BBFC launches new ratings system

By Games Industry.biz Published 22 May, 2008

For downloadable games and movies.

The BBFC has announced the launch of a new voluntary scheme designed to bring its rating system online to downloadable videogames and movies.

The new service, called BBFC.online, has already been signed up to by companies such as Walt Disney Studios, Warner Bros, and 20th Century Fox. Over 600 downloads have already been given BBFC ratings certificates.

While BBFC.online will cover a variety of online content it will not, according to the BBFC, attempt to censor the internet nor will it have anything to do with rating online games such as World of Warcraft.

"We're talking to all the major players in the arena," said Peter Johnson, head of policy for the BBFC.

"If what you're doing is providing the game to the consumer and you're using the internet as a form of delivery, as an alternative to mail order or shops, then that's included in the scheme. If the gameplay is hosted online then that's not included in the scheme."

Representatives from the BBFC said that they would have to work with PEGI Online to provide better ratings for online games.

"We don't need to set up in rivalry to PEGI Online... We can work co-operatively," said David Cooke, director of the BBFC.

"My view is that we are better resourced than PEGI and, unlike PEGI, we don't have to go to the games industry to get their approval when we expand, so resources are not an issue for us."

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (19) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Rash' #1 4 years ago

    Voluntary censorship? This should be interesting...

  • MGG #2 4 years ago

    My god yes, thats what the world needs - MORE CENSORSHIP! And paid for by the taxpayer too I guess? Lovely, jobs for the boys again.

    I'm glad I no longer live in the UK.

  • Charroux #3 4 years ago

    It's classification, not censorship.
    The BBFC is funded by charging for its classification services. Not by the taxpayer.

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife #4 4 years ago

    Certification != Censorship

    EDIT: As Charroux said. But let's not let the facts get in the way of a good knee-jerk reaction, eh?
    Edited by 1 at 22/05/08 @ 13:14

  • skillian #5 4 years ago

    My god yes, thats what the world needs - MORE CENSORSHIP! And paid for by the taxpayer too I guess? Lovely, jobs for the boys again.

    I'm glad I no longer live in the UK.

    I don't mean to be rude, but that's the most ridiculous comment I've read on EG this week.

  • Irien #6 4 years ago

    The BBFC is a well respected and generally fairly sensible rating body (although some will disagree) and unlike the mess that exists across the pond, its role/ratings is well understood and clear. I'm glad they are finally getting more involved in games/downloads because it is ludicrous to have lots of different rating systems.

    Unlike the US, where most movies seem to end up with an R-rating, the BBFC system offers a sensible progression of rankings, and retailers/parents/politicians/Daily-Mail-Readers understand it! This is what is needed for games, because if people understand it, there's less likelihood of the usual nonesense we see reported.

  • woodnotes #7 4 years ago

    Classification/Certification helps prevent censorship. It's a good thing.

  • wonk #8 4 years ago

    Anyone care to guess how long this will remain "voluntary"? My guess is six months.

    Depends how long it takes to change the law, as I understand it the current legislation on governs the sale of physical media and public screening and not digital downloads so that is why it is voluntary. It seems to me it is inevitable that the classification system will be extended to digital downloads eventually s more and more media is delivered to the consumer this way. I can't see the problem with that sa look as it is governed by the same rules as physical media.

  • Lemming81 #9 4 years ago

    1) As others have said, clasification is not censorship you morons.

    2) Why make it voluntary? No reason not to make it compulsory.

    3) Can't we just have to good old 18, 15, PG, U etc on all games (digital or otherwise) and sod the rest? It just looks messy.

  • HelloWorld #10 4 years ago

    Classification is good, but we seem to be heading towards a world in which something that is unrated is illegal. When there are also things that cannot even recieve an 18 rating, this is a very bad thing indeed. What adults play and watch and say (provided the media is created legally) should not be restricted. Seeing as this is not a compulsory system, it's all good. For now...

  • Orange #11 4 years ago

    Should just use PEGI online, no need for the BBFC here at all. Cunts.

  • J_C_X #12 4 years ago

    BBFC: Telling you what to watch and play.

  • smelly #13 4 years ago

    I love how they try to sneak this stuff in.

    It'll be voluntary for now.. give it a few years for people to get used to it..

    Then an OTT daily mail article.. and BAM! Every downloadable game/video is censored..

  • smelly #14 4 years ago

    >It's classification, not censorship.


    Tell that to manhunt 2..

    Or the ooodles of movies which have been censored by the bbfc.

  • rock27gr #15 4 years ago

    "We don't need to set up in rivalry to PEGI Online"

    Riiiiight.

    Pegi has already been classifying online-delivered games; for ex. all WiiWare and VC games have a Pegi certification.
    So what's the point of BBFC online then?

  • Dan234 #16 4 years ago

    I thought the problem with PEGI was it was voluntary, according to the government after the Byron report was released. And now the BBFC is launching a voluntary programme.

    I suppose the difference is that BBFC has Gordon Broon with his big clunking fist behind it if they don't behave voluntarily.

  • MGG #17 4 years ago

    Oh nice comeback Aspic, very droll and intelligent too. Your actual thoughts on the article are what exactly? Or are you just here for crap replies?

    I would also argue that the average IQ of those leaving the UK recently is a lot higher than the average IQ of those left behind, but whatever.....

  • Lemming81 #18 4 years ago

    MGG: "I would also argue that the average IQ of those leaving the UK recently is a lot higher than the average IQ of those left behind, but whatever....."

    America and Australia would contradict that...

  • MGG #19 4 years ago

    I did say "recently" to be fair.

    And not all of us go to the USA and Oz - places like Canada, France, NZ, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Africa etc etc may have different experiences of intelligence levels amoung ex-pats.

    Maybe certain countries attract people of lower intelligence? That sounds like an interesting research topic!