to join the CVG community. Not a member yet? Join now!
CVG

BBFC: We're taking legal advice

Your comments on our articles.

Obsers newly-proposed 'traffic-light' symbols bear a striking resemblance to its own

The BBFC has told Edge it is taking legal advice after observing that the newly-proposed 'traffic-light' PEGI symbols bear a striking resemblance to its own.... read more

Moderators : CVG Staff, CVG Moderators

BBFC: We're taking legal advice

Postby crimbo » 30 Oct 2008, 09:37

i don't really see a problem with this system and why does the bbfc take legal action against other people using similar systems :? :? :? :?
User avatar
crimbo 39
 
Posts: 776
Joined: 15 Oct 2008, 16:54
Location: United Kingdom

Postby WHERESMYMONKEY » 30 Oct 2008, 10:02

OHno red circles and numbers. Only the BBfc are allowed that. I'd say that the french board of film classification probably has a better case, or ireland come to think of it.

They best sue every other film classification organistaion in europe because they all look similar.

They just want a slice of the pie. It costs £1000 a time to get something classified by the bbfc and there's a hell of alot of games come out a year.

cha ching.
User avatar
WHERESMYMONKEY 66
 
Posts: 8972
Joined: 09 Oct 2008, 13:59
Location: United Kingdom

Postby robbiej55 » 30 Oct 2008, 10:26

The BBFC really is a waste of space.

I've said it before, but they are far far to lenient on films, letting some really deplorable content get on our screens and totally mis-classifying others (sex and the sity is absolutely not a 15... although personally I think is should have been banned for being s**t).

They always over-censor video games that are far tamer.

And now this!

They've shown that they are useless in setting standards, and so when someone else, who looks like they'll do a better job, comes along and uses a similar system they get their knickers in a twist. It's ridiculous.
User avatar
robbiej55 32
 
Posts: 112
Joined: 04 Jun 2008, 15:51

Postby voodoo341 » 30 Oct 2008, 10:43

robbiej55 wrote:
They've shown that they are useless in setting standards, and so when someone else, who looks like they'll do a better job, comes along and uses a similar system they get their knickers in a twist. It's ridiculous.


I'm 100% sure they don't set the standards, thats Parliments job. They just enforce it in media.
Image
User avatar
voodoo341 75
 
Posts: 7451
Joined: 18 Jul 2007, 08:36
Location: United Kingdom

Postby mongy » 30 Oct 2008, 11:56

The BBFC classify content based on legal ramifications and current public opinion taken via sanple audiences. They are taking action (rightly so) as PEGI is trying to exploit the reputation and recognisability of the BBFC symbols to further their endeavour at becoming the only board to classify games. Oh and for people who think that PEGI should get sole rights, I hope you're all past 18 (and yes I myself am 24 all posters who feel the need to be abusive when they don't understand posts) as PEGI does not classify games at a 15 level, they go to 16+. GAME already treat these as a requirement to purchase and should PEGI usurp the BBFC then so will all.

As for movies, I agree that some things are classified too low, and games get a raw deal. But with games its the interactive nature of the acts that causes this increase in scrutiny.I don't agree with it but thats where it stands.

Final note, PEGI ratings are bullshit, they're often way out and most parents think they pertain to difficulty a la boardgames.
mongy 22
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 19 May 2008, 14:28

Postby _Marty_ » 30 Oct 2008, 12:10

This just adds more weight to the argument that games should be rated using the well known movie ratings system. Really, is it necessary to have multiple standards?
NEO ANARCHIST AND BEST BANG SINCE THE BIG ONE

"RIP my baby kitty - forever in our hearts"
User avatar
_Marty_ 59
 
Posts: 5145
Joined: 09 Jan 2003, 11:48
Location: United Kingdom
Xbox Live: Da Sausageman

Postby Random Hangman » 30 Oct 2008, 12:14

I invented the traffic light*, so I am now going to sue the BBFC... That'll teach 'em!!!




*not strictly true
Random Hangman 57
 
Posts: 835
Joined: 23 Apr 2008, 13:30
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Crow555 » 30 Oct 2008, 12:18

If the Manhunt II episode is anything to go by, it shows us that the BBFC are not fit to rate games. They should just let ELSPA get on with it and use whatever rating markers they want.

I can only assume it's confusing for parents to walk into a game story and see some games with BBFC 15/18 markers on and some with 12/16 "white square" PEGI ones on. It's about time a universal standard (to all games that is) is set and in such a case, the BBFC needs to step aside.
Crow555 64
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: 23 Dec 2004, 15:00
Location: United Kingdom
Xbox Live: Crow555
PSN ID: Crow_555

Postby mongy » 30 Oct 2008, 12:25

Crow555 wrote:If the Manhunt II episode is anything to go by, it shows us that the BBFC are not fit to rate games. They should just let ELSPA get on with it and use whatever rating markers they want.

