Select your localized edition:

Close ×

More Ways to Connect

Discover one of our 28 local entrepreneurial communities »

Be the first to know as we launch in new countries and markets around the globe.

Interested in bringing MIT Technology Review to your local market?

MIT Technology ReviewMIT Technology Review - logo

 

Unsupported browser: Your browser does not meet modern web standards. See how it scores »

{ action.text }

But, for now, the ratings system has been voluntary. In other words, retailers aren’t financially liable if a minor gets his or her hands on an M-rated game.

“These efforts tell people that you can legislate along moral lines,” says Joseph Olin, president of the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences, a Los Angeles-based group that awards excellence in the video game industry. “That’s fundamentally against the Constitution.”

Such political criticism may not harm the game’s popularity or sales, though, according to one industry watcher.

“I’m not sure Schumer’s comments will compel a retailer not to carry a game,” says Schelley Olhava, an analyst with IDC. “Video game sales bring a lot of money to retailers. They’re a high margin product. There’s a reason Grand Theft Auto and these games have sold as well as they have: people want them.”

Rockstar Games’ Grand Theft Auto 3 was an instant hit when it was released in 2001, amid a flurry of controversy.

Still, retailers don’t want to be forced to police their customers. As a result, this latest salvo has upset some retailers and video game creators, who vow to fight the Illinois bill and suppress any other bills currently winding their way through legislatures. “It’s an unfortunate example of politicized legislation,” says Hal Halpin, president of the Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association. “The issue has become a political football, and those involved appear to me more concerned with garnering fast votes and support than affecting change.”

In Illinois, video game retailers may not have to do anything more than sue the state to erase the law from the books: in every instance so far, when a state has attempted to pass such a law, it has been defeated in the courts. The Entertainment Software Association, a Washington, DC-based lobbying organization, has gone to court three times against similar state laws – and won each time.

So why are Senator Schumer and some states attempting another round of lawsuits? John Millner, a Republican state representative in Illinois – and one of the six legislators to vote against the bill (106 representatives voted in favor) – thinks he knows why.

“Politically, it would have been a great vote for me,” he says. “But in my conscience, I couldn’t vote for it. I asked my peers ‘How can you [vote for] this?’ They looked at me and said, ‘If I vote against it, there’s going to be a piece of mail going out against me, saying I’m in favor of these games.’”

Millner says he opposed the legislation because of concerns about its constitutionality, as well as the negative impact it could have on retailers across the state, many of whom, he argues, are small shops that can’t afford a $1,000 fine if a clerk makes a mistake.

“I don’t condemn the governor for doing this,” says Millner, who disagrees with the research cited by the governor’s office, saying violence-oriented games cause real-world crime. “But it’s our job as legislators to…tell him that we can’t do this.”

0 comments about this story. Start the discussion »

Tagged: Biomedicine

Reprints and Permissions | Send feedback to the editor

From the Archives

Close

Introducing MIT Technology Review Insider.

Already a Magazine subscriber?

You're automatically an Insider. It's easy to activate or upgrade your account.

Activate Your Account

Become an Insider

It's the new way to subscribe. Get even more of the tech news, research, and discoveries you crave.

Sign Up

Learn More

Find out why MIT Technology Review Insider is for you and explore your options.

Show Me