PEGI to take full control of game ratings - The Bear and Badger

Mod74

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2012/may/10/game-age-ratings-simplified-pegi

Additionally

the "12+" PEGI rating will become legally enforceable for the first time, meaning that anyone who sells a designated 12+ title to younger children will face fines of up to Â£5,000 and a jail sentance.

Sentance? Well done Grauniad.

Bout time really, mixing two systems was a mess and I've always preferred the PEGI system so fuck you.

EvilRedEye

I had no idea they hadn't finished switching to PEGI. I was watching a video on the Nintendo site about parental controls because I wanted to make sure they were switched off on my 3DS before I sent it for repairs. It shows the menu and there's this horrible mess of ratings logos with both BBFC and PEGI ratings. Makes sense to just have one set of ratings, although I don't see what was wrong with having the BBFC do them.

Mod74

Neither is especially perfect, but for something often aimed at children there was a rather large jump between U and 12. The BBFC number+sentence isn't particularly descriptive of content either, imo.

Sasukekun

EvilRedEye wrote:

I don't see what was wrong with having the BBFC do them.

Â

I'd rather a body who actually know a thing or 2 about the medium to be in charge or ratings for them rather than the BBFC.

Tempy

Don't think BBFC have made any duff calls really, one would assume the department that rates them knows a thing or two about what they're rating.

They need to make the PEGI ratings stand out a bit more too, looks rather innocous compared to ye mark o' red death/child attracting Jupiter spot.

Mod74

EvilRedEye wrote:

I had no idea they hadn't finished switching to PEGI.

I thought it had been a complete switch as well, till Rick pointed out Mass Effect 3 had a 15 on the cover.

EvilRedEye

Sasukekun wrote:

I'd rather a body who actually know a thing or 2 about the medium to be in charge or ratings for them rather than the BBFC.

The BBFC are knowledgeable about the medium, they've done reports about videogames in the past that have been fair-handed and shown they know what they're talking about. And then you have PEGI giving games with innocuous fantasy violence against evil monsters 16 ratings because they contain 'realistic-looking violence'.

Unlikely

Mod74 wrote:

Neither is especially perfect, but for something often aimed at children there was a rather large jump between U and 12. The BBFC number+sentence isn't particularly descriptive of content either, imo.

What happened to PG?

Mod74

I think PEGI do err on the side of caution. They're kinda like the BBFC were before they chilled out a bit.

You're never going to get a 100% consensus on what content justifies what rating but overall I'd prefer them to err up not down.

Mod74

Unlikely wrote:

Mod74 wrote:

Neither is especially perfect, but for something often aimed at children there was a rather large jump between U and 12. The BBFC number+sentence isn't particularly descriptive of content either, imo.

What happened to PG?

Nothing, it just doesn't mean anything in particular. Or rather it isn't a hard number harried parents can easily understand.

Unlikely

U isn't a number either.

Unlikely

Makes sense to me.

U - everyone
PG - careful now, but not as scary as
12 - 12 and above, etc.

Unlikely

You'd have to be pretty harried (or dumb) not to get that.Â Especially as the same system's been used for film classification for over a million years.

EvilRedEye

Mod74 wrote:

You're never going to get a 100% consensus on what content justifies what rating but overall I'd prefer them to err up not down.

Yeah, but I think the PEGI ratings sometimes verge on stark-bollock mental. It's easy to say "Oh, I'm over 18, fuck it, let them do what they like" but I look at the kind of games I like to play and have done since I was a child and see that under the PEGI system I might have been barred from playing them. Dragon Quest games - all 12s. Final Fantasy - all 12s, the most recent ones 16s. Kid Icarus Uprising is a 12! I just think they're a bit arbitrary and bizarre.

Mod74

Unlikely wrote:

You'd have to be pretty harried (or dumb) not to get that.Â Especially as the same system's been used for film classification for over a million years.

PG is saying "hey, this might be a bit iffy, we're flagging it up now, but it's up to you to make the decision"

If we could rely on every parent making an accurate assessment of a games suitability for their child we wouldn't need a rating system at all. But they can't and/or won't so we do.

Bollockoff

My colleague at work was complaining about this to no end the other day. Under PEGI, he's the only one on his professional Call of Duty team that could play MW 3 at official events across Europe as the rest of his team are 17.

Drastically effects prize money earnings as well since less teams will compete.

Sasukekun

EvilRedEye wrote:

Mod74 wrote:

You're never going to get a 100% consensus on what content justifies what rating but overall I'd prefer them to err up not down.

Yeah, but I think the PEGI ratings sometimes verge on stark-bollock mental. It's easy to say "Oh, I'm over 18, fuck it, let them do what they like" but I look at the kind of games I like to play and have done since I was a child and see that under the PEGI system I might have been barred from playing them. Dragon Quest games - all 12s. Final Fantasy - all 12s, the most recent ones 16s. Kid Icarus Uprising is a 12! I just think they're a bit arbitrary and bizarre.

