PS3 News: PEGI Won't Warn Parents About We Dare, So Ubisoft Will - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

PEGI Won't Warn Parents About We Dare, So Ubisoft Will

We Dare may never come to North America but if it does, will the ESRB rating generate as much controversy as the PEGI rating?

The spicy Ubisoft production received a "PEGI 12" rating from the Pan-European Game Information board, and after reading up on game info and viewing that innuendo-laden video, many were confused. Well, both Ubisoft and the PEGI board have responded to the situation: firstly, PEGI says they consider content rather than context when rating a game. So in their eyes, We Dare only includes "mild swearing, minor assault on a human-like character and words/activities that amount to obvious sexual innuendo, explicit sexual descriptions or images and sexual posturing." ...how that doesn't translate to a higher rating, we don't know. But Ubisoft has decided to pick up the slack and slap a "Parental Discretion Advised" sticker on the box. And here's their statement:

"We Dare is intended for a mature audience and Ubisoft created its marketing campaign accordingly. The PEGI ratings system is decided upon by a pan-European body and the rating for this game was bestowed by the independent PEGI board. Ubisoft has added a ‘Parental Discretion Advised’ sticker to the game in order to ensure that parents are informed of the potential sensitive nature of the game content."

Well, that's a first...a publisher saying the rating board wasn't strict enough with their game. But while we sort of understand PEGI's explanation, couldn't one consider context to be part of their description? Or is that just me? And what might the ESRB give it, if they get the chance?

Related Game(s): We Dare

Tags: we dare, we dare rating, ubisoft, we dare pegi

3/7/2011 12:22:24 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (32 posts)

Highlander
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 12:36:21 PM
Reply

Hmm... sounds like Ubisoft is hoping to make the game sound even more racy than it is. Well, why not, that's the strategy that the publisher of Record of Agarest War took...

Still it does seem a little desperate to put a parental advisory sticker on a game because the content doesn't necessarily match the hype. It seems to me that the teaser video featuring various 20-somethings fooling around is a lot racier than the actual game. Hell, the only thing missing from the teaser was the authentic bom-chicka-wah-wah in the background. somehow though, I doubt that juxtaposing that with the Mii-avatars on the screen would come across as particularly titillating.

Last edited by Highlander on 3/7/2011 12:39:15 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Bonampak
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 12:51:36 PM
Reply

Isn't this a Wii game? Or was it also announced to come to the Move? I dunno. It wasn't on my radar.

In Europe, a game like this wouldn't be a big deal. But in the US...

....well, I can see this game catching the attention of several religious groups, the league of decency or even someone out there in cable-land (looking at you Fox News).

And any of them could start making a big fuzz about it. Which, lets be honest, is probably something Ubisoft could be looking for.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 1:00:19 PM

Wii and PS3 are confirmed. At least the PS3 controller has the correct shape - allegedly.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 1:10:10 PM

Thanks for the laugh Highlander.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

frylock25
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 1:03:32 PM
Reply

horrible, just horrible. everything about this game is a waste of time. i cant believe this would actually sell. and being a wii game too?

Agree with this comment 3 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

A2K78
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 1:16:35 PM
Reply

speaking of game ratings, its a shame that the industry isn't scrutizing the ESRB for the way it rates games; I say this based on the vast amount of content/rating inconsistencie I've spotted in my collection of games up to present and its for this reason why I tend to take the side of National Institute for Media and the Family.


"Still it does seem a little desperate to put a parental advisory sticker on a game'

When a developer choose to take the extra of including some kind content advisory I don't call it being desperate, but rather being responsibile and its even more important given the ESRB's flawed rating system.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 1:30:23 PM

With this game, I'd call it desperate.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 1:40:49 PM

There's no point Highlander. Responding to his inane logic is just as fruitless as responding to Cowpatty's. Sometimes I wonder if the two are related.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 3:07:02 PM

By that reasoning, they should also put parental advisories on the Move and every other game that has a woman or man in it that is dressed in anything less than a winter snow suit.

The content of the game itself isn't bad, based on what I've seen/read, it's what you do on your own... Seriously... "may contain sexual themes" isn't even a full committment to containing sexual themes.

I mean, come on... most games could potentially lead to some sort of sexual innuendo... whether it's laughing about the shape of the Move (?) or some teenager jerking to a female character on screen... it could ALL potentially contain sexual innuendo.

I dunno... I see it similarly to Highlander. It feels like a greater attempt at labeling as they did with Agarest War.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 3/7/2011 3:09:39 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 3:10:32 PM

BS, as usual.

The ESRB is far more accurate and reliable than the MSRB has ever been.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 9:44:48 PM

Oh please,

What we certainly don't need is more f*cking self-appointed holier-than-thou safety nannies!

Especially when it's the responsibility of the parent's to police their children.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

dillonthebunny
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 4:01:54 PM
Reply

personally this is whats wrong with gaming, im sorry but for fck sake..

now im not a prude, if you know me from the main forum I dont care what you do or how you do it, as long as no one gets hurt. but personally I think this game is a bad idea, especially at a 12 rating.

