When was his research done? 20 years ago? If my mom didn't want me playing a certain game she didn't let me play it plain and simple. Parents need to man up and take responsibility for their children. Putting restrictions on video games is just another form of censorship. I personally am tired of our government and their ignorance. One day the people who grew up with video games will be in charge. Oh how I will relish that day.
atx88
i find it interesting while the law is mostly going to effect console gamers. Yee says that this will on apply to those games where players actually do the killing with their "keyboard" or "joystick" there is no mention of a controller... This guy clearly is very unfamiliar with gaming as a whole. This reminds me of something my father told me, where as his generation, growing up with arcade games and not story driven ones, looks at gaming as a negative time wasting activity. Where as people who grew up playing these newer story driven game realize they higher level of learning and problem solving involved. I bet this guy couldn't even manage to aim using two joysticks on a controller. But that is a bit of a strawman argument.
ZzZEVOLUTIONZzZ
Kids get their hands on R rated movies, graphic novels, and so on but why are we talking about video games? Even if you put some sort of system in place kids will still get their hands on them and play them.
ZzZEVOLUTIONZzZ
WOW... This guy needs to actually go out and play a video game... He said grand theft auto 4 which is much more tame then say gears of war where you use a chainsaw bayonett to saw a locust and half. Your whole screen gets covered in blood and the body lies in chunks on the floor, I mean come on whoever is supporting this guy needs to open there eyes. This is all about VIOLENCE in general they dont have any idea what violence they want to ban JUST ALL VIOLENCE. I am sure the only game this guy knows about is GTA4 because of negative press. I am all for freedom of speech, do not censor this art form. It is the parents job to watch their kids not the governments.
swordgoatz
Looks like you both got the black suit, blue shirt, red tie memo.
doodle_billy
did he just compare video games to cigarettes?.... video games dont cause cancer.
Stefanos
Heh.. I believe many viewers are misunderstanding, this isn't a ban, it's simply a new rating system. I imagine the Senator is looking for a way to make himself useful and happened to notice the statistics and decided that it would be a good idea to try a little harder to prevent illegal downloads and video game piracy and to show minor's that they really don't have the world by the balls. This shouldn't change video games for adult consumers.
Thugzorz
You can urinate on people in Grand Theft Auto 4?? Man have I played that game wrong..
StrongestSaiyan
Wow, why did it post what I said so many times?
StrongestSaiyan
There are several problems with what Yee said. He wants to provide a tool to help parents: there already is one, it's called the ESRB. The problem is that a bunch of parents are too lazy to check the box, or to go online and do research, or to just ask someone at the store. There is high correlational data: there is just as much saying that games don't make a difference. And the game makers aren't worried because of losing sales to minors, they're worried that stores will be so scared of getting fined that they won't stock the games, and then they'd lose sales to the adult audience.
Also, what constitutes "just for the fun of it?" Now sandbox games are bad because they let the player choose to do things. The player can just as easily not. I went through all of Red Dead Redemption without committing a single crime. But I guess it's somehow better that I be required to kill characters, rather than given the option.
StrongestSaiyan
There are several problems with what Yee said. He wants to provide a tool to help parents: there already is one, it's called the ESRB. The problem is that a bunch of parents are too lazy to check the box, or to go online and do research, or to just ask someone at the store. There is high correlational data: there is just as much saying that games don't make a difference. And the game makers aren't worried because of losing sales to minors, they're worried that stores will be so scared of getting fined that they won't stock the games, and then they'd lose sales to the adult audience.
Also, what constitutes "just for the fun of it?" Now sandbox games are bad because they let the player choose to do things. The player can just as easily not. I went through all of Red Dead Redemption without committing a single crime. But I guess it's somehow better that I be required to kill characters, rather than given the option.
StrongestSaiyan
There are several problems with what Yee said. He wants to provide a tool to help parents: there already is one, it's called the ESRB. The problem is that a bunch of parents are too lazy to check the box, or to go online and do research, or to just ask someone at the store. There is high correlational data: there is just as much saying that games don't make a difference. And the game makers aren't worried because of losing sales to minors, they're worried that stores will be so scared of getting fined that they won't stock the games, and then they'd lose sales to the adult audience.
Also, what constitutes "just for the fun of it?" Now sandbox games are bad because they let the player choose to do things. The player can just as easily not. I went through all of Red Dead Redemption without committing a single crime. But I guess it's somehow better that I be required to kill characters, rather than given the option.
xxxciter
I'm a little confused... We are (or should be) talking about UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE access -- not adults (If the law isn't clear on THAT it simply should be)...
I don't play many video games, BUT I totally support an adult's right to do so (free speech or freedom of individual choice, whichever)...
BUT, I don't think a "child" (under the age of 17 or 18) should be able to do anything in a virtual reality that they are not allowed by law to do in real life!?!?! (so...no drinking, smoking, having sex, or shooting/gun owning -- the, maybe only barehanded killing and knife attacks allowed???)
(What does "MA" mean? Are "MA" titles being sold to minors? Are there no penalties for doing so? Then what is the point of an "MA" rating?)
Then, I think the industry would be wise to adopt a more COMPREHENSIVE and LEGALLY BINDING rating system (which is well and CLEARLY DEFINED) -- just like we have with MOVIES (which don't "allow" minors into certain movies); have consequences for, at least, those businesses which sell those "MA-18" (or some such) titles to "minors" (just as we do with CIGARETTES, GUNS, Condoms?, etc.).
I wouldn't want my nephew to be able to buy an extreme title, but that doesn't mean that his father couldn't purchase the title and allow him to play it -- that is his choice as his parent! And I don't think any law should extend into one's "living room."
FUNNY, though, I see real parallels here with old SODOMY laws.
So, I say... create an "ADULT" RATING category, define what "EXTREME" means," LABEL those titles, don't sell those titles to "KIDS," but STAY OUT OF OUR TVs & LIVING ROOMS!!!
It seems so simple to me, I'm not sure what the big fuss is all about -- let's just fix this mofo...
StrongestSaiyan
There are several problems with what Yee said. He wants to provide a tool to help parents: there already is one, it's called the ESRB. The problem is that a bunch of parents are too lazy to check the box, or to go online and do research, or to just ask someone at the store. There is high correlational data: there is just as much saying that games don't make a difference. And the game makers aren't worried because of losing sales to minors, they're worried that stores will be so scared of getting fined that they won't stock the games, and then they'd lose sales to the adult audience.
Also, what constitutes "just for the fun of it?" Now sandbox games are bad because they let the player choose to do things. The player can just as easily not. I went through all of Red Dead Redemption without committing a single crime. But I guess it's somehow better that I be required to kill characters, rather than given the option.
awi5951
ADAM YOU SUCK YOU DIDNT ASK HIM ABOUT THE HOLLYWOOD MOVIE VERSION OF HIS STUPID BILL. Adam this interview fails! This jerkoff is the one who is trying to have it both ways were is the violent movie bill. Adam you dont have any balls how did you let him get away with that.
Symicide
Senator Yee can go suck bigfoots dick.
Displaying 61–80 of 110
31234565