Video Game Ratings - Flawed?

[Gahars]

I'd like to point out that Shadow the Hedgehog a game where you have guns and shoot people with minor swearing is rated E10 while Viewtiful Joe is rated T.

Damn, man. They should've called the game "Shadow The Edgehog" because I'm getting cuts just thinking about it.

 

[tatripp]

My mom would never let me play M rated games. I had to sneak to my cousins to play mortal kombat. Some parents definitely care even if the rating system is inconsistent.

 

[Apex]

ESRB is a rating system, it's not responsible for enforcing anything. That's up to stores. Just like it's up to parents to determine what's appropriate for their children. If the ESRB says there is tobacco use, and I am for whatever reason fundamentally opposed to my children witnessing tobacco use, then the system has done it's job by warning me about what type of content my children are being exposed to by the games they play.

Has the Motion Picture Association of America failed because I saw R-rated films before I was 17? No, because it was my parents decision to allow me to watch those films. They either personally knew the content of the film before giving me permission, or the MPAA succeeded in warning them about the specific reasons the film was rated the way it was.

 

[CompassNorth]

Damn, man. They should've called the game "Shadow The Edgehog" because I'm getting cuts just thinking about it.

Edge the Shadowhog sounds so much better tho.

 

[Deleted-188346]

Ratings are fine. They're more like a guide than anything. However, it's ultimately it's up to parents to investigate a video game and determine whether it's appropriate for their children. Sadly, parents don't seem to give a fuck these days. If anything happens, they seem to lay the blame on anyone but themselves.

You better believe that when I have children that I'll personally check out each game they ask for. If I doubt that they'll absorb the themes of the game appropriately, then it might be a good opportunity to play the game with them and discuss it with them.

 

[vincentthegamer]

Game ratings are just stupid now IMO,people never follow them anymore so why have them?

 

[chartube12]

It's odd to me that the barely explicit, mod-enabled Hot Coffee mod warranted an AO rating, but the sex scenes in GTA V and full frontal nudity is just M. The system seems kind of like a joke.

Ratings criteria changes over the years. For example, The uncut version for robocop where his hands get blown off many years ago was rated R. Newer copies of the uncut can be found with as low as a pg13 rating. Why? Simple as the scene in question, not being realist by today's standards.

The coffee mod did more than activate a cut part of the game. It was modified to remove the blur effect and be slightly more realist.

 

[Issac]

I would rather have a completely new rating system. Keep the info-boxes of what the game has: Gore, fear, blood, sex, drug use etc. So that parents (or people in stores) know of the content in the game. Then it's up to parents to keep the kids from playing it or not, either by not buying it, or using parental locks or whatever.
BUT I would like the addition of recommended lowest age to play said game, based on the game itself. Is it a complex strategy game? Maybe isn't a perfect fit for 3 year olds, even though it has no blood. Mario? Everyone can play it and enjoy it, even though it can be difficult sometimes. FPS games aren't that difficult to understand. A visual novel with a complex story, maybe isn't for the youngest either.
Basically, an age recommendation for "Will you be able to enjoy/understand it" rather than "oooh booo, it's bloody, it's a no-no".

 

[FAST6191]

I would rather have a completely new rating system. Keep the info-boxes of what the game has: Gore, fear, blood, sex, drug use etc. So that parents (or people in stores) know of the content in the game. Then it's up to parents to keep the kids from playing it or not, either by not buying it, or using parental locks or whatever.
BUT I would like the addition of recommended lowest age to play said game, based on the game itself. Is it a complex strategy game? Maybe isn't a perfect fit for 3 year olds, even though it has no blood. Mario? Everyone can play it and enjoy it, even though it can be difficult sometimes. FPS games aren't that difficult to understand. A visual novel with a complex story, maybe isn't for the youngest either.
Basically, an age recommendation for "Will you be able to enjoy/understand it" rather than "oooh booo, it's bloody, it's a no-no".

Interesting, I wonder how that would play out when games can have an autoplay mode, automatically handle certain features (Total War was and is arguably a "complex strategy game" but a single click can autodetermine battles), the mechanics can be simple but the game can also layer a bunch more on top of things for the story (do you really think everybody that played it "got" Bioshock?) and I am never sure what kids can and can not understand/make sense of (beyond the "children are just smaller, less well mentally formed adults" concept being very wrong). Now there is certainly a merit to your ideas and I would not mind seeing something of it come to pass but there are a lot of questions and problems that would need to be addressed from where I sit before the full version of what you say could even consider coming into effect.

 

[Issac]

Interesting, I wonder how that would play out when games can have an autoplay mode, automatically handle certain features (Total War was and is arguably a "complex strategy game" but a single click can autodetermine battles), the mechanics can be simple but the game can also layer a bunch more on top of things for the story (do you really think everybody that played it "got" Bioshock?) and I am never sure what kids can and can not understand/make sense of (beyond the "children are just smaller, less well mentally formed adults" concept being very wrong). Now there is certainly a merit to your ideas and I would not mind seeing something of it come to pass but there are a lot of questions and problems that would need to be addressed from where I sit before the full version of what you say could even consider coming into effect.

Thanks for your input! It's true that it's very hard to know how it would/should be applied, and which criteria determines what. What I basically got the idea from is board games. They often have recommended minimum ages, based on the difficulty level of the questions in quiz games, complexity of the rules etc. And as always, there are exceptions, that's why I like the term "recommendation", it's never set in stone. Another thing that made me think of this idea several years ago was actually Zelda: Ocarina of Time. Here in Sweden (or all of Europe to be specific) on the box, it says it's from 3 years old. An average Swedish 3yo wouldn't what to do in the game, since we don't learn English until we're 7-8 years old.

That kids aren't "just smaller, less well mentally formed adults" I know. We're often discussing all kinds of subjects regarding children's mental development in GCP groups (gifted children programme), and at such a young age, mentality is so very individual. (Just as individual as in adults, really, haha).

Now, 3 year old is maybe pushing it. But when I was between 4 and 5 years old, I played Megaman 2 a lot! I didn't beat it, but eventually I got to the second Wily stage. (with help with the instadeath laser). But I could pick it up and play it, and have fun trying to go through the stages, trying to survive. I also played X-Com when I was 7. Sure I had fun with it, but I mostly built a base for all my cash, pressed the time settings and watched the earth spin. Then Aliens attacked and game over. I had fun, but didn't play it as it was intended (barely played it at all). Maybe it's too advanced for an average 7 year old.
The same goes for Total War, even if there's a single click battle thing (never played the game). The concept of war strategies, troops, defense, economy etc. might be too much for an average kid to play the game somewhat properly.
Again, that's why I think it would be a good thing to just recommend an age, along with information on the content.

 

[shadow1w2]

The ESRB is rated by overall non parent non gamers randomly that get paid.
They look at a list watch a video and call it done.

We need paid gamers and parents to actually PLAY the games and give them a rating.

Honestly I think its high time a group of gamers and parents get together to give games proper rating.
Heck wasn't there a site that did that for awhile?
Coulda sworn there was a group dedicated to giving proper ratings to games to go along side the "official" ESRB rating (which isn't really accurate truthfully)

Tempted to start my own really, but I'm too lazy da derp.

 

[Blaze163]

I've seen nine year old kids walk out of game stores with the latest Mortal Kombat and GTA games, so clearly nobody actually gives two shits about the ratings any more aside from politicians looking for things to complain about.

 

[FAST6191]

The ESRB is rated by overall non parent non gamers randomly that get paid.
They look at a list watch a video and call it done.

We need paid gamers and parents to actually PLAY the games and give them a rating.

Honestly I think its high time a group of gamers and parents get together to give games proper rating.
Heck wasn't there a site that did that for awhile?
Coulda sworn there was a group dedicated to giving proper ratings to games to go along side the "official" ESRB rating (which isn't really accurate truthfully)

Tempted to start my own really, but I'm too lazy da derp.

The time investment to actually play the games (main quest, sidequests, end game content...) would be horrendous and nothing would get done.

On "proper ratings" there are various sites that do try to do it or have otherwise tried to call the "family gamer" type thing their niche of choice, I have forgotten most of them as they got boring quite quickly (there is only so many times you can read evidence of how someone is a prude that would absolutely love to live in fantasy 1950's America, which is what I found most of those to be).

You would also have to figure out what you want rated. One of the more amusing things in recent times for me http://gbatemp.net/threads/the-old-republic-gets-gay.340426/

Similarly the argument could be made that rating games according to a system is a skill, why would parents and gamers suddenly have this skill?

 

[shadow1w2]

The time investment to actually play the games (main quest, sidequests, end game content...) would be horrendous and nothing would get done.

On "proper ratings" there are various sites that do try to do it or have otherwise tried to call the "family gamer" type thing their niche of choice, I have forgotten most of them as they got boring quite quickly (there is only so many times you can read evidence of how someone is a prude that would absolutely love to live in fantasy 1950's America, which is what I found most of those to be).

You would also have to figure out what you want rated. One of the more amusing things in recent times for me http://gbatemp.net/threads/the-old-republic-gets-gay.340426/

Similarly the argument could be made that rating games according to a system is a skill, why would parents and gamers suddenly have this skill?

Well wishful thinking mostly.
However a skill can be developed.
You do have a point though but in a perfect world it would be nice if a game could be rated on its full experience than just a set piece.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

tl;dr the entire thread (like usual lolol), so excuse me if I repeat stuff...

The ESRB ratings, as a whole, are quite useful for parents who take the time to monitor what they buy their kids. I'm sure people have brought up the whole "well I see (or hear) 10 year olds in games like Call of Duty! Obviously the rating system is flawed if kids can play games like this!" thing, but that would be false. The flaw is not with the rating systems, it's with the parents who cave-in to their kid's whining. Luckily, the stores (at least around my area) are very strict with ratings, and won't sell any rated M games to those without an ID, and some refuse to sell T rated games if they're obviously young. The downside of the future in gaming, though, is that digital distribution is getting to be a must-have thing, meaning any kid with their parents credit card info can buy whatever games they please.

 

[FAST6191]

The downside of the future in gaming, though, is that digital distribution is getting to be a must-have thing, meaning any kid with their parents credit card info can buy whatever games they please.

Future? Kids can and do download that stuff now. Some said porn drove the internet/new tech and perhaps that was true for a while. Today I would hold it is pirating.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Future? Kids can and do download that stuff now. Some said porn drove the internet/new tech and perhaps that was true for a while. Today I would hold it is pirating.

True, but I was referring more to how this next generation of consoles will be more heavily focused on digital downloads than it is now.

 

[LegendAssassinF]

The system has changed. We're not running on ESRB ratings anymore; we're running on 8.5/9/9.5 ratings from game magazines. Is it any wonder that a 10 year old can go into a game store and buy a Mature rated game? Shit, I know I'm a minority, but that is so fucking stupid. And parents clamor for legislation to curb the violence that their kids experience, a job the ESRB was clearly designed for.

I noticed after I wrote that my statement only applies to your first two sentences lol

The problem with game reviews is that the rating system is heavily flawed since every game is a different experience to each person. GTAV has a 9.6 on IGN by the community and Pokemon X/Y got 9.5 by the community or if you want to go with IGN's reviews a 10 and 9 respectively. Can you compare a game like GTA to Pokemon.... no you can't which is why rating games is pointless since there is no clear cut this game is better than this one since there are many factors to reviewing a game. Do you review the game for story? Multiplayer? Only single player? Only multiplayer? Gameplay? There is just too much to give a solid number since games like Battlefield 4 run around with 8/10 yet they mainly discuss the multiplayer rather than the single player. Games are usually never reviewed as a whole either. GTAV was a victim to this it was reviewed under just single player even though multiplayer was right around the corner. Yet games like SimCity are reviewed strictly on how it functions from Day 1 even though there clearly was an overload of users at one time. Same thing happened to GTAV yet people overlooked that problem as they sweep it under the rug yet SimCity gets bashed constantly and plays perfectly now.

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

I noticed after I wrote that my statement only applies to your first two sentences lol

The problem with game reviews is that the rating system is heavily flawed since every game is a different experience to each person. GTAV has a 9.6 on IGN by the community and Pokemon X/Y got 9.5 by the community or if you want to go with IGN's reviews a 10 and 9 respectively. Can you compare a game like GTA to Pokemon.... no you can't which is why rating games is pointless since there is no clear cut this game is better than this one since there are many factors to reviewing a game. Do you review the game for story? Multiplayer? Only single player? Only multiplayer? Gameplay? There is just too much to give a solid number since games like Battlefield 4 run around with 8/10 yet they mainly discuss the multiplayer rather than the single player. Games are usually never reviewed as a whole either. GTAV was a victim to this it was reviewed under just single player even though multiplayer was right around the corner. Yet games like SimCity are reviewed strictly on how it functions from Day 1 even though there clearly was an overload of users at one time. Same thing happened to GTAV yet people overlooked that problem as they sweep it under the rug yet SimCity gets bashed constantly and plays perfectly now.

I'm not sure you or calmwaters understands the point or this thread, it's about AGE RATINGS, not ratings by IGN and such about how good a game is. When a movie is rated "R" it has nothing to do with the ratings critics give it. The ESRB rates a game and tells people which age group it is suited for based on things like Drug Use, Nudity, Violence and Profanity, while IGN and other review sources rate games on how good things like Graphics, Gameplay, Sound, Story and Control are.

 

[LegendAssassinF]

I'm not sure you or calmwaters understands the point or this thread, it's about AGE RATINGS, not ratings by IGN and such about how good a game is. When a movie is rated "R" it has nothing to do with the ratings critics give it. The ESRB rates a game and tells people which age group it is suited for based on things like Drug Use, Nudity, Violence and Profanity, while IGN and other review sources rate games on how good things like Graphics, Gameplay, Sound, Story and Control are.

Sorry someone replied talking about ratings.