Indie game ratings?

Best not to go specifying ages as these are set per-state. Just state what's in it that might be rated on legislatively, eg. sex, violence, swearing etc.

Cas

 

Maybe something like this? It's the Dutch system for classifying movies and tv programmes. It uses icons to indicate the type of content, like what princec suggested.

 

Perhaps you're forgetting ~8% of people are color blind.

 

There's text AND colour - nothing wrong with that.

Seen any traffic lights lately?

 

What about people with no eyes or limbs ?

http://www.vischeck.com/

 

or ears.

Can of worms!

 

Have you? Last I checked, there were 3 lights in a linear fashion, not one light that changes 3 colors. You could be mostly blind and still tell what position the light is in if you could see all three positions. Hell, there's nothing wrong with "text AND color". There is something wrong when greater than half of the thing is color. Defeats the intended purpose of "at-a-glance", doesn't it?

 

@Adrian Lopez: I think this is excellent idea. If there would be solid organisation behind this system I think this would be a good for players and their parents to better understand the contents of different games.

Not sure how this can be broaneded to be truly working system... but the concept is tested and I'm all for this.

 

sonicron: someone has come up with a nice idea - I don't think it's worth shooting it down in flames over such a minor minor thing as you objecting to the amount of colour used.

 

I doubt my comment was "shooting it down in flames" and I also doubt the color is "such a minor minor" thing. I don't object to the amount of color being used. I object to the usage of the color in the examples. Their primary purpose is to provide a quick at-a-glance overview of the rating. This is fine. However, because almost 10% of the population is color blind, the entire purpose of the color is completely lost to that group. Color shouldn't be the identifying mark, it should accent it. I'm not making up problems that don't exist; this is basic user interface design.

 

Male population.

 

Having senseless ratings will limit my potential customers.

 

Speaking of color-blindness.. I notice that color is frequently the primary means in most games to differentiate tokens - at least in strategy games. One color for your tokens, and other colors for the AI's tokens. Would creating color blind friendly tokens help any in sales if indeed about 10% of the population suffers from color blindness?

Is most of the color blindess the red-green type, so that care mainly needs to be taken in differentiating those? I notice that most games out there don't bother with this. Does an untapped market of color blind people thirsting for games they can play exist? And if so, do any portals actually exist that help cater to them?

'tis a shame to be deprived of the ability to effectively play such classics as Civilization or Master of Orion due to color blindness.

To survive as an indie, it seems the targeting of market niches not generally supported by mainstream games (i.e. those on Walmart shelves) is essential. I wonder if this is a viable niche.

 

Colour blindness isnt limited to any particular spectrum. I made a Snooker game in 3D which had an option to have names overlaid over the balls. I did this long before any current awarenes (about 5 years ago).

I believe all games should respect disabilities where possible from having colour blind modes for colour-sensitive games to subtitles or closed captions. I think I'll draw the line at braille though!

It is not a niche supporting subtitles or colour blind visual cues as most games will (and should) work fine anyway... if you want to survive as an indie as you put it, simply make games that do not suck.

 

My Standard Response to this question is: Have you considered just using the ESRB?

ESRB ratings aren't free, but if you're serious about rating your games, going with the established standard (at least in the US) is usually a good idea. On top of that, creating a competing standard with a similar level of credibility and consumer recognition would be even more expensive and require more work than just paying to use what's available.

-David

 

We had a head of art who'd worked on games for years who was colour blind. He worked on one game and the coder remarked on how good his rocks were, the mad colour schemes really worked. Turns out he was trying to put green moss on the rocks and ended up with some purple colour. Best artist I've ever worked with as well.

He used to have the odd problem playing Pro Evolution if the strips were too close but it never stopped him from playing.

 

This topic has been discussed elsewhere -- I'm pretty sure there's a thread on the Garage Games forums from a few years ago where I said what I'll say now.

An Indie ratings system, while well intentioned, will have flaws.

As mentioned here earlier, the first big problem is that the system would compete with an already established system, the ESRB. ESRB is expensive, but it's expensive for a reason. Having an accountable and reasonably standardized ratings body is an expensive task.

If you're instead proposing that people use these feely and of their own discretion, then I think you're going to find that's not realistic and the whole excercise becomes pointless.

First, let me ask: Who do you think will every use the "Mature Audiences" or "Adults Only" ratings? That would basically cut off a huge portion of the audiences that might otherwise buy the game.

Second, what kind of accountability will you have? What happens when someone releases their Porn King game with the "For Everybody" logo? The entire system, which will only have false credibility to begin with, will lose even that.

The whole reason the ESRB (or the MPAA's rating system) is effective is precisely because the ratings are determined by an independant, accountable entity with a standardized system of ratings assignment.

Without that, a system is completely meaningless. I know *you* might use it with the best of intentions, but what about the guy who doesn't? What about the legitimate misundestandings. I think my game should appeal to everyone, but what happens when someone gets upset about the absurd low-tech animation of someone getting shot by a crappy arrow sprite? Heck, maybe they're right and it's inappropriate for all ages. But I sure as hell am going to use the "For Everyone" sticker anyway.

Your best hope of using this system would be that your audience didn't *realize* it was meaningless (by not being backed by any sort of consistant, accountable body), or that they weren't smart/wise enough to care.

I think there are noble intentions behind this effort. But I really think this is a fundamentally misguided effort...

-Hiro_Antagonist

 

Adrian, I would definitely like to have a free self-rating system, even with its inherent drawbacks. The ESRB rating is better, but it just costs too much for indies. I wish we didn't have to go over "should there be a self-rating system?" again, since we already know that people are divided on this one.

I like having icons for content--it's more meaningful. The Dutch examples warn people of spiders and women with stinky feet, which is very good.

I think a survey of some kind could be used to come up with the rating. Obviously, it's possible to cheat and give yourself whatever rating you like, but indies are less motivated that way. The advantage of the survey is to provide some consistency to ratings.

-Erik