How useful is the AO rating?

LibrarianThorne

All Nude Cyber (Mac, PC) - Strong Sexual Content
All Nude Glamour (Mac, PC) - Strong Sexual Content
All Nude Nikki (Mac, PC) - Strong Sexual Content
Body Language (DVD) - Strong Sexual Content
Critical Point (PC) - Strong Sexual Content, Violence
Crystal Fantasy (Mac, PC) - Strong Sexual Content
Cyber Photographer (Mac, PC) - Strong Sexual Content
Fahrenheit: Indigo Prophecy Director's Cut (PC) - Blood, Nudity, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Drugs and Alcohol, Violence
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (PC, PlayStation 2, Xbox) - Originally received an M rating; however, the rating was changed to AO (with the "Nudity" descriptor added) several months after its release due to the Hot Coffee mod. Afterward a newer version (labeled "Second Edition") was released on all three systems. These versions had the content removed and are now rated M.
The Joy of Sex (CD-i) - Strong Sexual Content
Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude Uncut and Uncensored (PC) - Mature Humor, Nudity, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Alcohol
Lula 3D (PC) - Blood, Nudity, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Violence
Peak Entertainment Casinos (PC) - Gambling
Playboy Screensaver: The Women Of Playboy (Mac) - Mature Sexual Themes
Playboy the Mansion: Private Party (PC) - Nudity, Strong Sexual Content
The Punisher (PC, PlayStation 2, Xbox) - This game was edited during production in order to receive a "Mature" certificate.
Riana Rouge (Mac, PC) - Realistic Blood and Gore, Strong Sexual Themes
Singles: Flirt Up Your Life (PC) - Nudity, Strong Sexual Content
Snow Drop (PC) - Strong Sexual Content
Thrill Kill (PlayStation) (Cancelled) - Animated Blood and Gore, Animated Violence
Tokimeki Check in! (PC) - Strong Sexual Content
Water Closet: The Forbidden Chamber (PC) - Strong Sexual Content
WET - The Sexy Empire (PC) - Strong Sexual Content
X-Change (PC) - Strong Sexual Content

The above is a list of all 25 titles that, according to Wikipedia, have ever recieved an AO rating from the ESRB. Now, while Strong Sexual Content/Nudity is obviously a key link here there's still some suprising entries, such as Peak Entertainment Casinos recieving an AO just for gambling.

Given that big box retailers like Wal-Mart and Target refuse to carry AO games as well as game store chains like GameCrazy and Gamestop, I find that AO as a rating is relatively worthless. Even more damning is that none of the big 3 console manufacturers will publish an AO game or allow it to release on their systems. Combined, these limiting factors are essentially a death knell for any game that recieves an AO. Technically one could still purchase AO-rated PC games online, but I feel that this strikes at a deeper issue within the game industry as a whole.

Look at films that use violence and sex to send a message or speak on a topic. Films like A Clockwork Orange and Full Metal Jacket challenge the audience's perception and even state of mind through use of extreme violence and, in some cases, equating violence to a sort of sexual drive. Now, while I don't doubt that a movie like Clockwork Orange would never see release today, it still stands as a testament to the maturation of the film industry. With limiters like AO in place, my question is does the ESRB and this M and under standard limit the growth and maturation of the video game industry?

Improvolone

I find it reeeeally difficult to compare to very different forms of media and the experiences.

However, AO games sound AOK to me.

The ESRB has and is doing alot in order to keep gaming safe. Not to protect gamers from games, but to protect games from non-gamers.

LewieP

It kind of baffles me how stores will refuse to sell AO games in the USA. I can't at all relate to that, in the UK the highest rating that a game can get is an 18, and I have a bunch of them (some of which are in my mind no more deserving of an 18 than a bunch of games that receive 15 ratings, or even no age restriction)

I definately have more opinion in this matter, but it's going to take me some time to get them into words, I shall post more in this thread later.

stigweard

The ESRB ratings always remind me of the Southpark movie. You can have all the violence you want so long as you don't swear or have boobies.

Daedalus

The Peak Entertainment Casinos thing isn't a game, it's the software running on video slot machines in actual casinos and such. PEC submitted it to the ESRB trying to get an AO rating, to show the lawmakers and such that they were against underaged gambling.

Wonder_Hippie

Water Closet: The Forbidden Chamber (PC) - Strong Sexual Content

Bwahahahahaha.

Oh God.

-SPI-

The whole idea of having this taboo throw-away rating is bullshit. It's not a real rating, it's a "Go crawl up in a corner somewhere and die so we don't have to think about you" rating, game developers shouldn't be in fear of having a ratings board killing the commercial potential of their games by giving it the "black spot" or whatever if it has some risque content (hi hot coffee!). Not that I can talk, my country (Australia, which has had more than it's fair share of controversial ratings decisions) doesn't even have an adult rating, but then again the difference between AO, refused classification and banned is very slim.

Of course if digital distribution becomes more prevelant and becomes a viable substitute for brick and mortar stores this argument could become less of an issue.

Daedalus

-SPI- wrote: »

Of course if digital distribution becomes more prevelant and becomes a viable substitute for brick and mortar stores this argument could become less of an issue.

Not really, because console makers won't license a game that carries an AO rating, and the PC games market is somewhat slim.

-SPI-

Well, potentially.

I'm still not entirely convinced that digital distribution will become mainstream for consoles, simply because then the brick and mortars would turn around and go "fuck you" and take the consoles off the shelves.

Wonder_Hippie

Or, you know, just ramp up the price of consoles to ridiculous amounts.

Daedalus

-SPI- wrote: »

Well, potentially.

I'm still not entirely convinced that digital distribution will become mainstream for consoles, simply because then the brick and mortars would turn around and go "fuck you" and take the consoles off the shelves.

I don't think that's ever likely to happen, but if game size keeps going up and the US stays in the fucking toilet with our development of broadband, it's never going to come to that anyway, is it? I mean, I pay for a good cable hookup, and I'd pay even more for fiber if it was available, but I'm not exactly mainstream. My GF's parents have the slowest DSL connection available. It's no dial-up, but I still can't imagine downloading a 6-gigabyte game over it in anything less than a weekend.

DaveTheWave

Well, considering 99.9% of the time, content which attracts an AO rating is usually put into a game for shock appeal due to the absense of any sort of engaging game mechanics, I have no problem with it. Adult content isn't what makes games as an art form *good*, it's control, mechanics, gameplay etc. As soon as the rating system stops a game like Torment from coming out, it doesn't really matter. If something like Torment, which contains some incredibly dark and adult themes, can pass with an M15+ rating (in Australia), then there's nothing to worry about IMO.

Novus

Personally I think the rating does serve a purpose but it really should apply strictly to porn. That's what "adult" usually means in any other context and calling something AO for violence is misleading. To my understanding though Manhunt 2 originally had a level in an S&M club so the AO rating may well have been justified. Anyway Bo Anderson, president of the Entertainment Merchants Association made a very good point about retailer support which can be found at Game Politics http://gamepolitics.com/2007/08/28/hal-halpin-game-industry-officials-weigh-in-on-the-dreaded-ao-rating/

Retailers are doing exactly what you would want them to do with respect to exercising individual choice… It’s as important in my view that retailers and individuals have the right… to not carry a product as it is for them to be free to carry it

I have to say I agree with that; like it or not Wal-Mart should have every right in the world to decide they don't want that kind of material in their stores.

LewieP

I just want to point out that Wall Mart and any business (in theory) will only act on what is most profitable to them. Obviously they currently beleive that the fallout from stocking AO games would be more detrimental to revenue (in the short and long term) than the increase in revenue from stocking AO games. It is a textbook example of Friedmanism in action, basically, the people within an economy determine the moral stance of the businesses in it by voting with their wallets.

I have a couple of problems with the rating system as it stands now.

1. I dislike that a public agency (in my case PEGI) determines what software I, as an adult responsible for all my own actions, am able to have access to. There is no way they can prevent me from seeing violent or sexual material, I am only a google search away from kiddy porn and snuff movies, and it is my responsibility (imo) to censor myself from things like this, and if I were to go on a killing spree after playing GTA it would be entirely my responsibility.

I personally feel that software should not be censored by any public agency (which is the current situation we have) but their job should be to accurately describe the nature of the content a game contains. That way consumers (be it adults purchasing software for themselves, adults purchasing software for children, or children buying software themselves.

2. I also think that discrepancies between cultures are a bit of an issue right now. Where in the USA sexual content is a massive issue compared to violence, in the UK violence is much more of an issue compared to sexual content, and Germany is very anti violence. Language is also different with different countries, especially when different translations are involved.

The problem this causes are that a developer has to make the choice of changing the nature of a game for different releases (like the german bioshock is different to the "international version) which is at extra cost to the developer (which is negative for everyone involved in the games industry) or develop games with less freedom, like removing violence which would be culturally acceptable in one country just because it is unacceptable in another.


