Tuesday, 23 May 2017


It’s been a busy couple of months here at the VSC as we wrestle with games needing a rating, but also combining that with work outside of our usual remit.  In addition, we’ve acquired a brand-new Director General in the form of Ian Rice.  Ian has been with us for quite a while, gradually working his way up the career ladder and landing the top job.

Having joined us from a multinational networking company, Ian is well versed in all matters digital and has served a full apprenticeship as a video games examiner before moving on to help develop things like the PEGI ratings criteria and helping to establish IARC (International Age Rating Coalition) with other regulators around the globe.

Our information and training package for schools – which I touched on last time – is currently being trialled by several schools in the UK, so we hope this proves to be a good indicator for future take-up.

On top of this, you’ve probably seen recent press reports criticising certain social networking sites – I’m sure you can guess who they are – for their apparent inability to prevent the more extreme material from being published.  Indirectly, we have been asked by a major UK children’s charity to help promote safe internet use and are currently putting together some relevant info for them.

The controversy that shop bought, physical video games once used to generate appears to have moved online well and truly.  While we have no control over what people may say to one another when engaged in multi-player online games, we can at least try to ensure that players – younger children in particular – are at least aware of what potential problems may arise when chatting to complete strangers, and what steps they can take to reduce the risks.

It's rather depressing that we feel it necessary to do this, but until the online community learn to be rather more polite and respectful in their interactions with one another, we must take what limited measures we have to combat a seemingly growing problem.  It would, of course, also help if those who manage sites were a little more pro-active and robust in their response to abusive or bullying behaviour, but until they get their act together it is likely that organisations such as major children’s charities will have to provide the necessary help and information.

Tuesday, 14 March 2017

The Three R’s (Reading, Riting, Rating)

I know I’ve banged on about this before, but it remains deeply frustrating that a fair proportion of the population still think that it’s okay for younger folk – adolescents and below – to play with adult rated video games; often without realising that there is likely to be something in there wholly unsuitable for them.

I can understand the attraction of many ‘18’ rated games – many will remember attempts to sneak into a cinema in order to watch an ‘18’ rated film when they were fourteen/fifteen/sixteen – and it is much easier to get your hands on a game that it is sneaking into the cinema.  Adults will frequently buy an ‘18’ rated game for someone much younger; justifying the purchase with a “it’s only a video game” argument whilst failing to understand that games are no longer the simple, 2D blocky affairs they were back in the eighties.

Perhaps then, it is time to take the message to the kids rather than the adults and to this end, we have now embarked on an attempt to engage schools on the issue through the provision of an online educational programme which can be incorporated into the school day.

Ostensibly aimed at KS2/KS3 students (though there is also a version for those over 18), the course comprises an interactive video detailing what PEGI does, how games are rated and what the ratings mean.  Coupled with this is our ‘Gamewise’ magazine which features a number of related articles, information on setting console controls and some follow-up exercises and other resources.  All this comes for a mere £50 per year!

We are currently trialling the package and undertaking a few demos at assorted educational establishments.   In this way, we hope to spread the message about the importance of adhering to the ratings – they’re not just there to decorate the game packaging, but to warn that some content really isn’t suitable for younger players.

If you are a UK based educational establishment, or simply just curious, the details are available on our website (www.videostandards.org.uk).  In the meantime, we continue trying to get the PEGI message across to young people in the hope that they come to understand what the ratings are intended to do.  A little education often goes a long way in enabling people to make informed rather than uneducated choices in their game playing.

Tuesday, 7 February 2017


IARC, or the International Age Rating Coalition, is a global ratings system for digitally delivered games and apps; the idea being that consumers have broad access to established, credible and locally relevant ratings for interactive entertainment products across a variety of platforms, most notably phones and tablets.  Member bodies include the ESRB (USA), PEGI (Europe), the USK (Germany), ClassInd (Brazil) and the ACB (Australia).

The system has been operating since 2012, but has gathered much more pace in the last couple of years or so.  Here at the GRA we have a primary IARC person in the form of “Sarah”.  Rather than giving you a dry overview of the system (which you can read about anyway on the IARC website), I thought it might be more worthwhile (and more interesting) to get it from the ‘horse’s mouth’ as it were.  Therefore, and without further ado, I give you Sarah and the wonderful world of IARC!

Me: What’s your role at the GRA?

Sarah: I test assorted apps and apply the appropriate rating under the IARC system.

Me: Briefly, explain what IARC ratings are?

Sarah: IARC is a global ratings system which, for UK and Europe, include criteria laid down by the PEGI system.  The basic job is to let users – more notably parents and carers – know whether a particular app is suitable for a specific age group.  The IARC system incorporates video games ratings bodies from around the world.

Me:  What kind of apps do you test?

Sarah: All sorts! More specifically, it tends to be mostly games though I also test utility, social networking and reference apps.

Me: How do you rate the apps?

Sarah: I will take a look at the product page either on Google Play, Microsoft or Oculus.  If there is insufficient information, I will also research the app through other means and physically test the app on a tablet.  Like video games, I will be looking for the usual suspects; sex, violence, nudity, bad language, etc.

Me:  What’s the weirdest app you’ve had to rate?

Sarah: That honour goes to the “button”.  It was literally a red button which you pressed and which did absolutely nothing, not even a sound! 

Me: Are you the only IARC rater in the UK?

Sarah:  Not really.  I am the primary IARC tester, but other colleagues also test apps as necessary.

Me:  How many apps do you rate in a year?

Sarah: I’m not sure, but I guess I average 20-25 apps per day.

Me:  What are your favourite type of app?

Sarah:  I really like the time management games such as World Chef or the Simpson’s Tapped Out.  They require a bit more thought than all the shooters.

Me:   Will this job ever make you a millionaire?

Sarah:  Probably not.

My thanks to Sarah for taking the time out to answer a few questions.  I hope you found it insightful too and remember, if you have a view or question then drop me a line.  See you next month!

Tuesday, 13 December 2016

GRA Megamix 2016

 Ever wondered if our video game examiners take time out to play rather than simply examine a video game for content – believe me, the two processes are very different.  In fact, I managed to get some of them off the hamster wheel for a few minutes in order to ask them what their own favourite games of 2016 are.  The result is the GRA Video Game Megamix of 2016 – a ‘top five’, if you like, of games that our examining team found particularly interesting and entertaining to play this year.  You may (or not) agree with their findings, but if you are unsure what to buy for yourself or the children, you might find their recommendations of some value.

And so, in no particular order, we kick-off with:

OVERCOOKED (PEGI 3) – This is a neat local co-op game in which up to four players find themselves in a kitchen where they must turn out endless meals within a four-minute time limit.  Sounds simple, eh?  Mmmm, think Ramsay’s kitchen nightmares and you’ll begin to get a genuine ‘flavour’ of how this game is going to ‘pan’ out (I promise the puns will stop now.)

STARDEW VALLEY (PEGI 7) – Yes, it’s a farming sim! How dull, I hear you cry, but hang on a minute, whilst you do spend a lot of time initially planting, watering and harvesting crops, this game becomes much more immersive as it gradually develops into an RPG where you can explore the environment for other resources to help you build a profitable farm.  The repetitive cycle of farming (so familiar in other farming sims) are interrupted here by many and varied side missions involving fighting monsters in the mines, currying favour with the local townsfolk and much, much more.  I am
I am assured this compelling game will keep you engaged for many hours. 

