PEGI Rating System Becomes Law in the U.K. from Today

[Smokin Shadowz]

 

 

The PEGI rating system for age classification of video games in the U.K. has become law from today, making it illegal for retailers to sell games to anyone under age.

 

The law enforces the PEGI standard on all retailers across the country and completely replaces the old BBFC ratings, which will no longer be used. Anyone found to be selling games to anyone under age will face a £5,000 fine or up to six years in prison.

 

“The U.K. has one of the most dynamic and innovative video games industries in the world, and the games they produce not only entertain millions, but can also educate and foster creativity,” said U.K. culture minister Ed Vaizey. “Today’s simplification of the ratings system benefits both industry and consumers and will help ensure that the millions of games sold in the UK each year are being played by the audiences they were intended for.”

 

In real terms not much is going to change for customers, there will still be age restrictions on games, the only difference is that the ratings will be decided by a different system.

 

Information found at egmnow.com

 

http://www.egmnow.com/articles/news/pegi-rating-system-becomes-law-in-the-u-k-from-today/

[skummgummigubbe]

wow that hard and if you buy a game and give to under age will it be criminal

 

i remember when i was 14-15 i bought GTA San Andreas (PEGI 18) no problems there

[Lazmarr]

Bye Bye AC3 and BBFC 15, hello AC3 PEGI 18. *Sigh* Fuuuuuuuu.

[RoosterTeethFan]

happy i dont live in the UK lol but not much will change your parents will still have to get you the games.

[Guest GDF Apache]

What would happen if they did that law on the selling of music and movies over there too to people under the required age?

 

 

If they did that over in the US, it wouldn't be a $5,000 fine, it'd be a $10,000 fine do to the fact that the US dollar is I'm guessing 3/4s or 1/2 less of what it was worth maybe 5-10 years ago.

[SatanicBagels]

Effing ridiculous. There is no victim so how can there be a crime???

[Lazmarr]

Effing ridiculous. There is no victim so how can there be a crime???

 

It's like a 26 year old selling alcohol to a 13 year old.

[The Director]

Just for clarification, it's pretty much the same thing as with ESRB. The only real difference is that retailer's in the United States will get fined by the FTC and possibly lose their license if they are caught selling M or AO rated video games to children.

 

 

Effing ridiculous. There is no victim so how can there be a crime???

No victim? Are you joking? You don't have to be a brain surgeon to know that certain video games shouldn't be played by children. It's the same (and possibly worse) as selling a child pornography!

 

In a perfect world, we could claim that video games have no impact on the way that children grow up, but it's completely plebeian to think that this is actually the case. If you don't believe it, then I propose an experiment. We gather a group of children between the ages of 8-12 who have never played video games before in a playground and watch them interact, then we go and join a lobby of squeakers on MW3 and listen to them interact. I guaranteeing that the conversation in the lobby will go something like, "Hello, what's up?" "Not much you ****sucking newb!"

 

Children at the age of 8 should not even know what that word means, let alone how to use it in a sentence. And yes, it is indeed the parent's choice whether or not their child should be allowed to play these types of games. Which means that parents should be the ones who purchase these games FOR their children. Which also means that retailers should not be allowed to sell these games to children without their parents present.

 

Victimless crime. Ha.

[AdMech]

sigh wish we'd kept the BBFC. Seems more and more we are selling our culture out to appear hip to the US

[SuperIntendant]

-snip-

Well, as far as the victim thing, I don't believe that there is any serious harm in a kid playing something violent, by kid I mean > 10, I played Halo, Halo 2, and Halo 3 along with GTA all while being 10 and under and I don't curse with the exception of two words which I don't consider to be curses, I'm also a pacifist. I'm not saying all kids should be playing GTA or whatever when they're 8, I'm saying that it isn't black and white and what it really depends on is the maturity of the kid.

 

Now that that is out of the way, I believe it should be left up to the parent to decide whether or not their kid is mature enough to play the game or not which is why I like this law as it makes it so that the parents will have to make a decision before their kids go out and play a game like CoD or GTA.

[SatanicBagels]

Just for clarification, it's pretty much the same thing as with ESRB. The only real difference is that retailer's in the United States will get fined by the FTC and possibly lose their license if they are caught selling M or AO rated video games to children.

 

 

No victim? Are you joking? You don't have to be a brain surgeon to know that certain video games shouldn't be played by children. It's the same (and possibly worse) as selling a child pornography!

