[EDITORIALS]Time for game revision

The rating standards of the Game Industry Promotion Law, which was established in April, should be revised.
The intention of the legislation is understandable: Game industries can be the country’s next-generation engine for growth and should be supported. Though some gambling games, such the Sea Story slot machine programs, have brought about scandal, it would not be proper to denounce all game industries. And the law provision that games should be rated by an independent deliberation committee with sufficient expertise, separate from the committee for rating general audio and video recordings, also makes sense.
But some provisions of the law regarding ratings standards for games make no sense. First, under the new law, the previous four ratings for games have been integrated into only two ratings. Now there are only “no children under 18” ratings and “general users” ratings. The “at least 12” rating and “at least 15” rating have been removed.
The more serious problem is that all the games that had been rated “at least 12” and “at least 15” have become rated “general users” under a provision of the law.
How could the National Assembly make such nonsense in legislation? They deserve criticism that they have been lobbied by game industry representatives. Most of the games that have recently received the “general users” rating include cruel murders and bloody combat.
The view that violence in games can be tolerated more than that of movies or animations is not acceptable. In some respects, violence in games has more serious effects than video recordings, because it is seen repeatedly. Such games are already influencing people that may fail to distinguish reality from virtual reality.
Though civic groups, including associations of students’ parents, had repeatedly said that the ratings of games have problems, the assembly made the problems worse through the legislation. Why?
Some lawmakers had even tried to let non-governmental organizations take charge of rating of games under the new law, which was not achieved.
It has already been revealed that some lawmakers were given donations from game industries and made overseas trips in support of the businesses. So we cannot help but suspect that the businesses’ lobbying influenced the legislation procedures.
If the National Assembly is passive in disclosing this, the prosecutors should do it.