In an impressive botch up PEGI makes all video games with gambling now 18 rated, but potentially not for lootboxes

[Dwarvenhobble]

PEGI Rating For Gambling Descriptor Is Now Always 18+

Updated PEGI criteria for gambling ensures any new game that includes elements that encourage or teach gambling are now rated PEGI 18.

www.askaboutgames.com

Updated PEGI criteria for gambling ensures any new game that includes elements that encourage or teach gambling are now rated PEGI 18.

Sounds goo however

The result is that parents and carers can be confident that any new game published where you can partake in recognisable real-world gambling will be rated PEGI 18.

As keeps being argued by AAA companies Lootboxes aren't technically gambling under the present real world laws thus likely will end up escaping this.

However

An example is Overboard. This is a murder mystery game where the twist is that you are the murderer trying to fool people into thinking you are innocent. The game is a text adventure with some illustrations and includes "Mild Violence, Suggestive Themes and Use of Alcohol" at the PEGI 12 level.

However, because there is a scene where you can play blackjack with another character the game is rated PEGI 18 for Gambling. It's also worth noting that because the other elements aren't at the PEGI 18 level they are not included as descriptor logos.

games where you play a game recognised as gambling in the Real World but not for real money just for fun as part of the game can end up getting hit by this.

The VSC expanded on how these changes work. "In 2020, the PEGI criteria were changed so that, in future, any games featuring moving images that “teach and/or glamorise the use of games of chance that are played/carried out as a traditional means of gambling” will be rated PEGI 18."

"This refers to types of betting or gambling for money that is normally played or carried out in casinos, gambling halls, or racetracks. It does not cover games where betting or gambling is simply part of the general storyline. The game must actually teach the player how to gamble or bet and/or glamorise gambling. For example, this will include games that teach the player how to play card games that are usually played for money or how to play the odds in horse racing."

 

[bluegate]

Just a reminder that PEGI is the gaming industry trying to regulate itself.

Let it make fuck ups like this, it only devalues its own rating system, if shit like this continues then eventually actual legislation will be levied against the gaming industry.

But.... PEGI is a 'Murcan thing and we all know how well consumer protection is done in 'Murca...

 

[Gordon_4]

Just a reminder that PEGI is the gaming industry trying to regulate itself.

Let it make fuck ups like this, it only devalues its own rating system, if shit like this continues then eventually actual legislation will be levied against the gaming industry.

But.... PEGI is a 'Murcan thing and we all know how well consumer protection is done in 'Murca...

I thought PEGI was from Europe, and ESRB was the American body?

 

[MrCalavera]

I thought PEGI was from Europe, and ESRB was the American body?

It is. It's in the name. PEGI stands for "Pan European Game Information".

Anyway, PEGI's marks are merely guidelines, that have no real legal force whatsoever. Banning games/game content still lies within the prerogative of goverments. So this will have exactly as much effect as "18+" mark itself.

 

[Trunkage]

Sounds like a great way to get government regulation

 

[bluegate]

I thought PEGI was from Europe, and ESRB was the American body?

Got them mixed up, le whoops.

In that case, can't wait for actual government legislation to come down on them.

 

[Chimpzy]

Fyi, the PEGI rating system is run by the ISFE, a private, supposedly independant federation formed to represent the interests of the European game industry. Basically the European counterpart to the lobby group trade association ESA (which runs the ESRB).

So per chance any loopholes may or may not be coincidental.

 

[Bedinsis]

I have now read the article, after having read the other comments in this thread. Maybe my opinion was colored by my fellow commentators here but PEGI came across as more sympathetic than I expected.

While I consider lootboxes a negative thing in video games, the existence of Happy Meal toys from McDonalds does not bother me, despite that being a purchase with a randomized outcome. Apply that to video games and I can see how the argument is there that lootboxes is not technically gambling and should not be treated as such. It obviously comes down to how the randomized purchase outcome is implemented, and here I have too little experience to say anything about it, although I am sure the truth is that the developers to a large extent tried to instill a gambling mentality when implementing those aspects. At least if The Jimquisition is anything to go by.

I bring this up to get to the point: Nowhere in the article is lootboxes mentioned. Meaning they've made the decision that gambling elements, i.e. teaching minors how to gamble or glamorizing it, is a no-go, independently of whatever one might think of lootboxes, and although the two subjects are connected this was a decision about one thing and not the other.

I do wonder however if this actually helps a minor in not developing gambling problems. It just sounds like a face-saving measure to keep eyes off lootboxes and the like that is a real problem for those inclined to gamble, and to signal boost that "Hey-hey, we are doing something!".

Also, as the article highlighted, this added descriptor means that anything else that might be objectionable for a parent to let their child experience will not be found out. I could see a parent thinking that simulated gambling is A-OK for their child to play but alcohol consumption is not.

 

[bluegate]

While I consider lootboxes a negative thing in video games, the existence of Happy Meal toys from McDonalds does not bother me, despite that being a purchase with a randomized outcome.

Happy Meals make a skewed comparison to loot boxes though.

There are usually only one or two items per week available, you can ask the person behind the counter for the week's selection and state your preference, you can exchange a duplicate at the counter, or you can straight up buy the toys nowadays for a buck or two.

If you want a certain Mc Donald's Happy Meal toy, there are avaneus available to you to get it without any hassle.

 

[Bedinsis]

Happy Meals make a skewed comparison to loot boxes though.

There are usually only one or two items per week available, you can ask the person behind the counter for the week's selection and state your preference, you can exchange a duplicate at the counter, or you can straight up buy the toys nowadays for a buck or two.

If you want a certain Mc Donald's Happy Meal toy, there are avaneus available to you to get it without any hassle.

Fair enough, perhaps Kinder eggs or gumball machines with toys is the better comparison.

 

[McElroy]

Anyway, PEGI's marks are merely guidelines,

Depends on the country. Over here games (and films and series) rated 18+ can't be sold to under-18s. So I dunno... Some teens suddenly can't buy the PlayStation game they want and simply ask their parents to do it.