This page provides answers to a number of questions that people may ask, or have asked about the rating system.
Please contact us if you have any queries or questions that you'd like added to this page.
Questions Answered Here:
- Who are you?
- What is it?
- Why has it been set up?
- How does it work?
- Why are you not using the same age groups as the ESRB?
- Your ratings have a "Drugs" category — is alcohol included here?
- How Do I Pronounce the Name?
Who are you?
The project was initially set up by Matthew Atkinson (of the AGRIP project) under the name "AAGRS" (Accessible and AudioGame Rating System). However, it has been moved to AGDev so that it can be worked on by a wider range of people.
What is it?
It is a system for rating the content of accessible and audio games. This allows for pre–emptive knowledge of if the game will be suitable for you, or the person you're buying a game for.
The ratings are based on the ones used for the classification of films used in the UK. This is so that they may seem familiar to some of the people who might be making use of them. They are not the same as the film ratings, though, and have no legal connection to the BBFC whatsoever. Read: you must examine this rating system closely to be sure that a classification is what you expect it to be.
Why has it been set up?
The mainstream games (and film) industry has had a rating system for a very long time. The main reason is that we want to provide the accessible and audio gaming communities with similar benefits.
How does it work?
We provide a number of web pages that explain the various ratings that can be applied to games. Developers/Publishers of games may link to the description for the rating that their game falls under.
Please note that we are not a governing body and do not have any legal powers; we are only providing a common framework for rating the content of games. It is up to the developers/publishers of the games concerned to rate them honestly. If you feel that a developer has miss–rated a game, you must contact them directly.
Why are you not using the same age groups as the ESRB?
We feel that the use of these age ranges present some problems. The issue is that the age ranges are not very evenly distributed. In the ESRB system, kids of roughly 13 are grouped with 15 and 16 year–olds. As with films, we feel that a game for 15 year–olds may not necessarily be suitable for the younger teens (Quake is a prime example, being rated 15).
This means that either games unsuitable for the younger members of this group are down–rated to fit into this category (undesirable, seeing as this is what we're trying to discourage) or the older members of the group are made to wait longer before they can play (which seems a little harsh — again something we did not set out to be). This is why the proposed system is more like the BBFC's, which seems to provide a good balance between number of groups and the age ranges that the groups cover.
Your ratings have a "Drugs" category — is alcohol included here?
This category relates to the presentation of illegal drugs and their use in games. Alcohol is not, under most law, classed as an illegal drug and is therefore not directly included in this section of the rating. We would, however, point out that due to the fact that there is an age limit on the consumption of alcoholic beverages, games promoting this activity should be rated for adults only.
How Do I Pronounce the Name?
It's a tough one. We suggest abbreviating it to "AAGRS" and calling it "arg–ers".