But films with the same sort of content get the same ratings. So it's hardly bizarre.
Cartoons with the same content however would generally get PG ratings.

Bollockoff

I also don't get why they're saying people can now get fined up to five grand and a prison sentence. That's been the case under BBFC and PEGI for years if you get caught by mystery shoppers.

Mod74

Bollockoff wrote:

I also don't get why they're saying people can now get fined up to five grand and a prison sentence. That's been the case under BBFC and PEGI for years if you get caught by mystery shoppers.

For 12s? I thought that only currently applied to 15 and 18?

Unlikely

Mod74 wrote:

Unlikely wrote:

You'd have to be pretty harried (or dumb) not to get that.Â Especially as the same system's been used for film classification for over a million years.

PG is saying "hey, this might be a bit iffy, we're flagging it up now, but it's up to you to make the decision" If we could rely on every parent making an accurate assessment of a games suitability for their child we wouldn't need a rating system at all. But they can't and/or won't so we do.

Yes but you make the same decisions with "hard" age ratings.Â "You" being collectively but also specifically, I think.

Bollockoff

I've had to sit through many a training video on the matter and i've never been told or been implied to that 12s are exempt. It's just much less likely you'l get m-shoppers to test someone on a 12 as it's easier in court to just go "But I honestly thought he looked 12" which is how most people get off punishment completely.

Unlikely

Bollockoff wrote:

I also don't get why they're saying people can now get fined up to five grand and a prison sentence. That's been the case under BBFC and PEGI for years if you get caught by mystery shoppers.

I thought PEGI was a voluntary guidance thing, rather than a legal stipulation.Â Or was that some other rating system?Â ELSPA, or whatever it was called.

Mod74

Unlikely wrote:

Mod74 wrote:

Unlikely wrote:

You'd have to be pretty harried (or dumb) not to get that.Â Especially as the same system's been used for film classification for over a million years.

PG is saying "hey, this might be a bit iffy, we're flagging it up now, but it's up to you to make the decision" If we could rely on every parent making an accurate assessment of a games suitability for their child we wouldn't need a rating system at all. But they can't and/or won't so we do.

Yes but you make the same decisions with "hard" age ratings.Â "You" being collectively but also specifically, I think.

Agreed, but there's a lot less vaguery/decision making in "is my child as old or older than the number on this box"

You still might not have come to a decision even with the age thing, which is where the PEGI content descriptors come in.

Bollockoff

I honestly don't know the details. All I can say is that both Blockbuster and Game taught me that i'll get fined that exact amount and go to jail (extreme cases of course) if we get caught. Both on paperwork and training videos.

And I worked for Game about 5-6 years ago so it's been going that long at least.

EvilRedEye

Sasukekun wrote:

But films with the same sort of content get the same ratings. So it's hardly bizarre. Cartoons with the same content however would generally get PG ratings.

Bollocks. Films and TV programmes get away with all kinds of non-realistic violence without hard age ratings. In most RPGs you have an abstract animation appear over an enemy sprite, perhaps the most meaningless and abstract interpretation of violence possible, and yet they get slapped with 12 ratings for "non-realistic violence against human characters" while Disney films get off with an endless line of 'U's despite having dark stuff like a guy getting hanged to death by a vine just slightly off camera, etc.

vicinity_of_pie

So wait, what if you're a parent who wants to buy their 11 years old a 12 rating game? Is that Ok, could you be subject to a fine or is it only shops selling to underage kids? Sorry if this is a stupid question, I know nothing of games ratings.

Mod74

Unless this latest update has changed things, it's illegal to sell a game if you reasonably believe it's going to be given to someone who is underage. i.e. an adult buying it for a child stood next to them.

Same as alcohol/tobacco.

In reality I'd be surprised if a case like that has ever gone to court, and I've seen it happen and be waved through several times in different stores.

Diluted Dante

That's not the case. If a parent/guardian wants to buy GTA for their 7 year old, then they can. I'd rather it was that way, then I could tell them all to fuck off.

Also, selling a PEGI rated game to someone will result in just the loss of your job. Selling a BBFC rated game that's above PG can result in the loss of your job, a fine, criminal conviction and custodial sentence.

PEGI is a shit system that the government should never have endorsed. If they decreed that the BBFC wasn't up to the task, they should have created a new body specific to games, that worked in the same way as the BBFC.

regmcfly

I have a friend who works at the BBFC - this has been coming for 2 years.Â

The BBFC have had to lay off 3 of its 27 staff because of this - huge source of revenue gone for them.

Just thought you'd like to know.

vicinity_of_pie

DilutedDante wrote:

That's not the case. If a parent/guardian wants to buy GTA for their 7 year old, then they can. I'd rather it was that way, then I could tell them all to fuck off.

Are you saying you'd rather they couldn't buy said game for their child? What business is it of yours how someone else raises their child?

Diluted Dante

Yes I am. A parent buying GTA for their 7 year old is a shit parent.

You could equally say what business is it of the chap in the offie.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories