UK survey: 74% want independent ratings body

by Richard Mitchell { Feb 27th 2009 at 1:11PM }

A recent survey conducted by YouGov for the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) revealed that most UK citizens want an independent body to issue game ratings. GI.biz reports that a majority of those surveyed also said that they would prefer to see games use the same rating standard as movies. The BBFC hopes to use this survey as leverage in its bid to become the UK's primary game ratings body. Currently, the BBFC only rates games with a certain level of mature content, though that may change thanks to last year's Byron Review.

The BBFC competes with Europe's PEGI ratings, which already appear on UK game releases. The Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association (ELSPA) argues that the PEGI system is superior to the BBFC. Said ELSPA director general Mike Rawlinson, "Gamers no longer just play with their mates but play online, and we need a system that reflects this situation and protects their interests," adding that the PEGI system is the "right solution for child safety." Rawlinson further states that ELSPA will be promoting the PEGI system with a "multi million pound campaign" designed to get the word out to UK parents. Finally, he says that ELSPA has conducted its own research with YouGov that supports its argument.

The irony of all this, of course, is that this fight is being waged to make ratings less confusing.

Tags: bbfc, byron-review, elspa, pegi, uk

Related From Joystiq

Nintendo UK announces Reflect Missile for DSiWare, releases it
10 days ago
Survey reveals potential new colors for PSP Go
27 days ago
As easy as 1.23 million: Modern Warfare 2 breaks first-day UK sales record
28 days ago

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

John @ Feb 27th 2009 1:17PM

What a crock. These people have no respect for the government. Next they'll be saying they don't want to be watched by CCTV cameras!

Ignatius @ Feb 27th 2009 1:40PM

Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin van-guarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.

The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous.

Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.

joeybeast @ Feb 27th 2009 1:24PM

Did they mention there is PEGI on their so called survey?

BlaznGoldstein (Electric 6 Defense Force) @ Feb 27th 2009 2:03PM

Soooo, the BBFC wants to replace PEGI completly, but the ELSPA claims that PEGI is better than the BBFC.

All I can say to that is: ORLY?

Duoae @ Feb 27th 2009 2:53PM

Kind of.... The government (via the Byron report) want to make a standardised certification system for gaming as there is for movies. We already have a standardised system for titles that developers and publishers believe will fall into the 15+ age groups (that's M for mature for the US peeps). The BBFC currently has one of the most rigorous and fair systems for rating games and has 'banned' fewer games in the last twenty years than the ratings bodies in the US, Germany and Australia. (I say 'ban' because we actually have an 18+ rating whereas the ESRBs AO rating means that the game will not be carried despite being the same thing).

PEGI are basically a ratings body that is spread across a large proportion of the EU countries. Their ratings system is less rigorous than the BBFC's and can in the extreme cases allow a game to be published with just the publisher/developer filling in a form though they also view videos of games they think might be on the boundary of an age rating. They also contract out each country's ratings to a body within said country rather than having a centralised unit which does all the ratings for every country it covers.

ELSPA are a group that comprises publishers and developers that have interests in the UK. They want the system which will give them the least hassle and cost the least. PEGI is the system which fulfills their desires however, legally PEGI is more open to challenges on the rating of a game (if some parent or councillor or MP etc. takes issue with the content of a game) due to them not playing every game that is sent to them for rating. Their main (official) arguments for adopting PEGI is that it is more understandable than the BBFC's rating system... which is the same as the movie industry's rating system.
PEGI's rating indicators are quite obscure because (apart from age ratings - which BBFC has) they also apply content descriptor icons which range from a spider, a fist and a pair of dice and which are not explained on the game box (at least none that i own). My main issue with these is that across multiple cultures and societies these representations do not carry the same weight or meaning and so therefore are more confusing for the general public.

(Presumably) PEGI wants to make their system more open to the public and have recently announced a traffic light system which basically looked the same as the movie ratings (red for 18, orange for 12/15 and green for PG)... for which they were rapped on the hand and told to not to infringe copyright/trademark by the BBFC. Now they have altered the traffic light system so it's distinguishable from the BBFC's but i haven't seen the new symbols so i don't know how different they are.

So, PEGI is easier and cheaper and thus more open to legal challenges (which IMO is bad for the industry) and to make themselves less complicated copied the BBFC's rating icons which were previously 'not clear enough'.