United Kingdom Legalizes PEGI Ratings

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

What about the ESRB then? The vast majority of games I see here are ESRB rated, not PEGI and I can't think of any BBFC rated ones.

Does this mean that there is now a legal requirement for games released here in the UK to carry a PEGI rating? Does it make it a criminal offence to sell a game to an underage player (because at the moment, AFAIK it's just a "recommendation" rather than a legal obligation)?

To the OP, the UK doesn't "legalize" anything. We "legalise" it, baby.

And I don't want the UK to use the same thing as Germany. They censor their s**t quite a lot. (Also we totally won the war).

 

[iseko]

I suppose I don't have to worry about this, I'll be turning 18 next year... but I've never really agreed with age ratings. I've played 'inappropriate' games ever since I was 3, and it hasn't ever affected me one bit. If anything they made me more mature.
Seriously, what harm is it going to do for a kid to hear people say bad words a few times in a game? And when's the last time you heard of a kid going clinically depressed after seeing a pair of tits on-screen?

Because small children don't know when it's 'okay' to use the word fuck. A 3 year old won't even know what fuck means. So it's quite strange when you have guests coming over and your little boy/girl walks in saying: 'mommy, daddy, the neighbour boy just fucked me!'

Also, giving a 6 year old a game like god of war is a bad idea for way to many reasons. Kratos likes to rip of peoples heads and use them as flash lights... Yea that's some good story telling for a little kid. And ofcourse there is the mandatory love fest with 2 scarcely clothed girls.

There is a time and place for everything. And 6 years old is not the time to be animating threesomes and mass murder. Call me old fashioned but that's my opinion. It's probably going to be okay when your kid hits puberty. But that is something every parent should decide for themselves. When my kids show 'some maturity' I will let them have more privileges.

 

[CrankyStorming]

I prefer the little BBFC logos though....

Same, but a separate ratings board is understandable as they should be looked at differently.

Except that the PEGI ratings are pretty much meaningless as a guide to a game's content. For example, Silent Hill HD Collection is considered an adults-only game because it's Violent, yet Professor Layton and the Spectre's Call is absolutely fine for seven year olds despite being not only Violent, but also Scary. How does that make sense? Well they don't publish their guidelines, so it's anyone's guess.

I'm sure the former is more violent than the latter, but the labels certainly don't tell me that. Compare the BBFC guidance which tells me that the former contains 'Strong Violence and Horror' and their website which provides not only full guidelines for each category, but extensive reports on why the examiners classified the game in the category they did.

 

[Burnhardt]

This is a good thing. Parents can not watch their children ALL the time. And if the children are pc gamers it's easy to play the wrong games behind their backs (I know because I played doom and duke nukem without my parents knowing. When they found out they were pissed). This helps parents from having their 12 year old play a game like left4dead or splatterhouse.

Its not like we've never had Age ratings before in this country.

The only difference is instead of those games having a little red circle with 18 inside it, it'll be a little red square with 18 inside it. The only major difference between the two systems is that there is no 15 rating its 16.

I'm not a fan of the idea that violent videogames create psychopaths. But little children should not be decapitating people with a chainsaw (for obvious reasons). Even if it is a videogame. Especially with today's graphics. I'm not one of those people who would forbid his kid to play mass effect or dragon age because there is 12 seconds of 'bare' animated ass in it. Or because there is the option of a gay relationship. But they won't be playing the extreme violence games either.

For me it serves a second purpose also. I want my kid to know that he is a kid in my eyes. He will not get whatever he wants no matter what his friends get. This is important for me. I will keep certain things from him (like a cellphone, my kids ain't getting one until they are 15. And I will be damned before they get a friggin' smart phone). Yes he/she will be pissed of but in the end they will thank me for it (like I thank my parents now). All those little shits who got whatever they wanted are deadbeats now.

I will agree with you on this however. It nice to see a parent/potenial parent not spout the usual 'but they're very mature for their age' BS. Kudos to you.

 

[iseko]

This is a good thing. Snip

Its not like we've never had Age ratings before in this country.

The only difference is instead of those games having a little red circle with 18 inside it, it'll be a little red square with 18 inside it. The only major difference between the two systems is that there is no 15 rating its 16.

I'm not a fan of the idea that violent videogames create psychopaths. But little children should not be decapitating people with a chainsaw (for obvious reasons). Snip

I want my kid to know that he is a kid in my eyes. He will not get whatever he wants no matter what his friends get. snip

I will agree with you on this however. It nice to see a parent/potenial parent not spout the usual 'but they're very mature for their age' BS. Kudos to you.

