Should more games be rated AO?

[Final-Fan]

GotchayeX said:
Final-Fan, you apparently disagree with me. You think that rating games like Gears of War as AO would legitimize the rating instead of killing the games. Why? I've tried to argue that the most restrictive rating is always going to kill a work, just as an NC-17 rating can kill a movie's sales. What do you find objectionable about my arguments?

Actually, my recent responses have been to naznatips and bdbdbd.

I have stated in previous posts that the AO rating may indeed be radioactive beyond saving; I am arguing here about what ought to happen, not what necessarily will. On the other hand, if a big game like, say, Gears of War 2 were rated AO, I think that it would be powerful enough to overcome the stigma. At least, it would be on the retailer end; if Microsoft stuck to its "no AO" guns and sent it back to the shop, that would just prove that the system is broken.

And naznatips, bdbdbd, I don't think the above clarification changes our debate but if it does I'm sorry for not clearing that up before.

[edit:  To address your argument, GotchayeX, I have previously made my argument that keeping a radioactive rating in reserve to stop accusations of selling murder/rape simulators is both cowardly and ineffective.

[To wit:  "The place where we disagree is that I think not having two REAL ratings to distinguish violent vs. extremely violent games would hurt the industry more than not having a fake rating to defang Jack Thompson. 

["After all, it didn't really work, did it?  He got national headlines for years, until even nongamers realized he was psycho, and got GTA3:SA slapped with the AO rating!]