> Okay? How will this actually change anything?

It's my understanding that lots of parents use these numbers as guidance. I will make my own decisions about what my child can play, but the ratings and all the labels makes it much much easier to make an informed decision.

For the parents that are not into gaming, being able to just go by these numbers is much better than having no such guidance.

> Does anyone do outside of fundamentalist parents who wouldn't let kids play most video games anyways?

Yes. In fact I believe they help breaking down the fundamentalism by making it so clear that gaming is not inherently bad or good for your child. It all depends on the content.

> I don't think I have ever paid attention to a single age rating in my entire life.

You mean when you've selected games for yourself to play? That's... fine.

If you mean when you've selected (or allowed) games for your kids to play, that's... pretty irresponsible.

Having age ratings is useful so I dont have to play a game to know its age suitability. Its common for very young children to play games, and age ratings help parents make informed responsible decisions. There are some dark addictive patterns being used in gaming such as changing the odds of reward to optimise engagement (and make money) - these patterns need an age rating. Additionally, I think age ratings encourage developers to avoid content which would increase the age rating, since they then target a wider audience.

This is not a regulators move. This is the industry slightly adjusting their recommendations to parents. Will this change anything? Maybe it will help the industry avoid being targeted by actual regulation.

We won't know until we try it.

This law in worst case doesn't cause any problems and in best case solve problems. So win-win.

Well, this is going along with all the new requirements for companies to actually verify ages, so it won't be up to the parents.