To your first comment: Doesn't this new system forbid the sale of a game rated 16/18 to under age persons? Instead of the old system where it is just a recommendation, but kids can still buy them behind their parents backs. Or is that just a possible future implementation? If I misunderstood then yes, you are are right.

Second comment: thanks

 

[Kmadden2004]

What about the ESRB then? The vast majority of games I see here are ESRB rated, not PEGI and I can't think of any BBFC rated ones.

Does this mean that there is now a legal requirement for games released here in the UK to carry a PEGI rating? Does it make it a criminal offence to sell a game to an underage player (because at the moment, AFAIK it's just a "recommendation" rather than a legal obligation)?

To the OP, the UK doesn't "legalize" anything. We "legalise" it, baby.

And I don't want the UK to use the same thing as Germany. They censor their s**t quite a lot. (Also we totally won the war).

You sure about that?

ESRB is an American board, having them oversee game classification in the UK would be the same as calling for the MPAA to classify our films too. I don't think I've ever seen an ESRB rating over here.

And there are plenty of games with BBFC ratings; Mass Effect, Dragon Age, GTA, Assassin's Creed, Dead Island, Snipe Elite, and Call of Duty all have BBFC ratings.

And, yeah, basically it now means it's a criminal offense to sell a PEGI-rated 18 game to an underage customer. Though whilst it was merely a recommendation previously, many stores have actually been treating the PEGI ratings as law for a while, so it's not exactly a massive change.

And these UK boards don't necessarily "censor" content the way Germany does. They can refuse classification to a product that they feel goes too far, making it illegal to sell in stores, but that happens very rarely (the last time that happened was with the BBFC over The Human Centipede 2 last year), and often in those times they will actually work with the content's creators to find some kind of compromise that works well for everyone.

The benefits of having PEGI take over from the BBFC is that the former is dedicated solely to games, and will perhaps have a more nuanced perspective on the medium. That being said, the only time I ever had a problem with the BBFC's ratings was when Perfect Dark was released on the N64 (seriously, why was that game an 18?).

 

[Albino Boo]

Wasn't there a huge uproar about America trying to push through a law similar to this a few years back? That one in California?

This looks very similar to me, but maybe I'm just misreading the situation.

Its identical and the law has been enforce for about a year. Most democratic countries have something similar, only a few activity censor games (Germany and Australia). In much the same way there are law restricting the sale of booze and tobacco. It somewhat puts pay the alarmist claims that Amazon, Steam and Walmart would all stop selling games. All 3 continue to sell games in the UK, Wallmart trough its UK arm ASDA.

The main point of adopting Pegi rather the previous BBFC rating is to save money. The people at BBFC who used to rate games will be out of a job and reduce the cost to the tax payer. The Games industry also gains because they will have one less rating to pay for.

To your first comment: Doesn't this new system forbid the sale of a game rated 16/18 to under age persons? Instead of the old system where it is just a recommendation, but kids can still buy them behind their parents backs. Or is that just a possible future implementation? If I misunderstood then yes, you are are right.

It has already been implemented, its already illegal to sell games to the underaged, just like DVDS, Booze and cigarettes. This change is about who rates not if the rating is in force. The change will almost to certainly go through as an order in council and won't effect the law on the ground.

 

[Hoplon]

Wasn't there a huge uproar about America trying to push through a law similar to this a few years back? That one in California?

This looks very similar to me, but maybe I'm just misreading the situation.

What's different is in the UK ratings have always had with them a legal obligation Films, video/dvd etc.

Oddly I would have thought that Eliminating the PEGI rating would have been the way to go since the BBFC logos are so familiar and ingrained from Cinema.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Wasn't there a huge uproar about America trying to push through a law similar to this a few years back? That one in California?

This looks very similar to me, but maybe I'm just misreading the situation.

Yep. It was a good idea last time and will be a good idea this time. Asking a retail outlet not to sell something because you asked nicely isn't particularly effective. Making it an actual law is.

The important thing about these regulations means that the blame of buying inappropriate games falls entirely on the kids' parents, which is exactly where it should be.

There was actually a reason it was a bad idea last time. Last time they were trying to make it so that 18 rated games would be treated pretty much like porn, which is crap.

This is good, because all it's doing is going "here you go parents, its your problem". The other one wasn't doing that.

Sorry, misinformed then. I'll defer to you.

