Video game age-ratings are about to change in Europe. The Pan-European Game Information age-ratings body, better known as PEGI, which determines the age-ratings for games everywhere in Europe apart from Germany, is about to make arguably the most significant update in its history.
In June this year, four new categories are being added to the age-rating criteria which will attempt to tackle elements of addictive design in games, unmonitored online communication, and – the big one – paid content in a game including systems like loot boxes.
The result of these changes will mean that a game like EA FC Sports, which is routinely awarded a PEGI 3 rating, but comes with a separate in-app purchases warning because of the Ultimate Team blind-bag card packs the game sells, will now likely be age-rated PEGI 16.
PEGI director general Dirk Bosmans explained the changes to me this week, saying these were issues that had been on the company’s radar for some time, and that cues were taken from Germany’s ratings board USK, which implemented similar strategies a couple of years ago.
Criteria 1: in-app purchases
If a game contains time-limited or quantity-limited paid systems, like a paid battle pass, where rewards disappear after a certain time, meaning there’s pressure exerted for people to return and play, it will get a PEGI 12 rating.
Note, Fortnite already has a PEGI 12 rating and there will be other games in a similar situation, where the age-rating won’t change because of this, but there will be additional “descriptors” to highlight these systems.
The description is intentionally brief. “We obviously have more details in the background,” Bosmans told me, “but we’re not sharing that right now because we need to put this in practice to see how this works.”
A game will be able to reduce this PEGI rating to 7 if it contains in-game controls that allow you to turn spending off by default. As Bosmans noted, these systems don’t really exist yet, but the hope is this change will incentivise them to be developed.
“This for us is experimental,” he added. “We’re going to have to see in a year from now, does this actually exist? Is there going to be some slow or broad adoption of these controls? There were some concerns: is this going to be a back door to keep these games with a PEGI 7. For the moment, we don’t really see many games that have this, but it would be interesting to see if this indeed drives the adoption of such things.”
Also, and this is mostly a mobile thing, any games where purchases are linked to NFTs which are required to play the game will get a PEGI 18 rating.
Criteria 1b or 2: paid random items
This is loot boxes, “so your average card pack systems, gacha systems, but also keys to unlock the random items – we try to close the loopholes”. If a game sells these things, it will be rated PEGI 16.
The rating goes up to PEGI 18 for – and again this is mostly a mobile thing – social casino games.
“We will not rule out that in the future that, if the PEGI 7 with mitigating circumstances for in-game purchases works, that if companies would develop in-game controls that put access to paid loot boxes off by default, we might see a PEGI 12. But for the moment, that doesn’t exist,” Bosmans said.
Criteria 3: play by appointment
This is a criteria attempting to get at addictive design in games, in this case, games that incentivise or pressurise you to return to them. The essence of what PEGI is trying to capture is this: “When kids tell their parents: I have to play this today because I want to continue my streak, or there is a daily quest that I have to play,” Bosmans said.
“There was some discussion here,” he added. “Some people pointed out that these are features that make the game engaging and fun – this is enriching the game experience similar to a cliffhanger in a Netflix series. So we mostly want to inform parents about this, because there’s no reason why we should give Animal Crossing a very high rating. So this is going to stick to a PEGI 7 but it will have a descriptor that explains this. The exact language of the descriptors still needs to be figured out.”
This kind of design relates to battle passes as well, so the age-rating scales to PEGI 12 – the same rating a paid battle pass would get – if the battle pass incentivises people to return to it.
The PEGI 12 rating can also be administered to games that punish you if you don’t return in time. “If already acquired content or status is lost if players do not return to the game – so if you’re effectively punished for not coming back – we do take it up a notch,” Bosmans said.
Criteria 4: online community
Online toxicity is a topic of huge concern in games and this is an attempt to get at it. But like addictive design elements, it’s hard to pin down. You can’t control what someone might say online. You can, however, retroactively moderate or punish someone because of that. That’s why this category is mostly calling out games with no protections such as that in place.
If a game has unrestricted communication, it gets a PEGI 18. “If they wouldn’t have any possibility to restrict text, voice or video or other chat, then that game would get an 18,” Bosmans said.
“That game also probably wouldn’t be able to get a release on some platforms because they wouldn’t allow this. And I would say specifically for the UK and the UK Online Safety Act, this game would be illegal for sale in the United Kingdom. So we don’t expect to see many of these games. […] This is more like a line in the sand. We need to make it clear to companies this is something you cannot do.”
The changes come into effect in June
“This is going to come into effect in June of this year,” Bosmans said, “and we do expect that at that point, games will be submitted to us under this new regime, you could say, and then we’re going to have to remain confidential for a while because we can’t disclose the ratings until a game is ready for release or announcement. We do expect that somewhere later in summer, we will see the first games under these new criteria appear on the market – Gamescom time, around that.”
“I’m sure that in a couple of weeks, I’ll be hearing from companies or people that are not happy with all of this”
Today will be the first time many game publishers and developers are hearing about these changes, so it will naturally stir the sediment and create some feedback. It is, after all, one of the biggest changes PEGI has ever made.
“This is, in terms of scope and quantitatively speaking, probably the most significant update we’ve had in our history,” Bosmans said. “I hope I’ve made it clear that we try to address concerns that we’ve had on our radar for a while, but where we noticed that our initial narrative of how these things can be approached clearly isn’t enough any more so more needed to be done.
“We were lucky to have USK leading the way for us, because it meant that we could make this happen in about one year’s time, which sounds like a long time, but under the hood, so much needs to change. You need to speak with so many people, and I’m sure that in a couple of weeks, I’ll be hearing from companies or people that are not happy with all of this. You cannot please them all. But I do think that for the video games industry as in general, this is an important step forward in showing lawmakers who have more radical ideas about addressing video games, that we are capable of taking our responsibility.”
