Game Ratings: Whats Your Take?

I was just wondering what your guys' takes are on the game rating system (in the US), or how other countries regulate game sales (I am really interested in other countries, so please contribute here).

My feeling is that the ratings are self-explanotory, its just that stores need to enforce them more.  I mean, stores check ID's for cigarettes, pornos, alcohol, and all that other stuff...why not check it for games?

There is all this legislation being passed in the US and this big anti-game movement by Hippies Against Games ("HAG") headed by angry housewives and scared politicians, when there is already a decent system in place that isnt getting enforced.  I think eventually all this will pass over (Hugh Heffner got a lot of flack back in the day, gun control did in the 90s as did rap music, now its video game's turn) but for the moment I am seriously scared that games will become censored or banned, even is the US.

Here is my proposal:  If it says "M" or "AO" (mature or adults only), you check the customer's ID.  Simple as that.

Anyway, please list your opinions and, if from a country outside of the US, please tell us how stuff like this is handled, I would appreciate it.

[QUOTE="dbowman"]I live in the UK. Our rating system is a bit odd.

There is the PEGI rating [Pan European Game Information], which goes 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+, 18+,
However this is only a recommended rating. So you could be 7 years old and buy a 18+ game.

We also have the BBFC ratings. This is the same system used for films in the UK.

U - Universal [everyone]
PG - Parental Guidance
12 - 12 years or above
15 - 15 years or above
18 - 18 years or above

Using the BBFC system you have to be a certain age to buy the game [or film]

Examples... FEAR, Prey, Quake 4, Doom 3, GTA Vice City are all rated 18 under the BBFC system
                   Call of Duty 2, Half Life 2 and Company of Heroes are all rated 15 under the BBFC system

Ghost Recon 3, Medal of Honour Pacific Assualt and Brothers in Arms are all rated 16+ under the PEGI system
Rome Total War is rated 12+ under the PEGI system
lazzy102

That sounds reasonable.  How strictly is it enforced?  Also, are there anti-game movements or anti-game politicians in the UK?  And Jack Thompsons or whatever that guy's name is?

Also, I forgot to say that I only suggest this because it needs to be done, not because I want it to be done.  If we let politicians and everything create tighter regulations (which will result due to the lack of enforcement of the current system), then everyone loses but as it is now I think that game ratings are pretty fair.

UK's game rating system is great, if the bbfc slaps a 15 or an 18 age rating on it, it's illegal to sell it to people below that age - in exactly the same way as a film, and while you may not get IDed on every purchase you make, it's treated the same as any other item that is age-restricted by law

Uk takes violence pretty seriously (or is good at pretending it does), and doesn't have all the crazy controversy over game violence - there is some, sure - but nowhere near as much as in america

there has been many other regulatory bodies in uk as mentioned, but they're just guidelines, like when a toy says ages 3+, it's not illegal for a 2 year old kid to play with it, it's just a recommendation

the bbfc only puts ratings on games with serious content, stuff like san andreas are 18 straight away, though it should be noted that the content is not the sole factor in the way the bbfc works, but the context of the content - san andreas, as an example, is a game where you're a criminal who essentially opposes civil society - the bbfc doesn't want people to emulate, least of all kids - but if san andreas had been released as a game where you play as a police officer helping society (even with the exact same violent content), there's a serious chance it would've gotten a 15 age rating, or even slipped by the bbfc rating entirely - it's very nuanced and interesting

but the bottom line with UK age ratings is that we take it seriously, and for good reason - i personally think 15/18 may be a little extreme, but it's down to the individual - and at any rate, it means we don't have those computer game hate groups moaning constantly about how quake 2 taught my son to shoot or the school shooting guy mapped out doom levels based on his school and practiced killing his friends in them - regulation, even reasonable regulation, makes computer games much less of a target

there are always going to be groups and individuals in all countries who blame games, or rap music, or modern haircuts for all of the world's problems, but in the UK i don't think there are any groups or politicians who strongly oppose games or gaming violence (i can't name any, at least) - though they surely exist, they just don't have mainstream media attention - the UK is, while very traditional, also a very forward-thinking and increasingly unreligious and unfanatical nation with very grounded, realistic and rational views about most things, game violence especially
A-S_FM

Thank you for the summary.  Very interesting what you said about content vs context, I suppose that way of thinking could go both ways.  In the US I think we tend to focus more on context than actual content.  Its ok to show Arnold shooting people and throwing sawblades at stereotpyical drug smugglers in Commando, but its not ok to be a play a criminal in GTA: SA taking a bat to drug dealers heads and doing driveby's...equally violent in content, but very different in context.  Also, I think the fact that video games are interactive whereas movies are not is also a strong arguing point for the anti-gaming movement.