BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

October 8, 2008 -

Unless you've been hibernating for the last few months, it would have been difficult to miss the simmering feud between the BBFC and PEGI.

Both are in contention for the job of rating video games in the U.K., where PEGI enjoys the support of ELSPA, the U.K. game publishing lobby, while the BBFC appears to be favored by the government.

In a guest column for Edge Online, BBFC head David Cooke plays down the rivalry, which has gotten fairly nasty at times:

I have been reading recently that there’s a spat between the BBFC and ESLPA or the BBFC and PEGI. I don’t recognize this so-called spat. I have great respect for ELSPA and for PEGI and for the games industry...

Cooke also discussed the U.K.'s bifurcated game rating system, which currently uses both PEGI and the BBFC:

The conclusion that [Tonya Byron] reached was that we should still have a system in which both the BBFC and PEGI were involved for the UK but the BBFC should have a rather bigger role covering everything from age 12 and older.

 

In parallel, the House of Commons Select Committee on culture media and sports looked at the same kinds of questions as Tanya Byron, and they took a lot of evidence from many experts, including ELSPA.  They reached a similar conclusion to Byron.

Cooke also points out the difference between BBFC's mandate and that of ELSPA:

BBFC isn’t a lobbying organization, like ELSPA. It’s a statutory regulator. Our position is we’ll do what the government wants us to do... The key difference between us and PEGI is that we classify in accordance with guidelines that the British public has been consulted about. PEGI doesn’t do that and can’t really because it involves 27 different countries.


Comments

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

You really should- if you're going to toot your own horn about classifying- quote- in accordance with guidelines that the British public has been consulted about, then you need to accept that the fuss over your classification of Manhunt 2- or more accurately your refusal to do so despite happily classifying the Saw and Hostel films- is because the ratings you have given certain games gives that impression, or at the very least, are rating them incorrectly. There is, as they say, no smoke without fire.

You need to realise that the Saw and Hostel films are not the most violent, goriest films ever made, there are many many much more extreme films which have been banned by the BBFC.

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

Full list here for those who are interested (film, video and games).

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/SearchClassifiedWorks/?SearchView&Query=(REJECTED)%20and%20((%20[TypeOfMedia]%20contains%20Film)%20OR%20(%20[TypeOfMedia]%20contains%20Video)%20OR%20(%20[TypeOfMedia]%20contains%20DigitalMedia))&SearchMax=1000

The Texas Vibrator Massacre from this year stood out for some reason.

It's worth taking a look just for some of the older ones, poor Betty Boop, too filthy for the 30's

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

There's only really three issues that I have with the Edge article that hasn't been brought up extensively in other threads. The big one is:

>I really reject the notion that the BBFC can’t handle issues of scaleability. Look at the DVD market. In 1997 we had just over 3,000 DVDs to classify. By 2006 that had risen to to over 15,000, an increase of 460%.

This is meaningless unless we get to see the decline of VHS over the same period- if it's the case that in 1997 they had over 15,000 VHS submissions which dropped to 3,000 or less by 2006, then that isn't expansion, just reshuffling- DVD, fundamentally, was the same content as VHS, making it redundant and replacing it wholesale- we will be seeing the same effect, gradually, with Blu-ray. This is not the case with games.

Moving on:

>We’re not in any sense hostile to the gaming world and I don’t recognize the sort of coverage that suggests otherwise.

You really should- if you're going to toot your own horn about classifying- quote- in accordance with guidelines that the British public has been consulted about, then you need to accept that the fuss over your classification of Manhunt 2- or more accurately your refusal to do so despite happily classifying the Saw and Hostel films- is because the ratings you have given certain games gives that impression, or at the very least, are rating them incorrectly. There is, as they say, no smoke without fire.

Lastly:

>It’s not true that we attempt to see every single game element

Funny, that- PEGI do. All 12+ and higher games are seen, in their entirety, by a PEGI official, as detailed in their own guidelines.

/b

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

double post

 

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

>I really reject the notion that the BBFC can’t handle issues of scaleability. Look at the DVD market. In 1997 we had just over 3,000 DVDs to classify. By 2006 that had risen to to over 15,000, an increase of 460%.

This is meaningless unless we get to see the decline of VHS over the same period- if it's the case that in 1997 they had over 15,000 VHS submissions which dropped to 3,000 or less by 2006, then that isn't expansion, just reshuffling- DVD, fundamentally, was the same content as VHS, making it redundant and replacing it wholesale- we will be seeing the same effect, gradually, with Blu-ray. This is not the case with games.

A fair point, the BBFC has statistics on their website (front page under our statistics). Under type of work: Video (which covers VHS, DVD, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, doesn't split them down beyond that but the numbers give a fair enough indication of what they are talking about)

1997: 3279 total works

2008: 9268 total works

Their 'over 15000' is  abit of a choice stat from 2006, 15122 total works which is their biggest year but that still a big increase from '97 to '08.

Funny, that- PEGI do. All 12+ and higher games are seen, in their entirety, by a PEGI official, as detailed in their own guidelines.

According to PEGI in their How are games rated? section.

As some games can take several weeks to fully complete, the publisher will highlight in their submission those areas of the game that may affect the rating proposed. It is primarily these areas that are viewed to determine the correct age rating.

 

That's not the same as viewing a 12+ game in it's entirety, the only proper PEGI Guidelines that I came across was the one explaining their ratings so i'm not sure if this is covered elsewhere.

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

The BBFC and PEGI fighting?  Why do I have an image of someone shadow boxing in my mind?

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

Also the Daily Mail is nothing but sensationalist trash.

 

I would feel that many in the Videogame Industry have already found that out by now.

 

Unfortunately most of the parents of the UK still don't know about the lies the Daily Mail has told them about videogames over the years.

 

The Byron Review puts it perfectly when she says that we need to stop with all their fear of Videogames and start looking at the way children are participants and not victims when it comes to Videogame Content.

 

TBoneTony

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

I had  a feeling that all this infighting was started by politicians who wanted BBFC to cover all Videogame content. They just missinterpretated the Byron Review into their own agendas and the PEGI getting a bit worried and they fight back.

Sometimes we just need to all sit down and read the Byron Review again.

 

Plus I don't mind having the BBFC cover the 12 and up, as long as the PEGI still have their own ratings either still at the back or at least next to the BBFC ratings just so people can understand that this is just the recogmended views of two different ratings board and the parents can chose which one to follow or at least make the decision on their own.

 

 

TBoneTony

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

>this is just the recogmended views of two different ratings board and the parents can chose which one to follow or at least make the decision on their own.

What would the value of that be? At present, the BBFC's ratings have the force of law behind them, and we can logically expect this to continue in all possible situations bar full PEGI implementation. Doesn't this make what any other board thinks more or less irrelevant?

/b

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

Well, at least he's a darn sight more civil and courteous than that ELSPA chap.

-- teh moominz --

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

It's easy to appear more civil and courteous when it's clear the government are going to come down on your side.

I say "appear", rather than "be", because you'd be hard-pressed to find a statement from the BBFC on this subject that doesn't include some willy-waving comment along the lines of "Well, the Tanya Byron thinks we're amazing, and so do the government and are obviously going to pick us anyway, so, you know, shut up, ELSPA." Hell, it's even made it as the middle quote in the GP aricle.

/b

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

Our position is we’ll do what the government wants us to do.

Oh crap. That's so going to be misinterpreted. PRO TIP: It doesn't mean, "If the government wants a game banned, we will do it."

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

If PEGI was to become the organisation to rate games with legal backing in the UK it would "have to do what the government tells it to do". Many will quickly pick up on these comments as meaning that BBFC is told by the government what to ban (such as an MP calling for a particular game to be banned), but what it actually means is that certain content is illegal in the UK, such as instructional material supporting terrorism, and by law the BBFC have to check for this particular content to prevent it from being released.

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

"It’s a statutory regulator. Our position is we’ll do what the government wants us to do." Spoken like a true monarchist. 

"We respect PEGI; we're just better than them, and we represent government regulation." And they wonder why the Americans revolted...

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

They kind of have to. If they didn't do what the UK government wanted the mto do, the ywould be dismissed and replaced by another group that will do what the government wants them to do. It would suicide not to do as told.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

Plus if PEGI took over they'd have to do what the UK Government/European parliment wants anways. The grass is not always greener.

Re: BBFC Head: Spat with PEGI? What Spat with PEGI?

Lets not drag Europe into this - the Daily Mail is getting excited enough!

The EU has no power in this area, and is unlikely ever to do so. That is one of PEGI's problems; this is a very 'national' issue, not a European one.

