E10+ Rating Coming

[Jonbo298]

March 2, 2005 - Along with familiar designations such as "E" for Everyone or "T" for Teen, games may now carry a rating of "E10+," standing for Everyone 10 and older, according to an announcement today by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB).


While the category seems confusing at first, the ESRB means to distinguish those generally family-friendly games which regardless include content which may not be appropriate for very young children -- content such as mild cartoon violence, mild language, or "minimal suggestive themes."

"We expect that many of the best selling sports, racing, and adventure games will continue to receive E ratings appropriate for ages six and older," said ESRB president Patricia Vance. "Games with content that may not be suitable for younger ages of six to nine, such as racing games with more extreme crashes or fighting games with super heroes, will now receive an E10+ rating."

Since 1994, the game industry has adopted the ESRB ratings as a guide to game content, especially for parents who may not otherwise know whether a game's material would be appropriate for their children.

The ESRB developed the new rating after consulting with various child development experts, who point to developmental differences between very young children and teenagers.

Games deemed suitable for all ages will continue to receive the "E" rating.

http://cube.ign.com/articles/592/592775p1.html

Nice move by the ESRB, IMO. It seemed kind of needed as too many E games had things like mentioned above that were kind of between E and T.

[KillerGremlin]

Meh, I disagree.

Zelda = E
Harry Potter = E

The thing is....I can see Zelda being rated E10+, and the thing is, I don't think you should have to be ten to play Zelda.

Now, that's coming from me, a kid that was playing Doom when he was 8, but whatever. All I know is, I hope companies like Nintendo don't take this to seriously. I don't want Nintendo softening any of their games to make sure they get an E rating.

And the ESRB still sucks....but I guess we need them to hold our hands in our lame society.

[Stray_Bullet]

Well, ESRB never kept kids from playing games... protective parents kept kids from playing games.

Street Fighter II had an MA-13 rating a long time ago, and it seemed that everyone I knew played it. As well, Fable's been pretty popular, and it had the M(17) rating.

But yes, there could be the problem with some games dumbing down to reach the 10- age group. And hey, wouldn't that be evident enough that Nintendo is indeed trying to make "kiddy" games? We'll just have to keep our eyes on it, I suppose.

[Jonbo298]

ugh, that word again. Nintendo making "kiddy" games. I'm not even gonna retort that. Grow up

[Stray_Bullet]

Originally Posted by Jonbo298

Grow up

I don't care that you missed my sarcastic tone. However, you can't ignore that it'll be excellent fuel for fanboys around the world if Nintendo makes sure that their games get lower than the E10+ rating. What kind of game, other than one directed toward kids, would be obviously designed for bodies under the age of 10? The E-T gap was very practical to shoot for. E covered a large area of buyers.

If any company designs games at E instead of E10+, it probably doesn't contain any form of violence... and was probably made that way to:
1) Broaden the marketing range
2) legitimately appeal to a younger audience (you know, Sesame Street)


But still...

[Jonbo298]

Get rid of E Rating then and put EC (Early Childhood) in its place

[KillerGremlin]

Nintendo has said numerous times that their demographic is families, and kids. So....if they have to remove some of the violence from a Zelda title to keep it an E game....then that would be worth keeping your eye on. Because, frankly, Zelda is a "violent game" now.