 

In a perfect world, we could claim that video games have no impact on the way that children grow up, but it's completely plebeian to think that this is actually the case. If you don't believe it, then I propose an experiment. We gather a group of children between the ages of 8-12 who have never played video games before in a playground and watch them interact, then we go and join a lobby of squeakers on MW3 and listen to them interact. I guaranteeing that the conversation in the lobby will go something like, "Hello, what's up?" "Not much you ****sucking newb!"

 

Children at the age of 8 should not even know what that word means, let alone how to use it in a sentence. And yes, it is indeed the parent's choice whether or not their child should be allowed to play these types of games. Which means that parents should be the ones who purchase these games FOR their children. Which also means that retailers should not be allowed to sell these games to children without their parents present.

 

Victimless crime. Ha.

 

The way the US does it also has government interference (FEPA) and for that I am very sad.

 

As for saying that playing MW3 will completely destroy a child's ability to interact with his peers, I think it is a very drastic over statement. Plus you cannot be a victim if you inflict your own harm... because then you'd be the Offender as well. You can try to show that the kid didn't know what he was doing and the retailer should have known better, but ultimately any child above 7 knows what he is subjecting themselves to.

[Lᴜᴋᴇ]

child above 7 knows what he is subjecting themselves to.

Are all child gamers male now?

 

Personally this doesn't really affect me, though I live in the UK. I have to say though, I really don't like PEGI Ratings. Bring back BBCF, I say!

[SatanicBagels]

Are all child gamers male now?

 

Personally this doesn't really affect me, though I live in the UK. I have to say though, I really don't like PEGI Ratings. Bring back BBCF, I say!

 

Oh lol, when I'm typing about video games I habitually think of the gamers as male... I try to bring myself to change them all to "they" or "them" but sometimes I miss a few.

[The Director]

The way the US does it also has government interference (FEPA) and for that I am very sad.

 

As for saying that playing MW3 will completely destroy a child's ability to interact with his peers, I think it is a very drastic over statement. Plus you cannot be a victim if you inflict your own harm... because then you'd be the Offender as well. You can try to show that the kid didn't know what he was doing and the retailer should have known better, but ultimately any child above 7 knows what he is subjecting themselves to.

I definitely have to disagree with you, mainly (and this is going to sound a bit mean, but that's not it's intention) because that's in the top five of the dumbest things I've ever heard. If children over seven knew what they were doing, then there would be far fewer instances of fire-arm accidents. And it really isn't an overstatement. A child at that age is adaptive, not innovative, so is more likely to copy what he sees or hears (e.g. other children their age cursing over xbl), and is more vulnerable to persuasion. A person's mind does not leave the adaptive stage until well into their teens, which is why the age limit is set to 17+ on the ESRB ratings.

 

I'm going to go a little overboard here to try to convince you to look at this logically, rather than from your obviously biased point of view. If you dressed ecstasy up as candy, and offered it to a 7 year old, even if you told him what it was he would still probably take it. And no child can imagine what sort of damages certain things will do to them, especially damages that aren't physical. It would take a degree in psychology (or nearly, at any rate) to be able to tell what kind of damages exposure to certain things will do to a child, so there is no way you can say that a child would be able to understand what they are subjecting themselves to. To them, they see a shiny game case with a cool cover and a chance to act like an adult.

 

I'll use myself as an example. My mom tried to limit my exposure to certain things (i.e. Rated R movies, Rated M games, etc.), however needless to say she was less than successful. In my short 22 year life-span, I have been in countless fights, made people cry deliberately by saying mean things to them, and now have the urge to choke people at random. Is this directly related to watching rated R movies and playing games meant for adults? Not entirely, no, but that is definitely a contributing factor.

 

By the time I hit grade school, I already knew about bullies (from those rated R movies). I also knew that I was short and smart, so I would be more likely to be a target. So I figured, "If you can't beat them, join them." I beat people into submission, or said things to them that now I wouldn't say to my worst enemy. I pulled hair, stole lunch money, gave swirlies, the whole 9 yards.

 

So you can go ahead and sit there and tell me that material made for adults and teenagers doesn't affect children, and I'll just sit here and keep explaining to you how you are wrong.

[SatanicBagels]

and now have the urge to choke people at random.

 

o.O

 

I think my argument has been worded badly. At the beginning I was far more concerned by the fact that the government is getting involved. I find that stuff like this should be run and overseen by a company who provides fair and unbiased ratings, but I skewed my argument in favor of other things.

 

I don't think I ever said that violent games were meant for kids anywhere (and if I did then I was wrong and I don't know why I said it). I am more concerned with the government being able to punish for it.

[The Director]

o.O

 

I think my argument has been worded badly. At the beginning I was far more concerned by the fact that the government is getting involved. I find that stuff like this should be run and overseen by a company who provides fair and unbiased ratings, but I skewed my argument in favor of other things.

 

I don't think I ever said that violent games were meant for kids anywhere (and if I did then I was wrong and I don't know why I said it). I am more concerned with the government being able to punish for it.

They do not punish the children or even the parents for it. They punish the retailers who knowingly sell children materials that their parents may not let them have.

It's the same way the punish retailers for selling children alcohol, cigarettes, or porn.

 

And since I know your next argument is probably going to be "those are way worse than video games though", you have to realize that certain games (particularly rated M games) encourage the usage of all of these things. And other games pretty much ARE porn (e.g. Leisure Suit Larry).

 

If a retailer is willing to sell a child something that is above their age range, they deserve to be punished.

[RoosterTeethFan]

I definitely have to disagree with you, mainly (and this is going to sound a bit mean, but that's not it's intention) because that's in the top five of the dumbest things I've ever heard. If children over seven knew what they were doing, then there would be far fewer instances of fire-arm accidents. And it really isn't an overstatement. A child at that age is adaptive, not innovative, so is more likely to copy what he sees or hears (e.g. other children their age cursing over xbl), and is more vulnerable to persuasion. A person's mind does not leave the adaptive stage until well into their teens, which is why the age limit is set to 17+ on the ESRB ratings.

 

I'm going to go a little overboard here to try to convince you to look at this logically, rather than from your obviously biased point of view. If you dressed ecstasy up as candy, and offered it to a 7 year old, even if you told him what it was he would still probably take it. And no child can imagine what sort of damages certain things will do to them, especially damages that aren't physical. It would take a degree in psychology (or nearly, at any rate) to be able to tell what kind of damages exposure to certain things will do to a child, so there is no way you can say that a child would be able to understand what they are subjecting themselves to. To them, they see a shiny game case with a cool cover and a chance to act like an adult.

 

I'll use myself as an example. My mom tried to limit my exposure to certain things (i.e. Rated R movies, Rated M games, etc.), however needless to say she was less than successful. In my short 22 year life-span, I have been in countless fights, made people cry deliberately by saying mean things to them, and now have the urge to choke people at random. Is this directly related to watching rated R movies and playing games meant for adults? Not entirely, no, but that is definitely a contributing factor.

 

By the time I hit grade school, I already knew about bullies (from those rated R movies). I also knew that I was short and smart, so I would be more likely to be a target. So I figured, "If you can't beat them, join them." I beat people into submission, or said things to them that now I wouldn't say to my worst enemy. I pulled hair, stole lunch money, gave swirlies, the whole 9 yards.

 

So you can go ahead and sit there and tell me that material made for adults and teenagers doesn't affect children, and I'll just sit here and keep explaining to you how you are wrong.

in the U.S they just wont sell to kids under 18 that should be the parents choice but it deff does not damage children in any way really instead of throwing rocks at each other now there shooting things in a fake world dont see how thats a bad thing. but i do respect your opinion its a subject that we still dont no enough about video games have only got really popular since well halo 2 which wasnt even 10 years ago if im correct.

[Lazmarr]

Personally this doesn't really affect me, though I live in the UK. I have to say though, I really don't like PEGI Ratings. Bring back BBCF, I say!

I agree, although I did like it when the PEGI ratings used to be 'a guideline', because then you could buy the games anyway.

[Mr Biggles]

this is why you have a gaming mum.

 

 

she buys all your games for you, regardless of age

[Lazmarr]

this is why you have a gaming mum.

 

 

she buys all your games for you, regardless of age

My mum and dad don't really play games, except for sonic, boogie bunnies, and burnout (my mum) and Lord of The Rings - Xbox Original (my dad).

But they still buy me the games I want, as long as I pay with my money xD

[King of Winter]

My mum and dad don't really play games, except for sonic, boogie bunnies, and burnout (my mum) and Lord of The Rings - Xbox Original (my dad).

But they still buy me the games I want, as long as I pay with my money xD

 

My parents are pretty much Techno-phobic haha

[SuperIntendant]

Total Biscuit actually talked about this in the recent mailbox:

Go to 11:02

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvnsBaY-h-U&feature=player_detailpage#t=662s