PEGI/ESRB and Amateur game ratings

[CaptainBinky]

I can see the point in doing it. Some people get offended easier than others - good lord we found THAT out with that blinking picture of Mia in our game

But I think it should be simple. I see no problem with logos for Language, Violence, Sex and then beneath them the words "mild", "occasional", "frequent", "extreme" or something. I can't see the point on rating things out of 10, or having more than 4 or so categories because the whole thing would become too subjective and difficult to accurately compare.

[Helm]

FREQUENT EXTREME SEX

here are some more

WARNING: THIS GAME HAS BEEN RATED
WARNING : YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED
WARNING: THIS GAME HAS BEEN DEVELOPED
WARNING: YOU ARE PLAYING A GAME
WARNING: WARNING
WARNING: GERMANS
WARNING: THIS GAME MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN OPINIONS
WARNING: AMBIGUITY AHEAD

Some people get offended easier than others

let them be offended. Your choice to engage them in discussion or not.

[Alynn]

The idea is to give any consumer a truthful idea of game content,

But game content is there to flesh out concepts, ideas, story and aesthetics. What use is it to anyone to know 'this game contains images of knives, drawings of people having sex'. Take anything worthwhile you've ever experienced in art and break it down to the signifiers contained therein, regardless of the conceptual element they serve, what do you have?


I don't see any point to this, besides possibly it being fun to do for your game, to go through all of it and find the signifiers and put warnings for everything for them as some sort of post-modern statement.

WARNING, THIS GAME CONTAINS:

PEOPLE
DISCUSSIONS
COMBINATORIAL ITEMRY
COLORS
MOUSE POINTERS (6)

Maybe I shoud reword it "Possibly objectionable content"

[Helm]

I maintain that anything is possibly objectionable, and that you're not doing anything good in further promoting that type of thinking.

[GarageGothic]

A quick and dirty edit of Hillbilly's icon, but how about something like this to display the grade of severity:

[Ishmael]

WARNING: MAY CONTAIN A GAME

[CaptainBinky]

The way I see it, is sooner or later an amateur game is going to be released that is truly sick. It may not be now or in a year, or five years. But at some point it's inevitable. Since amateur games are completely unregulated when that happens, somebody somewhere is going to sit up and take notice.

I can't see a problem with implementing a system such as this. If you don't think there's much point to it, then don't be part of it, your call. I think it's a nice thing to do. I think it's good PR for the maturity of amateur games. Just keep it simple and consistent. Black and white images that are still recognisable small.

Just because what people find objectionable varies isn't a reason not to adopt this kind of system. There are general trends that can be copied such as what you get on the back of a DVD or commercial games. Whether or not anyone cares that they're there or not isn't the point. They are there, and it sends a good message out about amateur games (that adopt this, of course).

[Helm]

somebody somewhere is going to sit up and take notice.

Then that person should sit down when they realize the game isn't made by industry, but by amateur enthusiasts and they can do whatever the hell they like without any regulation since they're not selling product. In fact, this is one of the biggest strengths of the medium we're working on: that we can make whatever we want regardless of ratings.

And here we are talking about implementing self-censorship.

[CaptainBinky]

It's not self-censorship of any kind. Nobody is suggesting that you can't make the game you want to make, just that you label it clearly if you choose to be a part of this.

Just because you're not selling the product doesn't mean that you should take no responsibility for it.

[Alynn]

No not once does it say anything about censoring. And in fact it clearly states that the producer can make whatever they want. They just make sure they inform anyone that might use it the content that may be objectionable.

Here is the quote
"The Ethical portion of the title does not preclude any content from any game or project by a Producer in the association; it only pertains to truthfully depicting the content of the project or game to the public."

If you want to have mothers eating their own babies while being sodomized by an alien Ã, that is exploding cows with a microwave ray, then go right ahead, just make sure you have it labeled as having sex,violence,blood and gore. So someone doesn't download Fluffy Bunny Makes a Movie when the movie Fluffy bunny is making involves the above scene.

