What do you think about Game Rating Boards?

[Starry Windy]

It all started in the middle of controversy of Mortal Kombat, where that time Nintendo decided to tone down some of the content in SNES, while Sega already having a rating board on its own, so it allows the content to be unaltered in Sega's consoles. After some discussions (and apparently Ninty refused to use the rating board from its rival back then), the video game companies agreed upon making the first ever self-regulatory rating board to rate all the games from every gaming systems to determine which games would be appropriate for most gamers or not. This organization will later be known as ESRB.

So then, other game rating boards for different regions started to be founded as well, like CERO for Japan, and PEGI for Europe, among others. What do you think about these gaming rating boards? Are they helpful in deciding which game you wanted to get? Or do you think otherwise?

 

[Ace]

I never heard of CERO, but I've grown up with the ESRB most of my life. (PEGI reminds me of a certain Hill person.)

 

[Starry Windy]

I was growing up with ESRB as well, even though in these few years I started to learn about the existence of PEGI and CERO thanks to the 'net. Personally, I feel thankful that ESRB existed after all the commotion, because usually I'm into games that are pretty safe for me to enjoy. Even though I do remember when I ignored the ratings a few times to buy some M-rated games, but then, I was a little kid who didn't knew much about it that time.

 

[Dark Link]

This is very interesting indeed. I knew it had something to do with Nintendo and Sega in a way, but I never knew how it had started. It makes me wonder what would happen if ESRB was never a thing? Anyways this is pretty good Starry!
( @Ace And the husband sells Propane and Propane Accessories)

 

[Knight]

I like the rating boards, the PEGI in particular, seeing as it is the one I'm most familiar with (being European). Age ratings exist for a reason, though many children and youngeer teenagers think they're mature enough to play 18+ rated games, not all games are appropriate for all ages. They don't do much if parents and sellers don't bother enforcing them, but I wouldn't have them removed. Even if you don't care for the restrictions, the ratings usually give a fair impression of how mature the game's content is (except when the rating boards goof up, looking at you, Ocarina of Time).

I usually glance at the age rating for information about how explicit the game is. It may not keep me from buying it in the end, but the age ratings are generally good at informing you of what kind of content there is in the game, aside from the occasional blunder.

 

[Duffy]

Considering OP glanced over the fact that "some discussion" was discussion by the United States Senate on violent video games, I'm glad the ESRP was created for the US. Because if it wasn't, like I said the United States Senate would be regulating video games, and God knows if that would have gone well (probably not).

Also, I find it completely ludicrous that Nintendo would ever use Sega's (it's rival's) rating system. Sega's system had only 3 ratings that were clearly being abused by Sega. You mentioned Mortal Kombat with it's very graphic depiction of violence, blood and gory deaths. Mortal Kombat was rated MA-13 by Sega, or essentially they thought it was for kids 13 and up.

 

[2071]

Generally, I think game rating boards are a good thing that happened. When I buy a game, I would want to know what type of content I am expecting from it, which although it might not ultimately alter my decision of getting the game. For parents wanting to buy games for their children then that matters. I've recognized ESRB and PEGI but more familiar with the former.

 

[Crowing]

My parents always used to be pedantic about game and film rating but I've never cared at all. Does it really matter if there's violence or a little bit of risque? The former's not gonna turn me into a serial killer and the latter won't turn me into a demented pervert. Believe me, with the latter, games are the last thing that would've done that to me... but that's not something I should go into detail with here, as I'm sure you'll agree.

Books don't have ratings, surprisingly. Wish games and films would've followed suit. When you add things like ratings and make big deals out of it, all it does is create controversy. It's pointless. More understandable compared to books, but in my parent's case, I think they should've been more worried about some of what I was reading in Stephen King books compared to something like Highlander.

Anyway, game ratings are borderline pointless, and they don't really change a whole lot of anything aside from create controversy over pointless stuff.