This is my first serious blag post that involves a bunch of links. Please criticize it in earnest and suggest a macro to head it. And while you're at it, tell me how to make block quotes in BBCode.

When I saw the post about an expert actually doing good to the gaming industry, I was reminded about Common Sense Media, another one of those media advisory organizations dedicated to educating parents about what kind of media is appropriate for children and what isn't. They give their own ratings to movies, television programs, music albums, books, websites and, most importantly, video games. What sets them apart from other watchdog organizations you hear about is that they stress the importance of parental control of media exposure for children above all else. They don't just say what's bad and what isn't, rather they help parents decide for themselves what they should let their kids see. They acknowledge that every family is different and what could be appropriate for one child may not be for another; this is determined by the choices of the parents. To this end, every review utilizes a two-part rating system and a comprehensive content guide. For the purposes of this article, the system will be described in the context of video games.

Common Sense Media ratings are based on the age group most likely to be interested in watching or playing each title in question. A group consists of all ages above a certain number, for example, 8+ or 17+. The title is then given an "On", "Pause" or "Off" rating, which is color-coded green, yellow and red respectively. (If you're a Netflix customer this may sound familiar, as the same system is applied for movies and all other media types.) "On" means that the title is appropriate for the given age group, "Pause" means it's in a gray zone and it's up to the parents if it's appropriate or not, and "Off" means it isn't appropriate (again, it's still up to the parents if they allow them to see it anyway). Titles are further rated in levels of violence, language, sexual content and message (which includes commercialism, social behavior, drug/alcohol use and educational value), where applicable. The whole of the objectionable content is concisely summarized in a Common Sense Note, which briefly yet accurately and specifically describes what players can expect in terms of said content throughout the game without spoiling anything. The Common Sense Notes for select recent games should help get my point across:

Halo 3 (Pause 17+):

Parents need to know that even kids who don't play video games know about this adult game thanks to a massive advertising campaign that extends to normally kid-friendly establishments like Burger King and 7-Eleven. (Mountain Dew has even created a new soda for the game called "Game Fuel.") But while it might be marketed to kids, the ESRB gave this first-person shooter game a "Mature" rating for violence for very good reason. Throughout the game, players shoot aliens (and humans in multiplayer mode) using a wide variety of weaponry: shotguns, machine guns, bombs, grenades, and special alien weaponry that includes laser blasters. In the mayhem, they'll see vivid images with blood shooting out. Regarding the mild language warning, there isn't anything to really raise an eyebrow, but know that when the Halo games are played online, players can communicate -- and curse -- via headsets. Parents also have to know that this game is a major time-suck and can be so appealing that kids would rather play it than interact with their friends in real life.

Families can talk about what makes the Halo games the kind of experience that mature gamers gush about. How is it different than other sci-fi shooters? For kids who want to play but have parents who put their foot down: What made you want to play this game? Why do you think Burger King and Mountain Dew helped tell kids about the game when the rating isn't T for "Teen" or E for "Everyone"? What other made-for-adults media titles do you see marketed to teens? Why do you think this happens? And ask your kids how many hours a week they think is appropriate for game play?

Mass Effect (Pause 17+):

Parents should know Mass Effect is a robust role-playing game with an incredibly interactive storyline. Parents should know that this game has one brief sex scene involving an apparent female alien. The scene more alludes to sex as opposed to showing graphic acts. However, the encounter occurs even if you create a female character, which opens the door to same sex relationships. The in-game violence is on par with most shooters, but isn't gratuitous. This is a robust role-playing game with an incredibly interactive storyline. Players decide the dialogue of their character, and can traverse the galaxy as either a diplomatic hero or a renegade willing to bend the laws. The game is littered with moral choices the player must make, which have consequences.

Families can talk about how Mass Effect compares to other role-playing games. Did you feel conflicted making some of the moral choices in the game? Should more games involve equally engrossing storylines where you decide your character's reactions?

Rock Band (On 10+):

Parents need to know that even though there are some mildly offensive lyrics, this game is appropriate for players 10 and older (despite the "Teen" rating). Some songs have the words bleeped out, such as Beastie Boys' "Sabotage" ("I got this f--king thorn in my side") while other lyrics are kept as-is, such as The Hives' "Main Offender" ("I'm stuck in ways of being an ass"). This game is best for social settings since players get different instruments to play. It can also be played online, which Common Sense Media doesn't recommend for anyone under age 12.

Families can talk about how the savvy developer, Harmonix, built on a popular concept -- Guitar Hero -- and expanded on it ambitiously by adding drums, bass, and vocals, too. What does this game teach you about being in a rock band? Does it seem easy or do you have a new appreciation for the work that goes into becoming a really good rock band? Since the Special Edition Bundle comes with a drum controller, did the game give you a sense of what it's like to play the drums?

World In Conflict (Pause 13+):

Parents need to know that World in Conflict is filled with large-scale battles, complete with artillery strikes, napalm, even nuclear bombs. Soldiers can be run over by tanks, blown up with artillery, or shot by snipers. On the positive side, the game has a very interesting, and well-told storyline about how the Cold War could have ended. Plus, an included History Channel DVD explains how the real Cold War actually ended in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall. The game has an online component which Common Sense Media does not recommend for anyone under age 12.

Families can talk about how this game uses a storyline that presents an "alternate history" -- imagining that something in the past actually happened differently than it did. Have you read any other books or played games that used this method of storytelling? Does it encourage you to discover what really happened?