Hell, these ideas arent fully though out, maybe I am thinking about things too much, feel free to poke holes in my ideas with the goal of furthuring debate.

Rook

LewieP wrote: »

1. I dislike that a public agency (in my case PEGI) determines what software I, as an adult responsible for all my own actions, am able to have access to. There is no way they can prevent me from seeing violent or sexual material, I am only a google search away from kiddy porn and snuff movies, and it is my responsibility (imo) to censor myself from things like this, and if I were to go on a killing spree after playing GTA it would be entirely my responsibility.

I personally feel that software should not be censored by any public agency (which is the current situation we have) but their job should be to accurately describe the nature of the content a game contains. That way consumers (be it adults purchasing software for themselves, adults purchasing software for children, or children buying software themselves.

I wasn't aware that PEGI was anything more than a guideline.

2. I also think that discrepancies between cultures are a bit of an issue right now. Where in the USA sexual content is a massive issue compared to violence, in the UK violence is much more of an issue compared to sexual content, and Germany is very anti violence. Language is also different with different countries, especially when different translations are involved.

The problem this causes are that a developer has to make the choice of changing the nature of a game for different releases (like the german bioshock is different to the "international version) which is at extra cost to the developer (which is negative for everyone involved in the games industry) or develop games with less freedom, like removing violence which would be culturally acceptable in one country just because it is unacceptable in another.

I don't see why having cultural sensitivity is a bad thing. Even vaguely.

theprice

So, my understanding is that an AO game won't be released on a console and won't be carried in most brick and mortar stores. Honestly, that doesn't bother me that much. The point of an AO rating is to make it as difficult as possible for kids to get the game and keeping it out of stores and off consoles sounds like a good way to do that.

You can talk about films like Clockwork Orange, but films like this are not exactly blockbusters and they're made by people who are more interested in the art than in how much money the film brings in. If anyone with this mentality wanted to make an AO rated game that could only be ordered through the mail and could only be played on a PC, they wouldn't hesitate. And honestly, it wouldn't be any harder for you to get a copy of such a game than it would be to get some artistic foriegn film that's hard to find in brick and mortar stores simply because there isn't much market for it. The only people who can't easilly get a hold of an AO game are kids and that's as it should be.

The reality is that most games are not designed to be art, they are designed to be products for mass consumption. And if you want the masses to buy from you, you need to make something they like and also avoid doing anything to piss them off. That's why you can't go into your McDonalds and order a McVeal. I don't see anyone all bent out of shape over that. It's just business. Art is a different animal than bunsiness because art doesn't care if anyone likes it or not and it's still art even if it doesn't sell a single copy. There aren't that many people in the videogame industry who think like that (there aren't that many in the film industry either), and that's why there aren't many AO games that aren't porn.

ultrapeanut

So, my understanding is that an AO game won't be released on a console and won't be carried in most brick and mortar stores. Honestly, that doesn't bother me that much. The point of an AO rating is to make it as difficult as possible for kids to get the game and keeping it out of stores and off consoles sounds like a good way to do that.

The AO rating, much like NC-17, is fundamentally broken. The point of a rating should never be to say, "Your game is smut, so you're being punished."

JihadJesus

I don't think the AO rating itself is broken, but the console makers' and retail distributors' reactions sure are. Usually an AO rated game is pretty deserving of such a moniker- it should, indeed, only be played by adults. The problem is that the distribution channels don't react to AO as 'adults only' but rather 'unsuitable for human consumption'.

stigweard

I don't understand why people think A Clockwork Orange wouldn't have been made today. We have far worse movies making it to the theater all the time. Films depicting far more graphic fighting, torture, rape, dismemberment, etc are made and released with R ratings (a few NC-17s before the crackdown a few years back by the MPAA). And the Clockwork Orange was one of the top grossing movies (7th) of 1971. If that isn't blockbuster, I don't know what is.

edit: Wrong list, not top grossing, but top viewed in Australia - don't know how I missed that.

theprice

ultrapeanut wrote: »

So, my understanding is that an AO game won't be released on a console and won't be carried in most brick and mortar stores. Honestly, that doesn't bother me that much. The point of an AO rating is to make it as difficult as possible for kids to get the game and keeping it out of stores and off consoles sounds like a good way to do that.

The AO rating, much like NC-17, is fundamentally broken. The point of a rating should never be to say, "Your game is smut, so you're being punished."

The rating isn't saying that. The rating is saying that the game is only for adults. How businesses choose to react to a rating that correctly indicates that the game is not intended for children is their perogative. I just don't see the problem. Does anyone really think that a store should be forced to carry a product it doesn't want to carry? Because if a product just for adults should be labeled as such, and I think it should, and if a business can't be forced to sell a product that it feels will hurt its image, then the AO rating as it stands is as good a solution as any.

And on Clockwork Orange being a high grossing movie, I didn't know that. Alright then, barring that as an example, most really artistic films with potentially objectionable content don't make tons of money. Or if they do, it's because they develop a cult following and grow out of obscurity, just as a quality AO title released just for the PC could if it had enough merit.

Dusda

The AO rating is a de-facto ban on any game it gets stamped on. Period.

Gnome-Interruptus

What is the next rating down from AO? I mean, I cant pick up pornography from Best Buy, but I can certainly pick up an R rated movie. Perhaps they need something a level down so they can come across as saying, this is not for children, but is also not porn.

Edit: Essentialy to retailers AO equates to XXX, so we need something that will equate to R so that games can be edgy without being put on the other side of the line.

Arcibi

Gnome-Interruptus wrote: »

What is the next rating down from AO? I mean, I cant pick up pornography from Best Buy, but I can certainly pick up an R rated movie. Perhaps they need something a level down so they can come across as saying, this is not for children, but is also not porn.

Edit: Essentialy to retailers AO equates to XXX, so we need something that will equate to R so that games can be edgy without being put on the other side of the line.

:?:

Improvolone

Dusda wrote: »

The AO rating is a de-facto ban on any game it gets stamped on. Period.

It's not the ESRB that "bans" the game, they give it the rating and publishers and providers pretty much unanimously ban it.
I much prefer the currect rating system rather than say, government intervention.
This isn't censorship, it's the industry protecting it's own ass while it can.

korodullin

Arcibi wrote: »

Gnome-Interruptus wrote: »

What is the next rating down from AO? I mean, I cant pick up pornography from Best Buy, but I can certainly pick up an R rated movie. Perhaps they need something a level down so they can come across as saying, this is not for children, but is also not porn.

Edit: Essentialy to retailers AO equates to XXX, so we need something that will equate to R so that games can be edgy without being put on the other side of the line.

:?:

M is equivalent to an R rating in the US.

However, publishers sometimes put a lot of pressure on dev teams to conform to a T rating, which is equivalent to PG-13 for films.

Novus

Improvolone wrote: »

Dusda wrote: »

The AO rating is a de-facto ban on any game it gets stamped on. Period.

It's not the ESRB that "bans" the game, they give it the rating and publishers and providers pretty much unanimously ban it.
I much prefer the currect rating system rather than say, government intervention.
This isn't censorship, it's the industry protecting it's own ass while it can.

Exactly; if you're going to play the freedom card you have to understand that industry (i.e. Sony, Nintendo, Wal-Mart etc...) is just as free not to endorse something. Assuming you have the resources you can create and publish whatever you like (so long as no physical harm is done in the process); just don't assume that established businesses are under any obligation to support you. Censorship is when the Government tells you what you can and cannot publish.

Zek

There's absolutely no law against AO games. There just aren't many retailers at all that are willing to be associated with them, so making one is a shitty business decision and nobody does it. I don't see anything wrong with that. Capitalism at work.

Æthelred

What's the Japanese console companies' logic in banning AO games, but not UK 18-rated games?

Gnome-Interruptus

korodullin wrote: »

Arcibi wrote: »

Gnome-Interruptus wrote: »

What is the next rating down from AO? I mean, I cant pick up pornography from Best Buy, but I can certainly pick up an R rated movie. Perhaps they need something a level down so they can come across as saying, this is not for children, but is also not porn.

Edit: Essentialy to retailers AO equates to XXX, so we need something that will equate to R so that games can be edgy without being put on the other side of the line.

:?:

M is equivalent to an R rating in the US.

However, publishers sometimes put a lot of pressure on dev teams to conform to a T rating, which is equivalent to PG-13 for films.

I'm not so sure on that, I mean for example, Terminator 1 had a sex seen in it on screen, and i'm sure other movies that are rated R had nipples. But with the ESRB nipples or a softcore sex scene would earn it AO when the same material viewed in a movie would be an R.

The jump from M to AO is too great it seems, or else GTA was just bandwagoned into the AO rating when it really deserved to stick with the M rating.

Gnome-Interruptus

Æthelred wrote: »

What's the Japanese console companies' logic in banning AO games, but not UK 18-rated games?

