5 video game labels that might actually work

26583_1404714564368_1427496717_31101969_389938_n
Friday, April 13, 2012

Kirby

If you've been following Congress lately (or just reading my News Blips), you might have heard of HR 4204, a bill submitted on March 19 by Representatives Joe Baca and Frank Wolf. The legislation mandates that every retail-released video game with an ESRB rating of "E" and above -- so basically, all of them -- must carry a label reading, "WARNING: Exposure to violent video games has been linked to aggressive behavior."

I understand that Representatives Baca and Wolf mean well and are trying to keep young children from seeing and playing games that might turn them instantly into 28 Days Later-esque zombie psychopaths. I'm not really sure how the zombification would occur, and the proposed label doesn't explain it at all. So while I know that HR 4204 is a fine bill that presents no Constitutional, moral, or logical problems whatsoever, I think it could use more specificity.

I have selected a few games and devised labels that will tell people exactly what they're in for when they lay their money down.

 






Special thanks to Meghan Stratman and her Photoshop skills.

 
Problem? Report this post
EVAN KILLHAM'S SPONSOR
Comments (8)
Default_picture
April 13, 2012

Yeah, I really could have used that Fable 3 warning when that game came out... >.<

Default_picture
April 13, 2012

Suggested modification to the Duke Nukem Forever label: "DANGER: Game does not even remotely reflect time spent in development."

Suggested modification to the Super Smash Brosh. Brawl label: "NOTICE: Game occasionally rewards dashing, a key staple of movement, with arbitrary failure. In addition, much of game content is locked behind unnecessary hurdles, and save files cannot be transferred to circumvent this feature."

26583_1404714564368_1427496717_31101969_389938_n
April 13, 2012

Heh...I'm not sure all of that would fit on the box. We'd have to go back to those giant things that they used to package CDs in.

Dscn0568_-_copy
April 13, 2012

I liked the Smash Bros. label, but it should have been Meta-Knight instead of Pikachu. He did get banned after all.

26583_1404714564368_1427496717_31101969_389938_n
April 13, 2012

D'oh!

Lolface
April 13, 2012

But if Meta-Knight got banned, then no one can play as him and are therefore not eligible for face punching. Pikachu on the other hand is legal, so anyone can play as it, so everyone is eligible for face punching!

Default_picture
April 25, 2012

That Pikachu comment is genius.

Default_picture
April 25, 2012

That Pikachu comment is genius.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.