Assassin's Creed (Off 17+):

Parents need to know that this game is very much about violence as you play as a hired hitman, of sorts, to take down key targets with cunning and strategy. This usually involves skulking through the shadows to remain undetected and figuring out how to accomplish the task, such as a knife to the throat from behind. People you kill will fall to the ground and some blood is seen.

Families can talk about whether this game teaches anything about this time period (12th century) in the Middle East or does the backdrop take a backseat to the violence? That is, could a player actually use a game like this one to learn about key moments in history such as the Crusades?



Notice how the second paragraphs in those notes include tips about discussing the game with the family. It's this part of the review that I like the most, as it encourages parents to get involved with the games their kids play the best way they know how. Further, they attempt to make the games they describe sound like they have some artistic merit similar to that in film and tie those good points to suggested topics of discussion. They also give mind to online play (though personally I think children should have to wait a little longer before they can play with strangers over the internet).

Let me make a digression and bring attention to the note for Halo 3. When Game Fuel was released, I couldn't help but laugh that they would make a soft drink directly related to a video game that's most popular with hardcore gamers. "Just what we needed, a product that helps to enforce a stereotype advertised in the mainstream," I thought. The fact that a product related to an M-rated game was sold in family-accessible places like 7-Eleven is given attention in the note. Notice how they don't give it the Jack-Thompson treatment and state the problem in a cool-headed, matter-of-fact way: "But while it might be marketed to kids, the ESRB gave this first-person shooter game a "Mature" rating for violence for very good reason." They avoid going the sensationalist route and give games like Halo, violent and gratuitous as they may be, the same respect as games as every other title they rate. That kind of fairness is rare in media outside of the gaming community and only until more media watchgroups decide to explain the situation that doesn't scare parents into thinking games like Halo are the devil will I stop overly appreciating little gestures like this.

The main reason I support Common Sense Media ratings is because they actually think of not only the children, but the parents as well. (Long digression back there, huh?) While the ESRB does its job in revealing what kind of content is in a game (see the back of the box next to the rating), more and more people are beginning to feel that the current rating system of E-E10+-T-M-AO is no longer adequate, especially since the gap between M and AO is only one year. Full consideration is given to each aspect of the game in the Common Sense system so as to warn parents of every little thing that one could find objectionable. For example, here are the content advisories for Mass Effect:

Sexual Content: Partial nudity. One scene alludes to sexual encounter, but shows nothing graphic. Creation of female character opens door for same-sex encounter. Content best suited for mature players.
Violence: There is some blood, but nothing incredibly gory. There are a couple images of impaled humans, but not much else. You'll fight some organic species, humans included, as well as robots. Most battles involve using pistols, shotguns, rifles and grenades. Most of the emphasis is placed on the dialogue and exploration.
Language: Occassional curse word used, like 'ass' and 's--t'
Social Behavior: Character's moral choices determine whether you're perceived as a model officer or renegade. Those choices also impact future interactions and force you to consider the consequences of your actions.

Of course, such thorough advisories of content could never fit on the back of a game box, but it's still much more informative than the ESRB content descriptors of "Blood, Language, Partial Nudity, Sexual Themes, Violence", which the ESRB never bothers to elaborate on on the box. And then there's the problem of lazy parents who don't bother to read it all, defeating the purpose of ratings. I don't want to say that Common Sense Media's is a better rating system and that it solves the problems other ratings have, because frankly, it doesn't. It doesn't cover older games (say from two years back or so) or low-profile games and it doesn't even review portable games. Some reviews even sound preachy. Still, it's a much better tool than ESRB ratings for educating parents on game content, especially because of its unassuming nature that every family has different beliefs and values. Even with such potent tools, ultimately, I believe the responsibility is all on the parents for everything that their children get into (but that's for another article). I will say, however, that Common Sense uses a different rating system that I have high faith in, and if you know me, you know that I love being different and I love people who do things differently. With the Common Sense Media guides, it is my hope that parents who become aware of it will use it fully and in turn become better able to determine which games to avoid, thus helping to alleviate the whole "games make murders" mindset that is so popular with media these days by stopping the problem at its source. Only parents know their children well enough to determine if a game is a murder simulator or innocent escapist fun to their children, not the special interest groups. I'd love to bring up my own family as an example, but that's for another article as well.

My entire point in writing this article is simply to raise awareness of this system because I think it's more intuitive than the ESRB system that simply rates games based on a de facto standard of appropriateness. Common Sense Media bases its rating on a different system based on the target audience for each game. They may not be on the same level of inside knowledge we hardcore gamers throw around in places like this, but at least they tell parents what they want to hear. More importantly, they tell parents everything they want to hear and in a way not even they could misunderstand. It's a much more informed system and as far as I can tell, not many people have even heard about it. In fact, the only place I've ever seen it used is at Netflix. All I want is for other people to know about it and give it consideration, even if it can't get the same attention the other major organizations and Jack-Thompsons get. If another such group that emphasizes media control in the hands of the parents instead of their own exist, I don't know about it. This needs to change if we hope to see any progress with getting parents to be more accepting of video games.

Yeah, the above is wishy-washy at parts, but so what? I just spent an hour writing about an organization for the parents and I'm going to revise it later anyway. In summary, there's this different media rating group at http://www.commonsensemedia.org and I think you should look into it because it's more informative than ESRB ratings and a sensible alternative to other media watchgroups that think Hannah Montana: Spotlight World Tour in particular is an appropriate game for children these days.