'adult' console gaming was only a matter of time, it started very early in the 80's on pcs and c64s when we had nothing else.. so it was bound to raise its head again when graphics and interface was improved.

but this looks like a kids game, its a 12 rating.. its just wrong in my book.

when I saw this first for Nintendo my heart sunk a little. Ninty have done so well this gen on marketing and choices, its incredible compared to the total hash they made of the GameCube marketing. but seeing this I just felt that they had totally sold out..

but I did wonder why it wasn't called Wii Dare, and now it coming to the PS3.. I can see why.


I remember subtle marketing.. remember that wonderful game from Sega called REZ? in Japan you had this vibrating pad that you place at the base of your spine, so when you would play Rez it would vibrate through your body, just amazing. ..but the adverts in Japan were these girls doing things with this pad in their pants.
you see, that doesn't disturb me anywhere near as much as We Dare...

We Dare is just evil trash.. lol

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

A2K78
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 4:47:31 PM
Reply

"The ESRB is far more accurate and reliable than the MSRB has ever been."

If the ESRB is so accurate as you claim, then why over the years have it been taking heat from gamers, the gaming press, mainstream media and even peer university studies over its flawed method of rating games?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Bonampak
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 5:06:55 PM

The fact is, that the ESRB is accurate.

Does the ESRB take some heat? Sure.

But that's heat that really needs to be directed toward the clueless saps (a.k.a parents) that consistently buy adult-oriented games to their children while ignoring the big M rating on the damn box.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 7:56:18 PM

It only takes heat from anti-gaming activists and that's it.

Any other evidence as to all this other heat the ESRB has taken? Any specific examples of games that the majority found to be mis-rated?

Really. We're all waiting for something that backs up your constant stream of self-righteous baloney.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AnonWTF
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 4:59:24 PM
Reply

Ratings can go and die. Don't really care about them.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

D1g1tal5torm
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 5:46:36 PM
Reply

This game is not going to sell.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Snaaaake
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 5:49:52 PM
Reply

Parents never cared about rating, if they do, why do you think they'd be protesting so much about GTAIV?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 6:47:22 PM

It's not that they don't care about the ratings. Some of the those parents are worried retailers will sell those games to their kids regardless of the rating. Which they do. I watched a kid who looked no older than 14 buy a copy of GTA at Gamestop some years ago. Granted retailers are getting better about policing themselves but it still happens.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Neurotoxiny
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 6:16:48 PM
Reply

Ubisoft is awesome... and this game can't even compare with GTAIV...

It's going to be so much BETTER!

I'm betting there's going to be plenty of controversy once the game actually comes out though and some parents buys it for their six year old kid....

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Kevin5
Monday, March 07, 2011 @ 7:27:18 PM
Reply

Some of you lads bi*** & moan about your ratings system, be thankful you don't have to put up with our rating classification system here in Aus! (Australian Classification Board).

Most games R18 overseas get shoehorned into MA15+ classification here (most times uncut but sometimes censored) because we have no R18+ category to put them in. 15 year olds here have full access to Dead Space 2, God of War III etc. So it either gets refused classification, modified to squeeze through the censors or planted uncut under MA15+.

This piece of gimmicky sh!t game here was rated for 12 year olds here where as a game involving clearly cartoony looking fighters brawling in fantasy realms is too "real" & bloody (MK9) therefore cannot be legally sold locally.

Ubisoft, if people want to spank their wives or want to be spanked by their wives we have bondage basements or a bedroom at home for that, we don't need to stick a pad up our arses.



Last edited by Kevin5 on 3/7/2011 7:28:55 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 1:04:03 AM

Actually, it got rated PG... Which means that it's open for anyone to purchase. Well, PG is actually the same as G8+, so that's gives you a rough idea of how leniently they're rating this game.

It brings to light one thing: Australian censors are considered some of the worst in the world, due to the lack of an R18+ classification, so how would this slip through if the content was, in any way, unsuitable for children?

The other point you make about MK9, I disagree with. Yes, it's fantasy, but it's clearly realistically based. I don't think that it would hurt anyone between the ages of 15 and 18, unless they were already seriously mentally disturbed, but I can see why they would ban it. The characters are intended to be humans, while the same can't be said for DS2 or GoWIII.
Peace.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 1:30:30 AM

im shocked they normally take a frown to sexual content.
even if it is only implied at.
thing i think that pushed MK9 over the edge is the Xray moves.
those show in graphic detail what happens to your internal organs when you get slugged in the chest.
though, if you read their description they say the reason it got banned was because of the graphic highly detailed fatalities.
well, what about GOW3 and splatterhouses?
slicing a guy in half with a razor hat is not ok, but shoving your arm up a monsters a$$ and ripping out his insides is?
WTF?
yea, splatterhouse is based on fictional characters but so is MK9.
last time i checked humans cant shoot fireballs out of their mouth, or electrocute people, or throw spears out of their arms, ect ect.
should MK9 be banned?
absolutely!
BUT so should almost every other MA game out there!
you cant play favorites, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
as WB are trying to argue, theres many worse games out there that have a MA rating.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 2:45:13 AM

But that's just it, isn't it? In GoWIII, the creatures were easily identifiable as being inhuman. Whether the Centaurs, or the Olympian Sentries or whatever else, none of them, except the gods, had human form. That alone lessens the impact of the imagery. But, in MK, while the characters clearly have superhuman abilities, they still have the appearance of people. And having these excessively violent scenes occurring to 'actual' people is, IMO, worse than some mythological beast.

Now, I'm not saying that the OFLC is right in banning MK. As I said, the imagery associated with it, unless you're already deranged, isn't going to send you on some sort of killing spree that mimics what you've seen. It's just silly to ban that game while allowing some others to slip through, including GoWIII. Yes, I do think that it should have received some censorship to release here.

But MK is also far more recognisable. The people responsible for rating it would have gone into it with their minds already pretty much made up, based off the controversies of the series in the past.

But We Dare is a completely different argument altogether as it's about the sexual element, rather than the violent one. But the thing is, it's largely implied. Does this mean that it is 'safe' to allow children easy access to it? Based on what I've seen and heard of it, I would say that it is more deserving of an M15+ rating, than a PG rating. At least that way it's clear that children shouldn't really be exposed to it, while maintaining that it is, for the most part, harmless.
Peace.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 9:33:21 AM

thats what had me shocked, they normally take a sterner look to sexual material then they do violence.
as for MK9 though its just as distinguishable to fiction as GOW3 is.
completley stupid though, why should a game that has you ripping a humans head off get banned, but a game that has you rip a gods head off be fine?
what difference does whether the species is real or not make?
thats one thing allot of games have been tripping up on, whole reason L4D2 got banned but dead rising 2 a game which is far worse got through.
whether the enemy is real or not should not dictate the appropriate audience for it, only the depiction of violence should.

i remember reading a really interesting article in GI a while ago, they had a interview with a ex OFLC employee, and he was discussing what ends up getting games banned.
he was saying what your saying if the violence is against real beings instead of fictional beings then its almost automatically banned!
its just silly, he was also saying introducing a R18 would not help these situations because the law says if a game is considered to have high impact violence its not suitable for sale even under a R18 rating.
its just silly though, the reality of the being should not be deciding whether the game gets a MA rating or if the game gets banned.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 1:22:55 AM
Reply

so AUs not the only one with a f*cked up ratings system?
still, ours is the most f*cked up.
dont think you can get any more f*cked up then saying GOW3 is ok for a 10 year old to play, but MK9 is not!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 2:45:59 AM

15... not 10. Curiously, most of the retailers I've been to enforce the ratings.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 9:20:56 AM

not if the parents buy it for you.
saw a older guy buy GOW3 for his what i assume little brother when i went to go pick up KZ3 the other day.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 10:39:37 AM

If the parents buy their kid a bloody game that's on the parents. They are grown folks after all who can and SHOULD be allowed to make those decisions on their own without the Nanny State telling them otherwise.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Wednesday, March 09, 2011 @ 7:30:01 AM

of course they should, but that does not remove the responsibility from the ratings board to give the game a appropriate rating.
if this deserves a PG rating then so does heavy rain, and that most certainly does not!
what worries me is allot of parents see the wii as a kids console no adult games release on it, so how much you want to bet at least half the people playing this will be under the age of 15?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

A2K78
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 3:02:21 PM
Reply

"It only takes heat from anti-gaming activists and that's it."

anti-gaming force are saying it? Look to me like you're wrong..

http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/249387.html

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2008/03/former-esrb-rat

beyond those I can conjure up many more instances of individuals(both independent and connected with the industry) who also have been critical of the ESRB.

Also if you believe ESRB isn't flawed, then explain to me why games my collection(Aero Elite, MotoGP4) despite having E rating, was given a "violence" discriptors when the games have zero instances of violent acts, sexual content or swearing.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 3:28:52 PM

You don't even bother to read, do you? Either that, or you practice selective reading, often practiced by those with massive superiority complexes; whose worlds would collapse if they were proven wrong.

The first article consists of a tiny study that proves absolutely nothing, besides the fact that some content goes unlabeled or unheeded at times. Nowhere does it contest the actual rating of a game. For instance, they're not saying GTA (one of the game's involved in the study) is mis-rated...why would they; it's appropriately rated "M."

The second article is based on a former ESRB employee who is likely "former" because he or she was fired, especially based on the ESRB's statement that said employee issued ""numerous misleading statements, factual inaccuracies, and misrepresentations." And in fact, the person in question isn't even saying the ratings applied to games are inaccurate; his complaints mostly stemmed from how they're rated...with absolutely no evidence to prove the ratings are inaccurate. Or maybe that's why you liked it, because you have no evidence, either.

Pretty soon, I'll just get rid of you for causing WAY too many problems in thinking you're the only human being who's right. It's all the worse because you never ARE.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Did Destiny live up to your expectations?
Yes it did and then some!
Not quite but it's still great.
No, it's only okay.
Not at all; it's a huge disappointment.

Previous Poll Results