Study: M rated games have higher scores, better sales

by Ross Miller on Sep 11th 2007 12:28PM

Two mothers are talking over a cup a tea. "I think my Billy is going to be well off," she said. "He's got the heart of a teenager. Doesn't swear or advocate violence or engage in promiscuous sex or any of that! He's going far in life."

The second mother shakes her head. "Sue Ellen, that's just not how the world works nowadays. My son John is a foul-mouthed bully who dreams about rivers of napalm and who picks fights with the local church group. In this zany world, John will be richer and more well-respected than that wuss you bore."

If that conversation makes no sense, replace the mothers with game publishers and the tea with, well, hot coffee. A recent study by the Electronic Entertainment Design and Research firm concluded that games rated Mature by the ESRB, despite being only one-tenth of the titles examined, "have both the highest average Metacritic scores and the highest average gross sales in the United States."

What does this say about the average video game consumer? It's hard to say, but we're thinking the industry is learning to grow up with its audience.

Source

Tags: eedar, esrb, mature, research, study

Reader Comments (72)

That really depends on the game. Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List would suffer if they didn't have their mature content because it is all purposeful. Saw, on the other hand, is just violent garbage for the sake of being violent garbage.

Hold on. Something's wrong with that data. If you look at the top 25 best selling games of all time, only four are actually rated Mature by the ESRB. So that tendency doesn't hold for long term sales. So what's mucking up the data?

My guess? A large amount of licensed/shovel ware properties exist at the Everyone to Teen rating, which naturally are going to be rated lower and sell considerably less.

I dont think there is anything to apologize for. Video gaming audience has expanded to include many more adults who buy age appropriate games.

Also, I am not sure kiddie cash in game ratings are relevant because they are purchased on brand recognition and not on critical acclaim. Mom #1 never says: "Billy hates Bratz but it got 9/10 in Play magazine, so I'll get it for him and he will enjoy it."

I also agree with Andrew that there are many (MANY) mature themes that are not explored in M games, but that we will get there once the audience expands sufficiently.

I don't think it tells us anything about gamers. The whole "only hardcore gamers buy M-Rated games" is complete bullshit.

If a game carries a particular rating, especially one thats more restrictive, more people want to buy it.

But thats not what this articles about, as someone said, because the games aimed at whats believed to be a smaller (but actually more popular) demographic, more time is put into these games to make them better.

Besides, those games with ratings that are alright for kids to play are usually of the "kids summer movie" or "kids TV show" tie-in variety.

M? Mature? Tell that to Tetris! BOOYAH.

Tetris is a child's game. It's all about the blood in Puzzle Kombat.

What I was trying to say was this:

It's not that a game with a "kiddie" rating is more likely to be bad.

It's that a bad game is more likely to be marketed to kids, who can't tell the difference.

You also have to consider that many of the games that break out and sell like crazy to both the hardcore crowd and more mainstream (casual) audiences tend to be rated M. You're not likely to see Dewy's Adventure advertised on Mountain Dew cans and 7-11 cups, and that's partially because you won't see frat boys lining up at Gamestop to reserve a copy.

It's proof positive that the core video gaming market remains 13 year olds and the 30 year olds who think like them.

Beautiful.

What I think it says is that all of the shovelware developers make sure to get a Teen or lower rating because they're more interested in maximizing potential audience than making the best game they can. So the Teen category became saturated with that crap. But the only people who are willing to release a game as Mature are the ones who place their emphasis on the quality and vision of the game itself, rather than being sell-out shovelware peddlers.

That's why this is happening.

I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

Game guys go for "T" ratings for the same reason that horror movies go for "PG-13" ratings. Namely, because they don't mind churning out a piece of dren in order to get it to the widest audience possible. Want an example? Check out the "Alien vs Predator" movie - they took two R-rated franchises and kiddified them to the point where the movie thoroughly sucked, in the hopes of getting a wider audience. In games, "Lair" did the same thing for that almighty T rating. Personally, I prefer my games to be more realistic. C'mon, you're SHOOTING A GUY. I hate it when designers pretend that folks just fall over bloodlessly when shot, dead before they hit the ground. No thrashing, no screaming, no need for a follow-up shot to shut them up. You can shoot a guy in the legs, and he ought to try and crawl away from you (or to cover, and shoot back).

