Insider Gamer’s Loop

Since 2003 PEGI (Pan European Game Information) has served as the video game content rating system in many parts of the EU, including Great Britain. Now, however, the UK is on the verge of shifting, at least on the surface, to a more cinema like rating system based on the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification) style rating.

The breakdown

The Daily Mail’s online component ran a story today detailing some of the concerns to be had in the UK over video game violence and inappropriate content, and some of the measures British Parliament will be deliberating over and deciding on tomorrow.

Great Britain has had measures in place to rate video games since as far back as 1989 with ELSPA (Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association), which was an organization setup by British software publishers to voluntarily rate games. ELSPA served as the primary rating authority on video games until 2003 when PEGI became the new content rating system for the UK. Up until now, video games have been exempt from the BBFC ratings, placing the need on separate entities to rate games.

According the measures being considered, games would now be rated according to BBFC classifications that are currently used for films, which break down into the following categories: 18, 15, 12, PG, and U (for universal).

Currently PEGI breaks down its ratings into similar classifications of 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+, and 18+, and also makes use of several different content descripters for things like violence or drugs. Recently PEGI, like the ESRB in the US, has come under scrutiny for being unclear and ineffective. Subsequently there are those in the UK who would like to see BBFC ratings adopted, if only for clarity, as film ratings are more recognizable and familiar.

This debate then comes down less to the issue of actual game content, but more to the issue of how said content is rated, how clear those ratings are, and how to best ensure that those ratings are enforced.

Dr. Tanya Byron is a Clinical Psychologist from the UK who has long been a respected voice on entertainment’s influence on children. Dr. Byron has given recommendation to Culture Minister Margret Hodge on improving and updating the ratings used for video games in the UK.

In a March interview with GamesIndustry Dr. Byron said in regards to responsible parenting and ratings, “it also boils down to responsible, clear classification and labeling - there are responsibilities for retailers and they need to be supportive of that.” But then, how clear does a classification need to be? And in this case, are the BBFC classifications really an improvement? In the States we have the issue of reconciling the difference between an R rated movie and an M rated game, but in the UK both the BBFC and PEGI classification for the highest level of restriction is simply 18, which obviously indicates an age. Need it be more clear than that?

Our take on parenting and ratings

While the issue of game content is often placed on the hinge of a particular rating system and said system’s clarity and accessibility, at some point isn’t the responsibility placed on parents to educate themselves about how to best raise their children? I think we can all agree that certain content in film, video games, and even music isn’t appropriate for children. I think we can further agree that there should be clear labeling for the content contained in these mediums. The point of contention arises for me when this idea is introduced that some blathering idiot of a parent is exempt from responsibility when developers, publishers, advertisers, retailers, and an entire industry as a whole are unable or unwilling to bend over backwards to compensate for said parent’s inexcusable ignorance and laziness when it comes to raising their own child.

Furthermore, we need to do away with this excuse that the ratings aren’t good enough. Let me break this down for you - no shit sherlock. I actually agree that the ratings instituted by the MPAA, BBFC, PEGI, and ESRB are all in some way or another inadequate. Won’t I don’t agree with is the idea that a board or organization should be the deciding factor when it comes to what goes on in your living room, or your child’s bedroom. At some point we have to stop expecting a rating system to come three-quarters of the way, and start expecting parents to bridge the gap and make up for the shortcomings of the ratings systems themselves, with sound parenting and a willingness to take some time and get informed.

We expect parents to take the necessary time and measures to ensure their kids live in a safe environment, go to school in a healthy environment, and don’t hang out with the wrong kind of people. But when it comes to video games suddenly parents get a pass on not doing their homework because technology is boogie man and parents are intimidated. News flash to the Mr. and Mrs.: you’re kids are not smarter than you and the only reason they know more about “all that video game stuff” is because you’re too dumb or too lazy (or both) to take fifteen minutes of your life and learn something about it.

Be informed, be objective, and be active in areas that can potentially affect your child’s life in both positive and negative ways.

What does this mean for gamers and the industry in the UK?

Unfortunately it may mean delays. EA has already said the BBFC compliant system would further confuse parents, and would cause delays for their titles in the UK.

Any time a new controlling entity is included in ratings of any kind there are going to be delays, at least in the immediate future. The good new is the highest level of restriction is still, in theory, the same. The bad news is, that’s only in theory. This is because the criteria that is used to rate anything (films, books, games, whatever) is often highly subjective and subject to wide and fluid interpretation. Moreover, if the BBFC is anything like the MPAA, don’t expect any kind of consistency.

Developers and publishers may have to face the reality that what garnered them one rating previously, may gain them an entirely different rating now. And when this happens, bad things happen for the quality of your game. Delays will very likely result, content will unfortunately hit the cutting room floor.

UK gamers, we lament for thee.

Finally…

If you’re wondering why we chose to set this piece with the imagery of “Firemen”, understand we don’t consider ratings systems to be censorship, not really. But retailers and advertisers get nervous. And ratings carry a heavy stigma anywhere, one that can devestate profits. Improperly implemented we do consider ratings systems to a detriment to the creative process.

But perhaps there’s someone who can put it better than we can. We leave you with a few words from Frank Miller…

——————
Then there’s the nonsense to calling a rating system anything but censorious.
It worked in the movies, right? Wrong. Absolutely, utterly, wrong. “It’s just
labeling. It doesn’t affect the contents. It doesn’t limit anybody’s freedom.”
Say that out loud in Hollywood and your’re guaranteed a laugh. The movie rating
board, or MPAA, is a powerful force in Hollywood. It is capricious, maddening, and
destructive to the creative process. It is censorship, the self-incflicted kind
of censorship that Hollywood has, in its incredible cowardice, accepted and
embraced.

Having written several movies, I can testify: before a story is even plotted, it
is assigned a rating (”Are we talking an ‘R’ rating here?) by its producers. The
decision of what rating one is “shooting for” determines innumerable decisions about
the story before it goes to script. And that’s just the beginning. It gets a whole
lot worse later.

You see, there are no written rules at the MPAA as to what merits a G, PG, R, X,
or NC-17. Once the movie is edited into the shape the producers want, it is
submitted to the MPAA for a rating. It is assigned one, often without explanation.
If you want an R and you get an X, you face death at the box office, so you cut.
At random, you cut and cut and pray that you’re a doing a good job of
second-guessing the MPAA. Then, if you’re not lucky, you get another X and the
mutilation process begins again. It’s a nightmare, and one that a number of people
seem to wish us to inflict upon ourselves.
——————

- Frank Miller, 1994, back page column of Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Think about it, seriously.

——

[New cinema-style warnings for disturbing video games - Mail Online]
[Dr Tanya Byron: Part Two - GamesIndustry]
[Electronic Arts says new cinema-style ratings system unworkable - Times Online]