[ManicMatt]

A quick and dirty edit of Hillbilly's icon, but how about something like this to display the grade of severity:

SHOCK!! HOW DARE YOU!!! THIS KNIFE GOES AGAINST MY RELIGION! PREPARE TO ENGAGE LAWSUIT!

[Radiant]

"The Ethical portion of the title does not preclude any content from any game or project by a Producer in the association; it only pertains to truthfully depicting the content of the project or game to the public."

Also, whether intentional or not, the name subtly implies that any Amateur Game Maker who for whatever reason does not wish to participate in this content labeling system, is Unethical.

[Helm]

I stand by my position. Wait... how can I do that? I stand... BY my position?

WARNING: LOGICAL FALLACY

Anyway. Just by inviting this 'here are the potentially objectionable parts of my game, regardless of meaning or content, lol!' aspect of political-correctiveness into our amateur games, and to do this most of all, ourselves, we are sabotaging the vitality that exists in enjoying a piece of art for what it is on the whole, not as parts of a whole. And that's a luxury I'm going personally to continue to retain. I don't want to see small pictures of knives and penises, when I check out a game. I want to play a good game.

The word 'fuck' or a couple fucking are means to an artistic end. Do we really want to promote people gathering instead of this, just that there is the word 'fuck' and some fucking in our game? It's like looking at the finger instead of where it's pointing. It's silly.

[CaptainBinky]

I can understand your position and I respect it. Nobody's trying to force this on anyone. But since I respect your stance on this, then please respect mine. I think this is a good cause, and not:

'here are the potentially objectionable parts of my game, regardless of meaning or content, lol!'

This isn't a joke to me. If I'm going to support Alynn's idea (and I will) then I do so in all seriousness.

[Helm]

Go ahead and do what you want to do. From my point of view, it undermines your own credibility if you have big boobs in your game, and also a warning for big boobs. If you can't see that, it's fine.

[CaptainBinky]

We're not going to have a "big boobs" warning. That's ridiculous and simplifying the concept for the sake of a comedic point. There are other concepts in our game beyond that one character. Some of those ideas and imagery may be unsuitable to certain people.

Besides, what credibility exactly? We don't have any credibility to begin with. We're making a game, some people may like it, some people may not. I fail to see how having a couple of icons next to it undermines anything. I don't look at DVDs and think "Tsk! As if they have to have this on Schindler's List. Those ratings totally undermine that film's credibility".

[Helm]

I wasn't making a comedic point. Most of the ratings discussed in this thread amount to 'knife' or 'big boobs' as I see it.

The credibility someone automatically has and should try to retain when they're presenting their art with honesty and conviction.

[CaptainBinky]

The ratings how I've been suggesting would be more in line with what you see on DVDs. I.e. Violence - mild, Language - strong. etc. No, I probably wouldn't be happy with too much detail in the ratings because a) it'll get too subjective and b) it'd all get too confusing. It has to be simple. If you notice, this is what I've been saying all along.

The credibility someone automatically has and should try to retain when they're presenting their art with honesty and conviction.

We're making a game that we quite like, and we wouldn't pretend to have any other motivation or conviction other than "we want to make it". It's not art. It contains themes which you could say are satire, or social commentary, but we're not making a big deal out of that. It's just a game, and we hope people enjoy it.

[Radiant]

Of course we have credibility. It comes from interacting with a community and giving out expectations. For instance, if a random forum n00b wants to recruit people, nobody is interested - whereas if a longtimer (especially one who has demonstrated skills in the past) asks the same question, people offer help. That's credibility.

I think it rather makes sense to state that if you think the content of your game is offensive to people, you should reconsider whether it should be part of your game. Disclaimers are pretty much a weasel way out.

[CaptainBinky]

If you make a game that's for adults, what's the problem with saying "it's for adults"? Saying "if you think the content of your game is offensive to people, you should reconsider whether it should be part of your game" is basically saying "you should reconsider making an adult game".

It's not about whether it's offensive to everybody. If it were offensive to literally everyone, then no-one would play it and there'd be no point making it. I can't see why anyone would have an issue with this. You (as an adult) can choose to ignore the icons and play what you like. Whereas you (as a parent) can see what may or may not be suitable for your children. Where's the harm in that?