On the 14th April, the Media Development Authority of Singapore announced that by the end of April, Singaporeans will enjoy a new classification system for video games.
According to the press release, the new classification system was developed over a two-year period involving detailed research and extensive consultation with key stakeholders, including members of the MDA’s advisory committees, representatives from the video games distribution and retail sectors as well as parents, academics and gamers themselves.
I’m really pleased that such care and thought had been put into crafting and defining an in-depth and comprehensive rating system for the games sold in the local market. These two years of deep cooperation between the public and private sector is a testament to the commitment by the authorities on the importance of an extensive rating system to protect the young minds in our country.
To help you better understand the new system, I’ve taken the trouble to study and summarize the different tiers of the new ratings. Without further ado, here it is:
1. Mature “M18″ – Restricted title, suitable only for those 18 years and above.
2. Age Advisory “Suitable for 16 and Above” – Suitable for 16 years and above.
There.
No, stop refreshing your browser, I didn’t miss out anything. That’s it.
Two years in the making. Does this mean it took one year per rating?
Seriously, I’m not kidding. Read it here.
Let’s see how this compares with video game rating from elsewhere.
All games sold in US and Canada are regulated by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) and its unique because its voluntary and self-regulating. ESRB’s rating system is based on consultation with child development and academics, and nationwide research with parents. The result is that the system is age-based and most importantly, impartial.
In the end, ESRB’s system has six categories: Age 3+, Age 6+, Age 10+, Age 13+, Age 17+ and Age 18+. Along with these six categories is a list of 30 different content descriptors such as Sexual Themes, Real and Simulated Gambling, Tobacco Reference, Use of Drugs and Violent Content. So understanding game content is based on two-tiers, first look at the categorical age rating, then read the content descriptor to see why.
Full list can be found here
As a gamer, I may have some issues with how some games are rated. But as a member of the discerning public, I have to agree that ESRB’s two-tier rating system is just as comprehensive as it can get. Gaming content isn’t one dimensional, so you can’t just stick on an age rating and get it over with. The more difficult part is to explain why it is so – the aim is really to empower the buyer with the ability to make an informed choice.
Back to MDA’s rating system. Perhaps what I’m most uncomfortable about is that such a system is once again, top-down. Yes, there’s grassroots consultation but at the beginning and the end of the equation is the government’s policies.
Don’t get me wrong, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a government-led rating system but I’d personally very much prefer that something this should be one of those policies that are public-led instead. After all, it’s us who are buying for ourselves or our loved ones. We should have created a rating system that meets the needs of the consumer, providing clear and objective information on game content that could perhaps build on what ESRB has already established. Maybe it’s just me, but I really can’t get my head around this rating system, crafted over two years that really just oversimplifies the complexity of game content.
