World Rating boards, with a zippy chart.

[ZippyDSMlee]

World Rating boards

Descriptors aside here we go

Note: The exclamation points denote where a rating can have content “higher” than what normally seen in the US range of games.

A minus means violence may push it up a level with some form of regularity.

An x means sexuality may push it up a level with some form of regularity.

A B means a ban or the product needs to be edited for sell, this can mean a simple toning down of the product before sale or a wholesale redo to get it into a region.

A rating in () means it’s not used for games, Using the MPAA as a benchmark to show general ratings conscious.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v632/zippydsmlee/Zippys-rating-baord-chart.jpg
MPAA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_ system), ESRB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entertainment_Software_Rating_Board), BBFC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBFC) ,PEGI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEGI) ,CERO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Entertainment_Rating_Organization) ,USK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unterhaltungssoftware_Selbstkontrolle),OLFC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Film_and_Literature_Classification_(Aust ralia))
Want a rating board added to the chart? Let me know!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(edit)
Now onto something that should be in its own post :P (edit)

I will reiterate one of the (better) trains of thought I had on the BBFC vrs PEGI threads on the main site.

We can have a worldwide rating system that focus moralistic “boredom” on restricting content to what can be shown and sold to minors, IE do what Germany dose only with more thought put into making sure adults may buy the products they want.

Even if you dismiss the idea of a general worldwide board that has 1 set of ranges and descriptors than has regional boards that seek to rate games for their region based on the region and then let government decide what’s openly sold to minors after that.

One of my problems with banning anything is that it’s more often than not done with a childish mindset, one can easily regulate without moral or political “absolution” that tends to be more like swish cheese because they doing it for all the wrong reasons.


Unlike most ratings boards the BBFC is a bit more capable of crating a restricted level for violent media just so publishers have a real choice before being forced to edit the product down or just ignore the region altogether.

On many grounds the BBFC is near perfect, if it would do more to slot media it would be perfect!

[GamesLaw]

Will never happen, for the simple reason that different areas have different standards of what is acceptable, and have differing legal standards about the application of ratings.

I can guarantee you that this will not happen.

[ZippyDSMlee]

Will never happen, for the simple reason that different areas have different standards of what is acceptable, and have differing legal standards about the application of ratings.

I can guarantee you that this will not happen.

Even if you took say Pegi and its rantings then roped off regions and let them slot the content into the slots used by it with a lose mandate to try and slot it before you ban it because you can black list it anyway?

Its a possibility alot of the smaller countries would rather take a standardized board than to make up their own, under the right circumstances to save time and money these boards could ban together under 1 umbrella.

Still for the most part everyone thinks there way is correct and will seek to fulfill whatever mandate they are run under.


Besides the one world thought of fail, hows the chart anythign glaring wrong with it? :P

[GamesLaw]

Even if you took say Pegi and its rantings then roped off regions and let them slot the content into the slots used by it with a lose mandate to try and slot it before you ban it because you can black list it anyway?

Its a possibility alot of the smaller countries would rather take a standardized board than to make up their own, under the right circumstances to save time and money these boards could ban together under 1 umbrella.

Still for the most part everyone thinks there way is correct and will seek to fulfill whatever mandate they are run under.


Besides the one world thought of fail, hows the chart anythign glaring wrong with it? :P

It's inextricably linked to economics. Small countries may not want to set up their own board, but if game publishers are willing to spend more advertising dollars (which means more tax revenues) in that country for a favorable rating, why would the smaller country want to go with a rating someone else came up with?

[ZippyDSMlee]

It's inextricably linked to economics. Small countries may not want to set up their own board, but if game publishers are willing to spend more advertising dollars (which means more tax revenues) in that country for a favorable rating, why would the smaller country want to go with a rating someone else came up with?

Because its cheaper to use the brand they buy then make their own they still have to "fund" slotting the titles into the ranges provided by the origination, they either pay the origination to slot them for their region or fund a committee that slots the media, the region would pay a small franchise fee for it and get information over the use of and information regarding the slotting/vetting process.

If they do want to process the media to levels themselfs then they can chose it to be done form them with one of 3 general processing types ,full slotting, open minded or traditionalistic point of view on the process.

The process also flags hard content or games with questionable to region content and sends these games and information about them to the government doe finalization of approval if the region wants to flag and double check more questionable content.

Over all this process is merely a way to slot media to age ranges it would work on a multi regional front, its franchise governments buy into and price pointed as such its relatively cheap for a prosperous 3rd world/medium class 2nd world government, perhaps charge more for the better governments I dunno. It needs to be funded by governments for the content provided not necessarily by publishers alone as they can aid in "guiding" the process in the direction better suited to them and not to the regoin its aimed at.

Publisher can seek to show them games under contract pre launch as so they can slot it and then send that information down the pipes for finalization on a region by region basis, some regions will want more control some regions will want less.

Game not sent by the publisher will be vetted and reviewed and that information which is no different than reviews and opinions online will be sent down through the pipes and slotted as it needs be, in final local governments can simply hand out stickers,pamphlets and posters provided by franchise and simply place the ranting sticker on the end product this end process will of course be enforced and controlled by local regions and their governments if it gets to a point you have a region thats served by a factory thats pressing out games then the publisher might opt to use the rating stickers for the inventory thats going to wherever, but for that to happen there would be a need for it, until the its more a mulch regional franchise that seeks to aid smaller governments in the review rating process of media.

If Pegi, BBFC and the USK joined together with the mindset to slot media to the region it could well happen but conscious will have to form and hell is not chilly yet.

But even so its not that hard of a process to understand the organization gets a game passes primarily review and rating for it then the main regions seek to finalize the ratings some might opt for teen some might opt for adult and some might turn it down. the pros of this is more country's may have a more local say in media the cons, more countries will have a more local say in media.

Pros
More local control
Open up more regions for the rating board
More process/time for the final rating but a more accurate to the region rating.

Cons
More local control=more bans
More process/time for the final rating.

But there again conscious with a focus on slotting media to the region(this includes moving media up a level and banning it to the region) if you lose that focus its an unneeded bureaucracy.



gaa ramblings of a mad man >> *goes and hunts for brains* bbwwaaiinnnnssssssss

[GamesLaw]

Lol it's cool Zippy, I exist to shut down all of your ideas ;)

[ZippyDSMlee]

Lol it's cool Zippy, I exist to shut down all of your ideas ;)

:P

Naw I like running in ideas to their logical conclusion, even if their half illogical to start with :P

I need to rework the chart out I think, I had it where the if a rating level was more lax than another it was place alil behind it on eh chart but now since I am using the table I don't have the room for it, still its not a bad lil comparison chart any suggestion o making it easier to read, I might go back to the old one or use numbers to show how lax or stren they are in slotting content to that level.