Hi,
Intrigued by the cover box, our son called to buy a copy of World War One.
He is a 9 years old, smart kid. We checked the PEGI label: it said +7. So we trusted the game was okay for his age.
Troubles with game installation moved us to search the net for support: we got copy of the complete game manual.
Guess you noticed it a 200 pages electronic book, filled with tons of complex, over detailed rules: a bit hard for a 7 years old kid, isn't it?
We reported our regrets to the seller: the smiling shop-assistant said they couldn't help us, because the PEGI registration is a game publisher trouble.
But all, she checked other AGEod products: mostly +3 PEGI registered.
Quite dumb, isn't it?
The PEGI system was introduced in EU as a measure to assist parents buying games for kids. It’s a law ruled criteria game producers are called to respect.
I suspect AGEod is violating all that enlisting as PEGI +7, rather than +3 recommended age for own adult public products.
Mum & Dad
Hi
Sorry for you troubles.
I'm not an AGEOD member, just a forum dweller, so my answer is completely unofficial. But i think you misunderstood what the PEGI ratings meanings.
My understanding is that the PEGI ratings (as the ratings films have on some countries) are not related to the game difficulty or if t's childhood oriented or not.
They warns parents about if the game has adult content (blood, sex, nudity, foul words...) or not.
In this regard, AGEOD games (as most deep and complex strategy and wargames) are 100% "child friendly".
On WW1 you won't see bad words, nor nudity. That' why it's has a +7 PEGI
But that doesn't means the game is easy to learn or simple.
On the other side there are games very easy to play for small kids (like the Grand theft Auto series for example) that are not adequate at all for them as the game play features graphic violence, sex, drugs... They will have a higher age PEGI.
I'm not sure about what the back of the box said about the game but i guess the game description, features and screens should have warned you that the game was a very complex ans serious historical simulation of the World War one and not a child oriented educational game.
Regards
PS: hi again. Check this link from the PEGI web.
They explain pretty well the meanings of the age ratings
http://www.pegi.info/en/index/id/33/
An excerpts form there (the bolds are mine)
PEGI age rating labels appear on front and back of the packaging at one of the following age levels - 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+. They provide a reliable indication of the suitability of the game content in terms of protection of minors. The age rating does not take into account the difficulty level or skills required to play a game.
Sorry for you troubles.
I'm not an AGEOD member, just a forum dweller, so my answer is completely unofficial. But i think you misunderstood what the PEGI ratings meanings.
My understanding is that the PEGI ratings (as the ratings films have on some countries) are not related to the game difficulty or if t's childhood oriented or not.
They warns parents about if the game has adult content (blood, sex, nudity, foul words...) or not.
In this regard, AGEOD games (as most deep and complex strategy and wargames) are 100% "child friendly".
On WW1 you won't see bad words, nor nudity. That' why it's has a +7 PEGI
But that doesn't means the game is easy to learn or simple.
On the other side there are games very easy to play for small kids (like the Grand theft Auto series for example) that are not adequate at all for them as the game play features graphic violence, sex, drugs... They will have a higher age PEGI.
I'm not sure about what the back of the box said about the game but i guess the game description, features and screens should have warned you that the game was a very complex ans serious historical simulation of the World War one and not a child oriented educational game.
Regards
PS: hi again. Check this link from the PEGI web.
They explain pretty well the meanings of the age ratings
http://www.pegi.info/en/index/id/33/
An excerpts form there (the bolds are mine)
PEGI age rating labels appear on front and back of the packaging at one of the following age levels - 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+. They provide a reliable indication of the suitability of the game content in terms of protection of minors. The age rating does not take into account the difficulty level or skills required to play a game.
-
Padreigh
- Private
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 1:59 pm
- Location: Leinster; Grand Duchy of Berg; Kingdom of Westphalia (moving around a lot...)
Yes, neither the PEGI rating nor the German FSK/USK rating got anything to do the difficulty of the game. It deals just with what is appropiate for which age and what not. It usually focusses on the graphics as well. So it doesn't matter that you can wipe out dozens of enemy divisions in the game since you don't see any animations of soldiers being shot.
I think that they should mention this in small print under the PEGI label, though. Most people probably assume that the PEGI rating works like the rating on board games, jigsaws etc. But that is a PEGI problem and not a publisher problem, regardless of what shop assistants might tell you.
I think that they should mention this in small print under the PEGI label, though. Most people probably assume that the PEGI rating works like the rating on board games, jigsaws etc. But that is a PEGI problem and not a publisher problem, regardless of what shop assistants might tell you.
My great thanks to Don Arsan, the Spanish Ambassador, for his illustration of the PEGI system.
I’m professionally confident with child and adolescent psychiatry, so I’m competent in matter of game rating and PEGI too.
It’s true the PEGI rating is non game difficulty related, but the PEGI age level, ( 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+) was introduced to provide a reliable indication of the suitability of the game content in relation to age. Such suitability has to consider medium level of enjoyment a game can provide and user’s motivation to play it in relation to age.
I cannot trust a company suggesting as 3+ or 7+ games requiring but a complex manual assimilation, a hard chess like planning when playing.
So I please someone “AGEod officially speaking” to clarify the reason behind this marketing strategy quite ambiguous and deceiving in so far it remarks as 3+ or 7+ years old suited games addressed to the adult public as regard emotions, rational and cognitive capabilities.
Mum,
Daddy beeing till busy over the manual.........
I’m professionally confident with child and adolescent psychiatry, so I’m competent in matter of game rating and PEGI too.
It’s true the PEGI rating is non game difficulty related, but the PEGI age level, ( 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+) was introduced to provide a reliable indication of the suitability of the game content in relation to age. Such suitability has to consider medium level of enjoyment a game can provide and user’s motivation to play it in relation to age.
I cannot trust a company suggesting as 3+ or 7+ games requiring but a complex manual assimilation, a hard chess like planning when playing.
So I please someone “AGEod officially speaking” to clarify the reason behind this marketing strategy quite ambiguous and deceiving in so far it remarks as 3+ or 7+ years old suited games addressed to the adult public as regard emotions, rational and cognitive capabilities.
Mum,
Daddy beeing till busy over the manual.........
What has been presented as PEGI purpose and meaning is true. There is nothing more to add.
Now, in the nice world of business, you need to know how it works
- AGEOD does not need PEGI nor apply for one.
- PEGI is a requirement for selling boxed games in shops in Europe, and is an unescapable requirement for our partners and local publishers. They apply (and pay) for it.
- PEGI has rules (as presented above) and they grant their ranking according to their rules; and with their rules, a video game based on the Quantic theory would be rated 3+
In other words, dura lex sed lex
Now I agree their should be some sort of "new" ranking or quotation for difficulty levels, provided this is ever feasible to elaborate one...
In all fairness, if you felt misled by the ranking, your right as a consumer is to claim at the shop which sold the product, for lack of information, and request exchange with another product. Shops led by fair people usually accept this...
Now, in the nice world of business, you need to know how it works
- AGEOD does not need PEGI nor apply for one.
- PEGI is a requirement for selling boxed games in shops in Europe, and is an unescapable requirement for our partners and local publishers. They apply (and pay) for it.
- PEGI has rules (as presented above) and they grant their ranking according to their rules; and with their rules, a video game based on the Quantic theory would be rated 3+
In other words, dura lex sed lex
Now I agree their should be some sort of "new" ranking or quotation for difficulty levels, provided this is ever feasible to elaborate one...
In all fairness, if you felt misled by the ranking, your right as a consumer is to claim at the shop which sold the product, for lack of information, and request exchange with another product. Shops led by fair people usually accept this...
Mum&Dad wrote:It’s true the PEGI rating is non game difficulty related, but the PEGI age level, ( 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+) was introduced to provide a reliable indication of the suitability of the game content in relation to age. Such suitability has to consider medium level of enjoyment a game can provide and user’s motivation to play it in relation to age.
Sorry, but you are wrong. According to the definition of the system on the official PEGI web
http://www.pegi.info/en/index/id/33/
"PEGI age rating labels appear on front and back of the packaging at one of the following age levels - 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+. They provide a reliable indication of the suitability of the game content in terms of protection of minors. The age rating does not take into account the difficulty level or skills required to play a game."
It just takes into account "protection of minors" (related to adult content). Not level of enjoyment, user motivations or game difficulty.
Check the official definitions for +3 and +7 ratings
"PEGI 3+ - The content of games given this rating is considered suitable for all age groups. Some violence in a comical context (typically Bugs Bunny or Tom & Jerry cartoon-like forms of violence) is acceptable. The child should not be able to associate the character on the screen with real life characters, they should be totally fantasy. The game should not contain any sounds or pictures that are likely to scare or frighten young children. No bad language should be heard and there should be no scenes containing nudity nor any referring to sexual activity.
PEGI 7+ - Any game that would normally be rated at 3+ but contains some possibly frightening scenes or sounds may be considered suitable in this category. Some scenes of partial nudity may be permitted but never in a sexual context."
As you can see, its all about scaring scenes, explicit violence, partial nudity, sexual content... things you won't find on AGEOD games, so they are correctly labeled according to the PEGI official guidelines.
Should there be another official rating system about age suitability in regards of difficulty and enjoyment? Probably yes!
