A2M: devs try to cheat ESRB rating News
PC
Xbox 360
PlayStation 3
News
by
Robert Purchese
WET developer Artificial Mind & Movement (A2M) has revealed that some studios try and cheat their way to a lower, more profitable ESRB age-rating by submitting misleading videos of games.
"As a developer who has worked with a lot of different publishers, we're aware of many that have tried to cheat the rating," said Rémi Racine in a panel at the Montreal International Game Summit, reported by Edge Online.
"They say to the ERSB that it's a Teen rating [13+] rather than Mature [17+] to try and sell more; you can do this just by sending them a video that doesn't show the most violent stuff and then you'll get the rating that you want rather than the rating you should get."
The ESRB responded by claiming it couldn't be hoodwinked so easily.
"ESRB takes full disclosure of content during the rating process extremely seriously, and companies that submit their games to ESRB know this very well. We regularly check games post-release to verify that submissions were complete, and it's very likely that if a game contains undisclosed content that would have affected the rating assigned, we'll find out about it," said ESRB spokesperson Eliot Mizrachi.
"In such cases ESRB can actually impose fines up to $1m as well as require corrective actions like re-labeling or even recalling product, both of which can obviously be very costly. There's no incentive whatsoever for publishers to withhold content from ESRB in an effort to receive a lower rating, and those that would do so risk significant penalties."
The ESRB, unlike the BBFC and soon PEGI in the UK, offers a purely voluntary rating to stamp on games.
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-7 of 7 in total
|
0
Now this is the problem with ratings. With have 3 different ratings bodies and none of them are a legal requirement and are voluntary. Although games makers have to have one rating on there. Even then, only the red BBFC ratings are legally binding, the grey ones are not and are only recommendations.
The plans are in the works to tidy up the system but they need to do it sooner rather than later and take more steps to enforce them. Of course the shops can do their best, really the root of the problem is the parents who buy games for their children. |
|
NegativeZero
19/11/09 @ 13:14
0
ESRB ratings are 'voluntary' in that you don't have to rate your games. But no retailer will actually stock an unrated game.
I guess it's better than the other end of the scale. Australia for example. |
|
0
So why not just verify the content before release? Surely what is more important is that there isn't a window of opportunity for children (or parents who trust the ratings) to buy a product that is incorrectly rated, between the release and the ESRB realising that they've been deceived.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 19/11/09 @ 13:59
|
|
0
"Of course the shops can do their best, really the root of the problem is the parents who buy games for their children."
While I mostly agree with that sentiment, I'm afraid it's not that simple. Under age children these days are savvy enough with computers to download games from BitTorrent networks or Usenet while their parents have no idea these things are even possible. Children will keep finding ways to play games without their parents noticing and ever having to set foot in any shop. |
|
+1
yeah nobody likes a rat.
"as a developer that used to work, and now and in the future isn't going to anymore because of my snitching ass, with a lot different publishers (also meaning that the games we make are so shitty publishers try to ditch us to other, lesser, publishers as quick as they can) I know we faked a lot of stuff. But now, because I just told you this, obviously we aren't going to do that anymore because we respect you so much and we would like you to be our friends so we can bitch to you about how horrible the industry is " sorry kids, i'm drunk. |
Comments: 1-7 of 7 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
