The game industry's self-regulatory body has been under fire from politicians ever since its inception eleven years ago. Currently, Congressman Joe Baca, a Californian Democrat, demands that the Federal Trade Commission review the ESRB, as he feels it doesn't do an adequate enough job of preventing mature titles from being played by young gamers. However, the funny thing is, developers think the ESRB is too strict with their ratings, giving games AO ratings and forcing the devs to re-work the game so it can get a Mature rating.

But Daniel Greenberg, a freelance game developer and the chair of the IGDA's Anti-Censorship Committee, scratches his head and asks, "Are they talking about the same ESRB?" "For as long as I've been running these roundtables -- which is about eight years now -- they've been dominated by developers griping about their horrible experiences trying to get games through the ESRB," Greenberg relates. "They expect to get 'T' ratings and get 'M's or they believe they'll get an 'M' and they come out with an 'AO.' And that sends their marketing departments into a panic. The games have to be redone and are frequently sent back to the ESRB two, three, even four times, which is an expensive and time-consuming procedure. Our industry has a difficult time contending with the rating system. Which is why it's staggering to me that people say the ESRB isn't tough, because we get numerous complaints every year about how tough it is."