Other than the oxbox and the 360 arent they all Japanese? But I would assume it mostly has to do with them trying to convince parents to purchase their games and software/hardware and trying to distance themselves as much as possible that would put off a parent/guardian. While at the sametime these corporations are trying to sell to the hardcore 25-35 geek crowd. Its an amusing dance they do on the knifes edge.

jmdbcool

Gnome-Interruptus wrote: »

korodullin wrote: »

Arcibi wrote: »

Gnome-Interruptus wrote: »

What is the next rating down from AO? I mean, I cant pick up pornography from Best Buy, but I can certainly pick up an R rated movie. Perhaps they need something a level down so they can come across as saying, this is not for children, but is also not porn.

Edit: Essentialy to retailers AO equates to XXX, so we need something that will equate to R so that games can be edgy without being put on the other side of the line.

m
:?:

M is equivalent to an R rating in the US.

However, publishers sometimes put a lot of pressure on dev teams to conform to a T rating, which is equivalent to PG-13 for films.

I'm not so sure on that, I mean for example, Terminator 1 had a sex seen in it on screen, and i'm sure other movies that are rated R had nipples. But with the ESRB nipples or a softcore sex scene would earn it AO when the same material viewed in a movie would be an R.

The jump from M to AO is too great it seems, or else GTA was just bandwagoned into the AO rating when it really deserved to stick with the M rating.

God of War, major console release, has some boobies, rated M. Just an example.

DarkWarrior

The most common complaint I see with this though is that those who can legally purchase an 18+ or M game are old enough to make that decision themselves. Basing any decision on what kids might see (As it seems was the case in Manhunt 2s rating) is over cautious to the extreme. Yeah kids might get their hands on it. They also get their hands on bad movies, porn, cigarettes and alcohol. I know by the age of 8 I'd seen the first Child's Play but I was more scared by the dog statues in Ghostbusters (I had to hide behind the curtain when they first came to life ), I'd smoked a cigarette and seen girls knickers. I don't kill people though.

Not in gruesome ways anyway. Its only humane. Though admittedly by the same notion, I watched South Park since it first came out in the UK and nothing in there ever particulary shocked me yet apparently a lot of is is regularly censored, stuff I don't find wrong. So i'm most likely desensitised to stuff that maybe I should find morally wrong. Or maybe I shouldn't. It doesn't affect my interactions with other people, I just don't care that much about things that others may feel strongly about.

IShallRiseAgain

You know, looking at this list, it doesn't seem to be too much of problem. Almost all of these just look like stupid pornographic games. The only one that doesn't belong on there is GTA, but that was due to a stupid vendetta against game by politicians like Hillary Clinton.

Zek

IShallRiseAgain wrote: »

You know, looking at this list, it doesn't seem to be too much of problem. Almost all of these just look like stupid pornographic games. The only one that doesn't belong on there is GTA, but that was due to a stupid vendetta against game by politicians like Hillary Clinton.

The reason there are no good AO games is because no major retailers will sell AO games, so they're cut back in development just like Manhunt 2. If there were no sales restrictions you can bet that a lot more high profile games would be rated AO.

DarkWarrior wrote: »

The most common complaint I see with this though is that those who can legally purchase an 18+ or M game are old enough to make that decision themselves. Basing any decision on what kids might see (As it seems was the case in Manhunt 2s rating) is over cautious to the extreme. Yeah kids might get their hands on it. They also get their hands on bad movies, porn, cigarettes and alcohol. I know by the age of 8 I'd seen the first Child's Play but I was more scared by the dog statues in Ghostbusters (I had to hide behind the curtain when they first came to life ), I'd smoked a cigarette and seen girls knickers. I don't kill people though.

It has nothing to do with the children. It's strictly business. The ESRB's job is to rate the games, and they rated Manhunt 2 AO. Separate from them, stores have a policy of not selling AO games, probably because they don't want to deal with backlash from angry parents and protest groups. So the developers bring it down to an M before release because they don't want their game to flop.

Zxerol

The problem, as someone said earlier, is that AO is associated with something obscene or strictly pornographic. While the good lot of the currently rated AO games pretty much are as such and have no other redeeming values whatsoever, there's no reason why they can't. I mean, Requiem for a Dream was tagged with an NC-17 along with likes of Showgirls. Which one was a serious attempt at artistic expression while the other was just trash?

