Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ESRB To Automate Game Rating

Posted by Soulskill on from the rated-l-for-lazy dept.

The Entertainment Software Rating Board, which has struggled to keep up with the flood of games produced for app stores and other online markets, is now taking steps to automate the rating process. "Starting on Monday the ratings board plans to begin introducing computers to the job of deciding whether a game is appropriate for Everyone, for Teens or for Mature gamers (meaning older than 16). To do this the organization has written a program designed to replicate the ingrained cultural norms and predilections of the everyday American consumer, at least when it comes to what is appropriate for children and what isn’t. ... the main evaluation of hundreds of games each year will be based not on direct human judgment but instead on a detailed digital questionnaire meant to gauge every subtle nuance of violence, sexuality, profanity, drug use, gambling and bodily function that could possibly offend anyone. The questionnaire, to be filled out by a game’s makers (with penalties for nondisclosure), is like a psychological inquest into the depths of all the things our culture considers potentially unwholesome."

5 of 119 comments (clear)

  1. This isn't automation... by Phoenix0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is shifting the work to the game developers, whose staff has to fill out the extremely long questionnaires. Which might make one wonder, what's the point of the rating board in the first place?

    1. Re:This isn't automation... by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The developers already do most of the work. They develop games to fit the rating. They don't produce a game and then wonder what the rating's going to be.

      And they had to fill in the questionnaire anyway. The ESRB doesn't play the game through to the end. They rely on honesty from the developers. The developers will be honest because getting a too low a rating will typically deter serious adult gamers from certain types of games.

    2. Re:This isn't automation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They already had to do this for years. I've done the ESRB paperwork for games. Most ESRB submissions are put in with an extremely long form filled out, disclosing which red flags you hit. Then the developer has to put together a gameplay/cutscene video with an example of every single thing in the game that may change the rating, plus everything in the form. You have to list how many instances (and the circumstances) of things like tobacco use are in game. You know what this does? Makes is so the ESRB doesn't have to watch the video and the developer doesn't have to make it. Which will make a lot of low-paid employees very happy. Those videos were a pain to make. Oh, and the old system had the same penalties for non-disclosure this one does.

      In the end, nothing really changed.

  2. the Questionnaire by mustPushCart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why dont we just put the answers to the questionnaire online and then any parent who cares enough to read them will know exactly what they are buying. That way no one will be judging at what age you can play a game and the ... unpleasantness of games is no longer reduced to a number. Parents who are sensitive to topics like drug abuse or gun control or sex can read the questionnaire and decide for themselves on a per topic basis.

  3. Re:everything reduced to a meaningless number by Eivind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But -any- rating-system that in the end, delivers a recommendation for age-group, is going to have to choose some prejudice.

    You have to compare different sorts of content and weigh them against eachother.

    How does *this* sort of violence stack up against *this* sort of sex ?

    There is no single correct answer to that, indeed any extreme is thinkable from "Any amount of sex is okay, but no violence" to the opposite extreme of "any amount of violence is okay, but no sex"

    It doesn't really matter if the score is by computer+questionaire or by human judgement or by any other method. There simple *isn't* one single correct answer.

    The method of judging, isn't the problem. The fundamental task, is.

    I tend to ignore the age-recommendations completely - instead if I'm in doubt about a certain game being apropriate or not for my kids, I will play it myself for a while. (usually you don't have to play it for -that- long to get a fair guesstimate)