On another note. I wish he hadn't said Government. While the BBFC has engaged with a Govt commisioned Review, by Byron, the powers the BBFC exercise are not granted or controlled by Govt. The UK is still a Parliamentary democracy. It was Parliament that gave the BBFC the role, not Govt.

That's my constitutional rant for the day.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MechaCrashI just hope they realize that part of the problem with the Wii U was its relative lack of power. You can still make good games with what the Wii U has, but third parties won't want to deal with it when they can target the more popular PS4/XB1.07/02/2015 - 10:59am
Andrew EisenReplace "NX" with "QOL" and I'd buy it as potentially true.07/02/2015 - 10:51am
Andrew EisenNintendo to start manufacturing NX in October to target a July 2016 launch with 20 million consoles shipped the first year. Sure... http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20150702PD204.html07/02/2015 - 10:47am
james_fudgeLet's avoid name calling in the shoutbox07/02/2015 - 8:55am
E. Zachary KnightThe Daily WTF has a nice run down of some of the impact to software that the US Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage has. http://thedailywtf.com/articles/i-m-not-married-to-the-idea07/02/2015 - 7:45am
MechaCrashGee, how did people ever get the idea Gaters are morons who argue in bad faith? It's such a mystery.07/02/2015 - 7:03am
E. Zachary KnightGoth, again, no one is saying that we shouldn't be writig uncomfortable subject matter. What people are saying is that chances are you are going to write it poorly so it would be better to not have done it at all.07/02/2015 - 7:00am
Goth_Skunkdiscussed or portrayed in an expressive medium. Such an opinion only serves to stifle discussion. And as I said before, the only thing not worth talking about is what shouldn't be talked about.07/02/2015 - 6:50am
Goth_Skunk@Info: The same reason why I would entertain the notion that the Wired article writer could be right: Curiosity. Except in this case, I'm not curious at all. I'm not interested in hearing anyone's opinion on why uncomfortable subject matter shouldn't be07/02/2015 - 6:49am
IvresseI think the problem with the Batmobile is that they made it a core aspect of the game that you have to do continuously. If it was basically a couple of side games that were needed for secret stuff or a couple of times in the main game, it would be fine.07/02/2015 - 5:38am
Infophile@Goth: If you're not willing to entertain the idea you might be wrong, fine. That's your right. But why should anyone else entertain the idea that you might be right? If they go by the same logic, they already know you're wrong, so why listen to you?07/02/2015 - 3:53am
MattsworknameEh, I love the new batmobile personally, it's a blast to mess aroudn with. Plus, the game is set in a situation that mroe or less leaves batman with no choice but to go full force. And even then, it still shows him doing all he can to limit casualties.07/01/2015 - 11:38pm
Andrew EisenAgreed. Luckily, we don't seem to be in danger of that of late. No one's suggesting, for example, that tanks shouldn't be in video games, only that the tank in Arkham Knight is poorly implemented and out of place from a characterization standpoint.07/01/2015 - 11:27pm
MattsworknameConfederate flag, Relgious organizations, etc etc. Andrew isnt[ wrong, just remember not to let that mentality lead to censorship.07/01/2015 - 11:20pm
Mattsworknamefind offensive or disturbing, and that mindset leads to censorship. It's all well and good to say "This would be better IF", just so long as we remember not to let it slide into "This is offensive, REMOVE IT". IE , the current issues surroundign the07/01/2015 - 11:19pm
MattsworknameAndrew and goth both have points, and to that point, I'll say. Saying somethign is improved by changing something isn't a problem, on that I agree with , but at the same time, on of the issues we have in our society is that we want to simply remove things07/01/2015 - 11:18pm
Andrew EisenSee? Suggestions for improvements that involve taking things away do not mean the work is garbage or performing poorly, critically or commercially.07/01/2015 - 9:29pm
Andrew EisenSkyward Sword is spiff-a-rific but it would be an improved experience if the game didn't explain what each item and rupee was every single time you picked them up!07/01/2015 - 9:27pm
Andrew EisenHere's another: De Blob is a ton of fun but it would be improved without motion controls. Incidentally, THQ heard our cries, removed motion controls for the sequel and it was a better game for it!07/01/2015 - 9:24pm
Andrew EisenI'll give you an example: Arkham Knight is a ton of fun but the tank sucks and the game would be even better without it.07/01/2015 - 9:23pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician