Clown emojis all around

  • tb_
    link
    English
    1611 month ago

    Not entirely sure about the European PEGI, but the American ESRB is funded by the same companies that it regulates. It was created after the outcry about violent games and was the industry self-regulating to avoid the government getting more involved.

    It is a lobby group for the industry, for better and in this case very much for worse.

    I assume PEGI is little different.

    • @saltesc
      link
      English
      641 month ago

      PEGI and many other groups are private groups. They’re not an authority of any form. They’re not associated with government, public regulation, or public election. They’re a group of people that create their own standards outside of the ISO or any actual regulation representing the public.

      Some countries do have actual public systems, but many just have these private groups that know best.

      • @2pt_perversion
        link
        English
        241 month ago

        They’re private groups that do the ratings but ESRB is enforced by laws in some Canadian provinces for instance and PEGI is enforced by law in some European countries. They do have a de facto authority in those places as a publisher can’t just decide to disregard their ratings and sell to minors anyway or something.

        • @LorIps
          link
          English
          111 month ago

          In Austria PEGI is “enforced” in Vienna while USK is “enforced” in Salzburg (and Germany, the reason why they buy all their games here). And PEGI might be shit, but USK is a million times worse.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            430 days ago

            USK rated Balatro with a minimum age of 12 because of “elements resembling gambling”. Sounds more reasonable to me than the PEGI rating.

            • @LorIps
              link
              English
              4
              edit-2
              30 days ago

              German Authorities (technically not USK but USK is affiliated to them completely banned Wolfenstein, Dying Light, etc. Not 18+ or whatever it’s straight up illegal to promote or openly sell them in Germany.

              • Echo Dot
                link
                fedilink
                English
                129 days ago

                I can kind of understand Wolfenstein, as Germany does seem to have this thing where they do and also don’t want to face their past.

                But Dying light is a generic zombie game.

                • @LorIps
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  29 days ago

                  Yeah, it’s always stupid what ends up there and what doesn’t. And because of Germany’s stupid laws the German version often ends up worse than other versions (often even removing the English language option) (And people are surprised that we hate our northern neighbors…)

                  Here’s a (non-exclusive) list of banned games in Germany (it’s in German but the game titles should make it accessible to people that can only speak English): https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategorie:Indiziertes_Computerspiel

                  Oh yeah, Half-Life was indexed in Germany until 2017 (coincidentally when they switched from Elke Monssen-Engberding to someone less grumpy (half of the stupid decisions coming from Germany just stem from some grumpy old person who’s entrenched in a Department))

                  • Echo Dot
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    127 days ago

                    I honestly think it would be easier to just list games that they allow. I suppose Germans are really into Tetris or something since that’s apparently the only acceptable game.

      • @Takumidesh
        link
        English
        13
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        This is all well and true, but it’s important to note that these organizations exist as a sidestep to regulation, they are formed by industry insiders as a promise to the regulators that they will be honest about how they rate games (or movies or music) so that the government doesn’t actually get involved and do it’s job.

        It’s a form of regulatory capture that allows the industry itself to decide what is harmful to us.

        It’s basically the definition of conflict of interest.

    • kingthrillgore
      link
      fedilink
      English
      201 month ago

      To clarify: the ESRB is the rating arm. The ESA that runs it? That’s the lobbying arm.

    • @tlou3please
      link
      English
      71 month ago

      In fairness, I would much rather that than governments directly controlling access, creating an additional form of direct censorship.

      Not saying what we have now is great or anything though. I’m not exactly defending it.

      • Queen HawlSera
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 month ago

        That’s basically why the ESRB was created, it was “Self-Regulate, or we’re just going to ban 80% of games on the market as a scapegoat for Columbine!”

        • JackbyDev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          530 days ago

          Luigi Mangione played Among Us, an assassination game!

      • tb_
        link
        English
        31 month ago

        I largely agree, but the interests have gotten misaligned. Back then it was the threat of regulation which changed things up, I think the governments should do a little more of that.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        230 days ago

        Eeeeh, at least then there would theoretically be public accountability. The FCC has limited censorship power that they’re generally unobjectionable with.

        I’m honestly more concerned with the censorship from private enterprises than with government consorship currently. Less accountability and less recourse.

        It also really only becomes censorship if the rating system is used to prohibit speech. If we instead made it more like the nutritional guidelines on food it could instead give more of a content breakdown than setting an arbitrary age.

      • tb_
        link
        English
        51 month ago

        but… Looks like they don’t audit so good, if this article is evidence

        That’s the whole issue with it being a lobby group. It makes them a ton of money, so they are incentivised against making a rating for it because that would draw more attention/limit sales.

        And that’s where the whole government lobbying part comes in.