The NC-17 stigma is so bad, that most distributors either cut it down to for a tamer rating or just release unrated (which still kills their business since a lot of theaters won't show unrated films, but still not as bad as a fucking NC-17). The recourse is in the home video market, where, even though big box retailers will refuse to stock an NC-17 rated film, have no problem shelving unrated/uncut versions of the film which probably could fetch that rating. At least this way, the original, intended version of the movie could be seen.

There really isn't such an outlet for video games. The only brick-and-mortar retailer I've ever seen stock AO-level games is Fry's Electronics, but those fools also stock straight, hardcore porn in their DVD aisles, so it's not really surprising. If some hypothetical dev should make a hypothetical game that is strictly adult, but not smutty and has some artistic value to it, well tough cookies. They'll have to turn it down and release it with a tamer rating, while there's no way for them to release their intended vision. (Not saying that a game has to be AO to be "mature" and "artistic" mind-you, but that avenue is strictly off-limits with the current climate, which can be good or bad depending on your perspective.)

Dehumanized

jmdbcool wrote: »

Gnome-Interruptus wrote: »

korodullin wrote: »

Arcibi wrote: »

Gnome-Interruptus wrote: »

What is the next rating down from AO? I mean, I cant pick up pornography from Best Buy, but I can certainly pick up an R rated movie. Perhaps they need something a level down so they can come across as saying, this is not for children, but is also not porn.

Edit: Essentialy to retailers AO equates to XXX, so we need something that will equate to R so that games can be edgy without being put on the other side of the line.

m
:?:

M is equivalent to an R rating in the US.

However, publishers sometimes put a lot of pressure on dev teams to conform to a T rating, which is equivalent to PG-13 for films.

I'm not so sure on that, I mean for example, Terminator 1 had a sex seen in it on screen, and i'm sure other movies that are rated R had nipples. But with the ESRB nipples or a softcore sex scene would earn it AO when the same material viewed in a movie would be an R.

The jump from M to AO is too great it seems, or else GTA was just bandwagoned into the AO rating when it really deserved to stick with the M rating.

God of War, major console release, has some boobies, rated M. Just an example.

Hell, there was a sex minigame easter egg in GoW2. It wasn't graphic, but it kept the M rating nonetheless.

LewieP

Rook wrote: »

LewieP wrote: »

1. I dislike that a public agency (in my case PEGI) determines what software I, as an adult responsible for all my own actions, am able to have access to. There is no way they can prevent me from seeing violent or sexual material, I am only a google search away from kiddy porn and snuff movies, and it is my responsibility (imo) to censor myself from things like this, and if I were to go on a killing spree after playing GTA it would be entirely my responsibility.

I personally feel that software should not be censored by any public agency (which is the current situation we have) but their job should be to accurately describe the nature of the content a game contains. That way consumers (be it adults purchasing software for themselves, adults purchasing software for children, or children buying software themselves.

I wasn't aware that PEGI was anything more than a guideline.

brainfart, I meant BBFC

Rook wrote: »

LewieP wrote: »

2. I also think that discrepancies between cultures are a bit of an issue right now. Where in the USA sexual content is a massive issue compared to violence, in the UK violence is much more of an issue compared to sexual content, and Germany is very anti violence. Language is also different with different countries, especially when different translations are involved.

The problem this causes are that a developer has to make the choice of changing the nature of a game for different releases (like the german bioshock is different to the "international version) which is at extra cost to the developer (which is negative for everyone involved in the games industry) or develop games with less freedom, like removing violence which would be culturally acceptable in one country just because it is unacceptable in another.

I don't see why having cultural sensitivity is a bad thing. Even vaguely.

I think I meant more that "A problem is that developers have difficult compromises to make regarding cultural senstitivity", not "The current system is broken"

Novus

A thought occurs to me; the reason we don't see a lot of AO games is because there really isn't much of a market for pornographic video games. Sure some people wouldn't mind seeing it in games but how often are you tempted to go out of your way to get porn in the form of a game? Porn for the most part serves one basic purpose; a purpose which is inhibited by holding a controller. Basically the demand is not nearly enough to override public stigma; sex sells but as far as profitability goes a bikini is just as effective as full nudity (photorealism may change this).

MegaMan001

I'm not entirely sure if this adds anything to the question of whether or not AO ratings mean anything more than "This is a porno game" - but I wanted to learn more about "All Nude Cyber" on IGN and this is what came up.

LewieP

Sonic Shuffle is indeed deathporn.

MegaMan001

Oddly enough a search for Sonic Shuffle or Donkey Kong Jr. Math does not yield All Nude Cyber as a similar genre game.