EMILY WANTS TO PLAY (PEGI 12) – Well, this one terrified the living bejesus out of a thirty-something games examiner, but I don’t see why she should have all the fun…or should that be fear?  Basically, you’re a pizza delivery person who pitches up at a spooky old house just before midnight (you can see where this is going right?)  You ring the bell, but no-one’s in.  Then, like a complete goof, you open the door and step inside. The door slams shut and you’re now trapped inside.  You get a few minutes to familiarise yourself with your eerie surroundings before the bell chimes midnight and the ‘games’ begin.  The ‘games’ centre around Emily’s collection of horror dolls which appear every hour and are determined to kill you.  To defeat them you need to gather clues as to how they operate and what is required to defeat them.  Yes, rather you than me thanks very much.  I got a lifetime’s worth of horror from ‘The Exorcist’ and ‘The Shining’.  I’m all done with the horror stuff.

FINAL FANTASY XV (PEGI 16) – It’s Final Fantasy 15!  There’s been 14 previous versions!  Something about it must be good.  ‘Nuff said.

WATCH DOGS 2 (PEGI 18) – I’m told that this is a massive improvement on the original and, even better, you get to live in a beautifully rendered San Francisco!  Our hero, Marcus Holloway, is still up to his hacking tricks having joined a group of anonymous hackers who seem intent on wrecking the city’s infrastructure, though they also tackle the corruption and criminal elements within the city too.  Marcus isn’t restricted to digital skills however.  He’s a pretty dab-hand at using an assortment of weaponry to take down foes.  Coupled to all this, is an expensive, open-world game that allows you to zoom around SF a  la Grand Theft Auto whilst taking in the sights too. How can you possibly resist?

So there you go.  Something to keep you entertained over the next few months.  Let me know what you think of our choices (politely!) and in the meantime, a very merry Christmas and New Year to you all.

Thursday, 10 November 2016


 The UK Centre for Alcohol and Tobacco Studies, based at Nottingham University, recently undertook a study to discover whether adolescents were being influenced by depictions of smoking and/or drinking in video games.

The researchers looked at 32 of the best-selling video games to determine to what extent they contained tobacco and alcohol references.  They then asked a total of 1,094 11-17 year olds whether they had played any of the most popular video games identified as containing either tobacco or alcohol references. This group was also asked whether and to what extent they smoked or drank alcohol. The study found that adolescents who had played at least one game with tobacco or alcohol content were twice as likely to have tried smoking or consumed alcohol themselves.

The study also concluded that PEGI should be doing more to highlight these content issues in their descriptors.

PEGI does include tobacco and alcohol under its drugs descriptor as it considers these two substances to be potentially harmful and addictive in line with other drugs such as cocaine or heroin.

I think that Notts University probably want a dedicated descriptor, but we could end up like those food packaging labels that are so rammed with information it becomes difficult to work out what it all means.

Rather more usefully, smoking and alcohol is already highlighted in our Additional Consumer Information (ACI) – a text-based descriptor which gives detailed content information that a simple, visual descriptor cannot.  It will, additionally, state the context in which the smoking/drinking is presented and whether these elements are positively endorsed or otherwise.  I think this nuanced approach is rather more credible than simply an image of a cigarette or a bottle of booze.

The ACI can be accessed via the GRA website at any time.  Simply tap in the game’s title and the info will appear shortly after.

If you think that representations of tobacco or alcohol use in video games IS a problem, I’d be really glad to hear your views on the subject.

Monday, 17 October 2016

EGX 2016

Yes, of course we were there!  Whaddya mean you missed us?  We were on the “Askaboutgames” booth stuck between the retro games area and FIFA17 – at times it felt like being permanently tuned into ‘Match of the Day’.  However, it did prove to be a good location with lots of human traffic being collared by GRA staff and having handfuls of ratings information, plus PEGI keyrings and memory sticks, stuffed into their palms.

We attracted a lot of attention, particularly from parents and educators who seem to find the whole game rating business a bit difficult to understand at times - something I find somewhat surprising since, as far as I can tell, it looks pretty straightforward.  I think that maybe some folk still haven’t realised that PEGI 12, 16 and 18 ratings are subject to regulation in the UK.  We spent considerable time explaining how the ratings work and why they exist as a result.