I can only assume it's confusing for parents to walk into a game story and see some games with BBFC 15/18 markers on and some with 12/16 "white square" PEGI ones on. It's about time a universal standard (to all games that is) is set and in such a case, the BBFC needs to step aside.


The "Manhunt II episode" was in no way a fault of the BBFC, they refused to classify it and rightly so. The problem arose in Rockstar being like a dog with a bone and appealing again and again until it was overturned in court. The BBFC were understandly not happy at this, and it is cases such as this that undermine them. Give them the freedom to do their jobs and they perfrom more than adequately. And its PEGI that are the confusers, BBFC logos are recognised by a large degree of people in the UK. Whether parents choose to follow them is a seperate issue, and one of good/poor parenting respectively.
mongy 22
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 19 May 2008, 14:28

Postby Random Hangman » 30 Oct 2008, 12:42

mongy wrote:The "Manhunt II episode" was in no way a fault of the BBFC, they refused to classify it and rightly so. The problem arose in Rockstar being like a dog with a bone and appealing again and again until it was overturned in court. The BBFC were understandly not happy at this, and it is cases such as this that undermine them. Give them the freedom to do their jobs and they perfrom more than adequately. And its PEGI that are the confusers, BBFC logos are recognised by a large degree of people in the UK. Whether parents choose to follow them is a seperate issue, and one of good/poor parenting respectively.


Although I agree to a certain extent, I don't feel that they perform "more than adequately" when given the freedom to do their job.

The BBFC's history is full of varying degrees of errors, not necessarily in the area of gaming which is quite young when compared to film, but in their cinematic and video history. Films that have been banned or hacked to pieces based not on their suitability for public viewing but on personal opinion of BBFC directors (Straw Dogs, The Exorcist, anything with "blood on breasts", Nun-Chuks (sp?) and the "video nasty" debacle of the early 80's for starters!).
Random Hangman 57
 
Posts: 835
Joined: 23 Apr 2008, 13:30
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Wozzakl » 30 Oct 2008, 12:42

Ha ha, classic!
Wozzakl 54
 
Posts: 744
Joined: 29 May 2002, 13:58
Location: United Kingdom

Postby broadmoormike » 30 Oct 2008, 20:03

Last Christmas while stood in Game I was witness to a small (!)ish) boy picking up a copy of Kayne and Lnych for a 360 or PS2, and racing over to Dad, stood in the que, and thrust £50 worth of duff but violent, foul mouthed game into his hands, demanding to have it. Glancing at the age restriction Dad replis 'All right,'and pays for it. What, when faced with this, is the point of age restrictions on games?
broadmoormike 1
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 30 Oct 2008, 19:49

Postby sonic_uk » 30 Oct 2008, 20:08

FFS. People really will sue over just about anything these days. Criminals sueing victims of crime(for defending themselves or their property), ridiculous payouts from shops because some kid didn't look where they were going and walked into a shelf etc etc. Its time the world woke up and got rid of this compensation culture that has developed in recent years, and then the better off we'll all be.

As for the topic itself the traffic light system looks nothing like the BBFC symbols, and surely more obvious symbols(for the idoits that can't understand the old ones)can only be a good thing?
Own...360(Slim), Ps4, Ps3(SuperSlim), Ps2, Ps1, PsVita, XperiaPlay, Gamecube, Snes, Dreamcast, Megadrive, MegaCd 2, Saturn, Gamegear, PC

Owned...Acorn Electron, Atari 2600, Gameboy, Master System, 32x, GBA SP, Xbox, Psp, 360(Premium), Ps3(BC), Wii(BC)
User avatar
sonic_uk 56
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:32
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Al3xbr0wn » 31 Oct 2008, 02:15

Thats just absolute bull s**t, its not like there sales of movies are going to be affected just because somebody else is using their age rating system....

Just typical c**ts you find these days, will do anything to make a quick bit of money
Al3xbr0wn 27
 
Posts: 45
Joined: 26 Oct 2007, 20:01
Location: United Kingdom

Postby brad.storch » 31 Oct 2008, 03:25

Coloured circles with numbers in them! Oh s**t! I've never once considered the BBFC system a traffic light considering that the PG symbol is a triangle.

Anyway, parents don't read these things
brad.storch 28
 
Posts: 85
Joined: 01 Nov 2007, 19:39

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

The forum teamDelete all forum cookiesAll times are UTC [ DST ]