Um depending on where you shoot someone and the calibur of bullet used, there may not be hardly any blood, and no kicking and screaming will follow. Even a bullet to the head, with the correct calibur, will only leave a trickle on the forhead, and no exit wound.

What you describe is actually very unrealistic.

A shitty movie and a shitty game would be improved with more blood? ...I see your point.

I've seen more kids 5-12 with Grand Theft Auto than I do with a older age group.

Oh yeah, games with sex that I recall? On-screen: Darkwatch. Nude-or-nearly-nude (transparent bras count) pre-or-post-sex scenes: God of War 1, Run Like Hell. I can't remember any others off the top of my head, although I'm pretty sure that, were I home, I could look through the titles on my shelf and remember a few more.

You don't have to be a kid to enjoy non-violent games.

Actually, I'm talking more about post-mortem bleeding, not about spraying geysers. Most lethal hits I make on game combatants tend to be chest wounds, using calibers that'd go through. Head shots with the correct caliber to only penetrate one side and not go out the other, are an interesting cocktail of just the right range of kinetic energy, as well as the right amount of obstructions. If you got it just right, it wouldn't bleed much. That having been said, the games which allow you to more or less chainsaw someone apart with a SAW, yet not show blood, are highly unrealistic. And then, let's not forget exit wounds. The only game I ever saw that modelled exit wounds was Soldier of Fortune.

That having been said, the one game I saw that modelled postmortem bleeding, was Red Faction.

Anyway, as for kicking and screaming... eh, I'm talking about Saving Private Ryan type stuff here. Nothing over the top and such, but ... c'mon, supposedly we're killing enemy combatants - human combatants. They're not always going to die as quickly and prettily as the folks who get lucky and check out with a head shot.

SO what is the point then. Yes in reality if you shoot someone 26 times with an M-16 there would be a bloody mess left on the ground.

In this something that we really want portrayed in the utmost realism. DO we really want murder simulations. Video game developers sure seem to think we do. After the success of SAW, Turistas, Hostel, etc it seems like entertainment in America is gunning for revelence in murder and sadism. Young kids in fight clubs and underground wrestling hitting each other with chairs.

This is what the article seems to point to. That the hardcore gamers writing in magazines are calling for more blood and rating these games higher. Even if the underlying game is poor it will get a higher rating if there is plenty of gore. With the new generation of consoles you really can't make the argument of comic violence as you could with Splatterhouse. It's almost comparing Hostel to Nightmare on Elm Street. Nightmare is almost funny compared to today's movies. It's so unrealistic that you have to laugh.

It is kind of sad that the sick and twisted is being lifted to such lofty heights in our current society. How long will it be till we allow real murder to be a form of entertainment again since its virtual representation rakes in millions each year. Hell tuning into the nightly news you'd think it already has.

Not to disagree with you, but personally I find reality, and thus realism as well, to be overrated.

Actually, one reason I believe FPSes should be MORE realistic, is that it won't portray violence as being some fun, happy, antiseptic thing. I remember reading, back in the 90s, an essay on why Miami Vice's not-so-clean portrayal of gunfight results was probably healthier for kids to watch than the more 'sanitized' fare which was common at the time. The rationale is that they'd be less likely to see guns as toys, and more likely to think harder before pointing a real gun they just found at a friend and pull the trigger.

It's a point of view that I really haven't seen methodically addressed anywhere since. It makes sense to me, though, and I think games could probably do with a bit more of that point of view.

Previous 50 Comments

Study: M rated games have higher scores, better sales

Reader Comments (72)

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 5:45PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 1:49PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 1:50PM Korova Pamplona said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 1:51PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 1:56PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 2:37PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 2:04PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 2:24PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 2:38PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 2:46PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 3:37PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 3:58PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 4:54PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 5:15PM Crono141 said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 7:13PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 4:51PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 5:00PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 5:12PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 7:16PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 11:59PM enbadesign said

Posted: Sep 11th 2007 11:58PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Sep 12th 2007 4:52AM (Unverified) said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

WB conjures up Harry Potter for Kinect this fall

Featured Stories

Game Of Thrones and the paradoxes of adaptation

Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma

Next-Gen Starts When We Say It Does

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW