A new report could help clarify some of the murkier areas of gaming…

The next couple of weeks are going to be very important for the video-games industry. Late March will see the release of a report into the impact of the internet and computer games on children, while April marks the launch of two big game releases: Wii Fit on the Nintendo Wii, and Grand Theft Auto IV on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.

The release of Wii Fit will be crucial for Nintendo. Despite the runaway success of the Wii (with global sales topping 22 million, according to figures from VG Chartz), some have questioned whether Nintendo can maintain the winning formula. Ask Wii fans, and most will tell you their favourite game is Wii Sports. That’s the free disc of games that came with the console, allowing you to wave a motion-sensitive controller around to play tennis, baseball and bowling.

Wii Fit takes that concept a stage further, using a motion-sensitive balance board to train the user in four core areas: aerobic fitness, balance, strength and muscle conditioning, and even yoga poses. It’s great fun, if marginally less sociable than Wii Sports, and Nintendo will need it to sell well to rebuff claims from some sections of the gaming community that the Wii is a one-trick pony.

This sort of active, family-oriented entertainment is just the sort of video gaming likely to receive the approval of Dr Tanya Byron, a psychologist and parenting expert who has been commissioned by the Government to undertake an independent review of the impact of the internet and video games on children.

It would be hard to imagine her celebrating the latest instalment in the Grand Theft Auto franchise, which follows the fortunes of a small-time Eastern European crook as he seeks fame, fortune and respect in the US. The series has earned a reputation for violent gameplay, but to focus solely on this aspect of the game is to diminish the innovation and creativity that has gone into making Grand Theft Auto such a cultural phenomenon. It’s an immersive, cleverly realised, if relentlessly gritty, environment and the fact that it is likely to be granted an 18 certificate in this country clearly emphasises that it is designed for mature gamers - but only the very naive would believe that will prevent underage gamers from getting their hands on it.

Age certification and the rights and responsibilities surrounding age-restricted games are likely to form a large chunk of Dr Byron’s report. It is believed she will seek to streamline and simplify the current certification process, and make it easier for parents to understand the content of a video game, and therefore judge whether or not it is suitable for their children.

At present, there are two systems of game rating in Britain: the compulsory one run by the British Board of Film Classification and the voluntary one run by the Pan European Games Information body, known as PEGI.

As things stand, the BBFC only has to grant an age certificate to certain games that fall under some specific categories in the outdated Video Recording Act of 1984. It stated that all video games were exempt from classification except for those that contained gross violence, human sexual or excretory activity, or material that could be useful in the commission of a crime. If a game breaches any of these criteria, it must be granted an age certificate by the BBFC before it can be released. It is then illegal to sell the game to someone below that age.

PEGI’s ratings, on the other hand, are designed primarily to educate parents about the content of a game. It has its own age recommendations (3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+) as well as a series of symbols to depict certain features of a game, such as violence, drug abuse, discrimination, gambling, or sexual behaviour. It is then up to parents whether or not they buy the game for a minor. The BBFC has a panel that plays each game before giving it an age certificate; the PEGI system relies on a questionnaire answered by the game’s publisher.

The PEGI system has won backing from some of the industry’s big players, most notably Matt Lambert, Microsoft’s director of corporate affairs. “The BBFC is set up to rate films, and it takes that approach for games when a different approach is required,” he said. “[PEGI] is more sensible, and it also has a European aspect to it.”

Dr Byron is expected to place a strong emphasis on parental responsibility, and recommend a process of education to make parents better informed about the kinds of games their children play, as well as their wider online activities. In an interview late last year, she said: “The truth is that many parents don’t even understand that an 18 rating on Grand Theft Auto is the same as an 18 on Texas Chainsaw Massacre. They see the word ‘game’ and have a totally different mentality.”

Dr Byron’s report could therefore present an opportunity to challenge widely held and largely inaccurate assumptions about the gaming community. Too often, the general public and the media fall back on convenient stereotypes about gamers - that of teenage boys hiding away in darkened bedrooms. The idea that games are a solitary pursuit is becoming increasingly irrelevant in an age when massively multiplayer online games such as World of Warcraft command a global fan base of millions, and today’s internet-enabled consoles allow a worldwide community of Halo 3 fans to do battle across cyberspace.

While teenage gamers are certainly a substantial chunk of the game-playing public, the average age of a gamer is now around 30. To a generation that has grown up with Sinclair Spectrums, Amigas, and Commodore 64s, gaming is another entertainment medium, just like film or music. It deserves to be treated as such - and that means giving adults the choice of deciding what kind of games they want to play, while protecting children from unsuitable titles. Let’s hope Dr Byron’s recommendations enable this to happen.

Source: Telegraph.co.uk, United Kingdom
http://tinyurl.com/2qutcc