More problematic was the fact that time and time again the same issue of children accessing adult rated games cropped up.  You certainly feel a lot of sympathy for parents who are doing their best, but find their efforts constantly undermined by others.  The typical example is: “I won’t let my twelve year old play Grand Theft Auto, but his friend’s parents aren’t bothered at all which makes it hard for me to say ‘no’ when he asks.”  How you square that particular circle is especially hard.

Lots of folk, including “Deadpool” who appeared to have gotten lost, stopped by to chat and offer comments about the ratings most of which were positive though one man, clearly a lover of conspiracy theories, decided we were some sort of government agents out to ‘get’ people.  Yes, my friend, those innocent-looking PEGI keyrings actually emit rays in order to fry your brain!

I think my most interesting experience was having a crack on the “Whizdish” – a piece of VR technology where you physically move your legs on a circular plastic base in order to ‘move’ through a game; in my case running away from the ghosts in a VR version of Pac-Man.  The manufacturer of this device claims that it helps prevent motion-sickness and I have to confirm that this seemed to be the case.

I think EGX’s new home at the NEC is a major improvement on Earl’s Court and it’s probably safe to state that we aim to be back there next year.

Thursday, 15 September 2016

The Great Divide?

We occasionally get gripes from consumers about the nature of the PEGI ratings system compared to that used by film regulators.  For example, the recent STAR WARS THE FORCE AWAKENS film was rated ‘12A’ here in the UK and PG-13 in the US (the ratings are roughly equal.)  The game version, however, received a PEGI 16 – quite a step up from its movie cousin.  Some consumers quite reasonably ask how this can be so since, apart from anything else, movies are ‘realistic’ whereas video games are not.

The first thing to understand is that film and video game regulators are not only separate entities, but also view the medium they are dealing with in quite separate ways too.  This affects the method by which they are rated.  As an ex-film regulator, I speak from first-hand experience and must confess that I too was quite surprised by the differences in approach.

Perhaps one of the biggest contributory factors rests with the point that film regulators invariably make contextual judgments when arriving at their decisions whilst game regulators generally do not.  Since films are driven by story (on the whole), it is quite correct that elements within a narrative are taken into account and considered before applying a rating, otherwise there is the potential for a film to be rated for a wholly unsuitable audience simply because it may contain an issue which, at first glance, would seem unsuitable or inappropriate for a certain age group.  As a simple example, most of us would probably agree that illegal drug use is a bad thing and would not want images of such drug use being shown to younger people.  However, if the narrative thrust (and the accompanying images) relay a story that depicts a “drugs are bad” message then it is likely that such a message would be useful for younger people to see – the difference between “Trainspotting” (18) a positive endorsement of drug use, and “Traffic” (15) a negative endorsement of drug use.  Clearly, other elements would also be taken into account – bad language, sex, etc, but the above serves to give a rough illustration of the primary rationale behind a film rating.

Game ratings on the other hand, are approached from a more direct, non-contextualised perspective.  The origins of this being, perhaps, centred on the fact that early, arcade-style video games simply didn’t have discernible narratives, so there was little to contextualise.  For games, ratings generally boil down to the degree and strength of a particular issue – the amount of violence and how it was portrayed, for example.  This is notable in the extremes of MORTAL KOMBAT (PEGI 18) at one end and DISNEY INFINITY (PEGI 7) at the other.

This still rings true for PEGI, the ESRB and other worldwide games regulators and is why game ratings can appear to be more restrictive than their cinematographic brethren.

As games become increasingly sophisticated – many games now feature wholly discernible narratives as a major component of game play - there will probably come a point at which games regulators will have to reconsider their approach.  That, however, is beyond the scope of this wee blog.

In the interim, just bear this in mind and that you should never compare like-for- like as in the case of STAR WARS the film vs game.