 

[maninahat]

I suppose I don't have to worry about this, I'll be turning 18 next year... but I've never really agreed with age ratings. I've played 'inappropriate' games ever since I was 3, and it hasn't ever affected me one bit. If anything they made me more mature.
Seriously, what harm is it going to do for a kid to hear people say bad words a few times in a game? And when's the last time you heard of a kid going clinically depressed after seeing a pair of tits on-screen?

I agree that society is fairly arbitrary about which media needs age consent. A 9 year old might not be able to buy American Psycho or Clockwork Orange from a DVD store, but not only could he walk into a book store and buy the substantially more violent novels, but people would commend the kid for his "mature reading list".

Same goes for plays. In a showing of The Fall of Sejanus, I watched as two naked men ass-fucked one another on stage (whilst soliloquising, no less). No guidance, or age ratings or any child restrictions were in place. I could have brought a 3 year old in to see the disemboweling and onanism on display (if I wanted).

I guess as long as its old, established and "cultural", anything goes.

 

[ScruffyMcBalls]

Woo! It's about damn time game ratings were legally enforceable. Now parents have no ground from which to claim videogames are fucking their children up, not like they ever did before, but now we can empirically prove it. This change does make me wonder if a parent buying an -M- rated game for a minor would be held to account in the same way an adult is if they buy cigarettes or alcohol for a minor, I can only hope so.

 

[mad825]

Wait! politicians understanding the everyday person? Ha! Bunch of high class snobs.

 

[Quaxar]

As long as it's the sane PEGI rating and not the completely fucked up German FSK...

 

[AnarchistFish]

I prefer the little BBFC logos though....

Me too

I think they're different too. BBFC has a 15 rating but I think the PEGI equivalent is 16. Oh well, it doesn't matter for me anymore. I don't really agree with it being illegal to sell to people under the age rating but next year it will be completely irrelevant anyway.

Wasn't there a huge uproar about America trying to push through a law similar to this a few years back? That one in California?

This looks very similar to me, but maybe I'm just misreading the situation.

What's different is in the UK ratings have always had with them a legal obligation Films, video/dvd etc.

Oddly I would have thought that Eliminating the PEGI rating would have been the way to go since the BBFC logos are so familiar and ingrained from Cinema.

This too^^

Especially since the government seem so intent on separating themselves from EU legislation.

To your first comment: Doesn't this new system forbid the sale of a game rated 16/18 to under age persons? Instead of the old system where it is just a recommendation, but kids can still buy them behind their parents backs. Or is that just a possible future implementation? If I misunderstood then yes, you are are right.

Pretty sure it was illegal anyway. I can't think of a time when it wasn't...

What about the ESRB then? The vast majority of games I see here are ESRB rated, not PEGI and I can't think of any BBFC rated ones.

Are you sure? I've just checked my games and about 90% of them are BBFC rated and barely any are ESRB rated.

Woo! It's about damn time game ratings were legally enforceable. Now parents have no ground from which to claim videogames are fucking their children up, not like they ever did before, but now we can empirically prove it. This change does make me wonder if a parent buying an -M- rated game for a minor would be held to account in the same way an adult is if they buy cigarettes or alcohol for a minor, I can only hope so.

It was legally enforceable before though, and it's rare for parents to make a big deal out of it. If anything it's the tabloids but it never adds up to much.

OT: Don't really understand the headline either. They weren't illegal, just not primarily used.

 

[fix-the-spade]

To your first comment: Doesn't this new system forbid the sale of a game rated 16/18 to under age persons? Instead of the old system where it is just a recommendation, but kids can still buy them behind their parents backs. Or is that just a possible future implementation? If I misunderstood then yes, you are are right.

Yes it does.

BUT, the old system did as well, this new ruling just changes who's logo is on the box. Before it was the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification) who decided age ratings, for a while they've been trying to get out of doing games. BBFC ratings (U,PG,12,15,18) have always been legally binding so selling a game with a rating to an under-age was still an offense.

Now it's PEGI that is legally binding, so the BBFC logos will be disappearing from games entirely and the PEGI rating (which goes 3,7,12,16,18) should be the only one on the front of the box.

For the people in shops this will make little to no different. Store policies have always been to treat all age ratings as legally binding regardless of it's actual status.

 

[draythefingerless]

Wasn't there a huge uproar about America trying to push through a law similar to this a few years back? That one in California?

This looks very similar to me, but maybe I'm just misreading the situation.

Its identical and the law has been enforce for about a year. Most democratic countries have something similar, only a few activity censor games (Germany and Australia). In much the same way there are law restricting the sale of booze and tobacco. It somewhat puts pay the alarmist claims that Amazon, Steam and Walmart would all stop selling games. All 3 continue to sell games in the UK, Wallmart trough its UK arm ASDA.

The main point of adopting Pegi rather the previous BBFC rating is to save money. The people at BBFC who used to rate games will be out of a job and reduce the cost to the tax payer. The Games industry also gains because they will have one less rating to pay for.

To your first comment: Doesn't this new system forbid the sale of a game rated 16/18 to under age persons? Instead of the old system where it is just a recommendation, but kids can still buy them behind their parents backs. Or is that just a possible future implementation? If I misunderstood then yes, you are are right.

It has already been implemented, its already illegal to sell games to the underaged, just like DVDS, Booze and cigarettes. This change is about who rates not if the rating is in force. The change will almost to certainly go through as an order in council and won't effect the law on the ground.

There is a huge difference between the california laws and what we have implemented across Europe. We treat games as protected by constitution, they are art. The californian law would treat games as tobacco or booze, where in the government decides wich products it allows to be sold. You cannot sell booze without the government allowing you, and evne then, it decides what booze you can sell. This way, games would of been highly scrutinized, the market would of been stalled as the government inspects each andevery game sold, censoring it, implementing itself in its creation, and most likely changing stuff. Germany is much like this, and it is HIGHLY criticized for its stupid stick-up-ass behavior.

 

[Albino Boo]

Wasn't there a huge uproar about America trying to push through a law similar to this a few years back? That one in California?

This looks very similar to me, but maybe I'm just misreading the situation.

Its identical and the law has been enforce for about a year. Most democratic countries have something similar, only a few activity censor games (Germany and Australia). In much the same way there are law restricting the sale of booze and tobacco. It somewhat puts pay the alarmist claims that Amazon, Steam and Walmart would all stop selling games. All 3 continue to sell games in the UK, Wallmart trough its UK arm ASDA.

The main point of adopting Pegi rather the previous BBFC rating is to save money. The people at BBFC who used to rate games will be out of a job and reduce the cost to the tax payer. The Games industry also gains because they will have one less rating to pay for.

To your first comment: Doesn't this new system forbid the sale of a game rated 16/18 to under age persons? Instead of the old system where it is just a recommendation, but kids can still buy them behind their parents backs. Or is that just a possible future implementation? If I misunderstood then yes, you are are right.

It has already been implemented, its already illegal to sell games to the underaged, just like DVDS, Booze and cigarettes. This change is about who rates not if the rating is in force. The change will almost to certainly go through as an order in council and won't effect the law on the ground.

There is a huge difference between the california laws and what we have implemented across Europe. We treat games as protected by constitution, they are art. The californian law would treat games as tobacco or booze, where in the government decides wich products it allows to be sold. You cannot sell booze without the government allowing you, and evne then, it decides what booze you can sell. This way, games would of been highly scrutinized, the market would of been stalled as the government inspects each andevery game sold, censoring it, implementing itself in its creation, and most likely changing stuff. Germany is much like this, and it is HIGHLY criticized for its stupid stick-up-ass behavior.

Small but rather important point movies, both in cinemas and on DVD have legal enforcible age limits on them in the UK. In the case of cinema the limits have been in pace for 80 odd years. I'm sorry to tell you its only the USA that has this hang up about age limts in the democratic world. Is American democracy so week that it can't treat dvd sales like tobacco sales without plunging in a fascist state? I think you have to examine whether you are being manipulated by the games industry who know that over 18 games are attractive to 15 year old boys more than they are 35 year old men. I would like to point in the direction of the deadsapce2 ads, your mother wouldn't like it, when the game was rated 18. Most 18 year olds are unaffected by parental opinions on gaming. It could be that the they aimed the ads at 15 year olds now. Its also interesting to note the only in the US did the games industry attack legally enforcible age limits, not one peep was heard in the rest of the world. Could that be because the rest of the democratic world regard age limits for films and games in the same terms as booze and cigarettes?


If the rest of the democratic world can manage this why can't the US?

 

[targren]

Wasn't there a huge uproar about America trying to push through a law similar to this a few years back? That one in California?

This looks very similar to me, but maybe I'm just misreading the situation.

It's pretty much exactly the same. The difference is that the UK doesn't have a "First Amendment" to contend with.

 

[disappointed]

Given the wide variation in social taboos across the continent, a Pan European solution to game ratings seems illogical. There was nothing wrong with the BBFC. This move is just to make life a little easier for the publishers.