Is AGEOD's or his distributor's fault that this don't exist? Not at all
Are you venting your understandable frustration about a badly informed buy in the wrong direction? I woudl say yes
Maybe contacting PEGI about your concerns with his rating system would be the best thing to do.
Looking at the bright side of things... maybe dad will find the game interesting and can enjoy it until your son gets old enough for it
Regards
Don Arsan, you are probably the worst Ambassador in charge ever.
You just suggested me (a wife), to encourage my husband to go after some sick gaming practice, misreading all home duties waiting for his care.
It's not a diplomacy incident, it’s something worth of the attention from the International Criminal Court of the Hague for crimes against humanity.
Mum
You just suggested me (a wife), to encourage my husband to go after some sick gaming practice, misreading all home duties waiting for his care.
It's not a diplomacy incident, it’s something worth of the attention from the International Criminal Court of the Hague for crimes against humanity.
Mum
Mum&Dad wrote:Don Arsan, you are probably the worst Ambassador in charge ever.
You just suggested me (a wife), to encourage my husband to go after some sick gaming practice, misreading all home duties waiting for his care.
It's not a diplomacy incident, it’s something worth of the attention from the International Criminal Court of the Hague for crimes against humanity.
Mum
In this you are right!
Don't let him get hooked on wargames or you will regret it
Mum&Dad wrote:Don Arsan, you are probably the worst Ambassador in charge ever.
You just suggested me (a wife), to encourage my husband to go after some sick gaming practice, misreading all home duties waiting for his care.
It's not a diplomacy incident, it’s something worth of the attention from the International Criminal Court of the Hague for crimes against humanity.
Mum
Hi, Mum
Quoting your first post, you nevertheless didn't discourage your son to 'go after some sick gaming practice' when you bought this game for him so it's maybe also worth of the attention of some Court for childhood protection ?
(I'm joking of course...
)La mort est un mur, mourir est une brèche.
oke: 
Arsan said:
In this you are right!
In this?
Don Arsan you are a hopeless clinical case.
You should know, MUM IS ALWAYS RIGHT!
Adlertag said:
Hi, Mum
Quoting your first post, you nevertheless didn't discourage your son to 'go after some sick gaming practice' when you bought this game for him so it's maybe also worth of the attention of some Court for childhood protection ?
It should be clear, without I have to point that out: I was not at the toys shop, the time Dad bought a useless and dangerous PC game.
I encourage children to play just educational games, stimulating learning, social relationships, psycho-motorial abilities.
“Sick PC gaming practice” is to be strictly reserved to very mature persons: someone like Herr Ambassador Dooya, as far as I can see!
PEGI absolutely not about complexness of games, first person shooters are often 16+ but a six year person could actually play them.
Indeed this kind of game are excellent for this, assimilation of complicated rules, with empirical in game experimentation with a lot of possibilities and possible stimulation of interest in history, yet too much for most 9 years old kid I'm afraid.stimulating learning
-
Major Tom
- Lieutenant Colonel
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:00 pm
- Location: Alexandria, Virginia
Mum&Dad wrote:Don Arsan, you are probably the worst Ambassador in charge ever.
You just suggested me (a wife), to encourage my husband to go after some sick gaming practice, misreading all home duties waiting for his care.
It's not a diplomacy incident, it’s something worth of the attention from the International Criminal Court of the Hague for crimes against humanity.
Mum
I completely agree. In fact, I don't think this goes far enough. I believe AGEod's encouragement of sick gaming practices deserves the prompt attention of the United Nations. I believe they should put Hans Blix on the case, to be followed by massive air strikes and possible pre-emptive invasion. But becasue the U.N. is too weak to act, it will be up to Team America, World Police, to do the job.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
Mum&Dad wrote:Don Arsan, you are probably the worst Ambassador in charge ever.
You just suggested me (a wife), to encourage my husband to go after some sick gaming practice, misreading all home duties waiting for his care.
It's not a diplomacy incident, it’s something worth of the attention from the International Criminal Court of the Hague for crimes against humanity.
Mum
Holy motherhood!!! A couple of mothers little helpers might calm her down.
Sick gaming practice indeed. No need to guess who wears the pants in this family. Criminal court of the Hague? LOL
Nial
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
-
Gray_Lensman
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
- Location: Who is John Galt?
-
Aphrodite Mae
- Posts: 764
- Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 3:13 pm
- Location: With Dixicrat
Quotes and stuff
"Meh, when you quöte, make surrre tuu ät leest quotte corräctly..."
Wow!
Is that Norwegian?!
On a different matter...
Why does "Mum" suspiciously sound like... Jasta?
Just kinda wonderin'...
Wow!
Is that Norwegian?!
On a different matter...
Why does "Mum" suspiciously sound like... Jasta?
Just kinda wonderin'...
Aphrodite Mae
Return to “General discussions”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests