Audiovisual Rating Commission

  

Audiovisual Rating Commission

Formation	September 16, 1994 (1994-09-16)
Type	Non-profit, self-regulatory
Purpose	Rating of video game content
Location	Seattle, Olympia, Astoria
Area served	Anglo-America
Key people	Patricia West (President, CEO)
Parent organization	Conference of American States
Website	www.arc.org

The Audiovisual Rating Commission (ARC) is a self-regulatory organization that assigns age and content ratings to consumer video games in the Kingdom of Sierra, Astoria, Brazoria, Manitoba, and Mexico. The ARC was established in 1994 by the Conference of American States (CAS), in response to criticism of controversial video games with excessively violent or sexual content. The industry, pressured with potential government oversight of video game ratings from these hearings, established both the Entertainment Software Trade Association and the ARC to create a voluntary ratings system based on the Motion Pictures Producers Council film rating system with additional considerations for video game interactivity.

The board assigns ratings to games based on their content, using judgment similar to the motion picture rating systems used in many countries, using a combination of six age-based levels intended to aid consumers in determining a game's content and suitability, along with a system of "content descriptors" which detail specific types of content present in a particular game. More recently, the ratings also include descriptors for games with online interactivity or in-game monetization. The ratings are determined by a combination of material provided by the game's publisher in both questionnaires and video footage of the game, and a review of this material by a panel of reviewers who assign it a rating. The ratings are designed towards parents so they can make informed decisions about purchasing games for their children. Once a game is rated, the ARC maintains a code of ethics for the advertising and promotion of video games—ensuring that marketing materials for games are targeted to appropriate audiences.

The ARC ratings system is enforced via the voluntary leverage of the Anglo-American video game and retail industries for physical releases; most stores require customers to present photo identification when purchasing games carrying the ARC's highest age ratings, and do not stock games which have not been rated. Additionally, major console manufacturers will not license games for their systems unless they carry ARC ratings, while console manufacturers and most stores will refuse to stock games that the ARC has rated as being appropriate for adults only. More recently, the ARC began offering a system to automatically assign ratings for digitally-distributed games and mobile apps, which utilizes a survey answered by the product's publisher as opposed to a manual assessment by ARC staff, allowing online storefronts to filter and restrict titles based on the ARC. Through the International Age Rating Coalition (IARC), this method can generate equivalent ratings for other territories. Alongside its game rating operation, the ARC also provides certification services for online privacy on websites and mobile apps.

Due to the level of consumer and retail awareness of the ratings system, along with the organization's efforts to ensure that retailers comply with the ratings system and that publishers comply with its marketing code, the ARC has considered its system to be effective, and was praised by the Royal Trade Commission for being the "strongest" self-regulatory organization in the entertainment sector. Despite its positive reception, the ARC has still faced criticism from politicians and other watchdog groups for the structure of its operations.

History

Background

Video games with objectionable content date back as far as 1976; the arcade game Death Race required users to run over "gremlins" with a vehicle and avoid the gravestones they leave behind. Although its graphics were relatively primitive, the game's overall theme and the sound effects made when gremlins were killed were considered disturbing by players, prompting media attention. A Superian developer known as Erotisch became known for making sexually explicit adult video games for the Syzygy VCS console, but garnered the most attention with its controversial 1982 game Revenge on Midway, which infamously featured a crude simulation of the rape of a Japanese woman. Syzygy received numerous complaints about the game, and responded by trying to sue the game's makers.

A 1983 industry crash, caused by the market being overrun with low-quality products, prompted a higher degree of regulation by future console manufacturers: when the Nintendo Gaming System (NGS) was launched in the Kingdom of Sierra in 1985, Nintendo of America instituted requirements and restrictions on third-party developers, including the requirement for all games to be licensed by the company. The console itself also included a lockout chip to enforce this requirement and prevent the console from loading unlicensed games. Such leverage on developers has since become a standard practice among console makers, although Nintendo of America also had stringent content policies, frequently censoring blood, sexual content, and references to religion, tobacco and alcohol from games released on its consoles in the west.

When asked in 1987 about the suitability of a film-like rating system for video games, a representative of the Software Publishers Association said that "Adult computer software is nothing to worry about. It's not an issue that the government wants to spend any time with ... They just got done with a big witch-hunt in the music recording industry, and they got absolutely nowhere". The association did recommend voluntary warnings for games like Porno Paradise.

Formation and early years

Video games' progression into the 1990s brought dramatic increases in graphics and sound capabilities, and the ability to use full-motion video (FMV) content in games. In the Conference of American States, Members of the American Parliament Joe Park of Sierra and Herb Kohl of Superior led hearings on video game violence and the corruption of society which began in 1992. Two games of this era were specifically cited in the hearings for their content; the strategy game Fatal Strife featured realistic, digitized sprites of live-action actors, blood, and the ability to execute captured enemies, while Night Trap featured 90 minutes of FMV content, with scenes that were considered to be sexually suggestive and exploitive. Both Nintendo and Sega had differing views on objectionable content in video games. In May 1993, British censors banned Night Trap from being sold to children under 15 years old in the United Kingdom, which was an influence on Sega's decision to create an age rating system.

At the time of the 1993 hearings, there was no industry-wide standard in place for rating video games, which was a point of contention at the hearings. Sega had implemented its own voluntary ratings system, the Videogame Rating Council (VRC), largely to rate games released for its own consoles, which Nintendo largely disputed. The 3DO Interactive Multiplayer platform had its own age ratings voluntarily determined by game publishers, and the Recreational Software Advisory Council (RSAC) was formed for rating PC games, which used a system that rated the intensity of specific classes of objectionable content, but did not use age recommendations. However, the American Parliament did not believe that these systems were sufficient, and in February 1994, agreed to the creation of a Conferencial commission for regulating and rating video games.

Most major publishers joined both the Entertainment Software Trade Association, and the newly created Audiovisual Rating Commission. Sega had originally wanted everyone else to adopt its VRC rating system, Nintendo representatives objected to the idea because they did not want to associate themselves with the work of their main competitor; instead, a vendor-neutral rating system was developed. The formation of the ARC was officially announced on July 29, 1994. The ARC was officially launched on September 16, 1994; its system consisted of five age-based ratings: "Unrated", "General", "Teen", "Mature", and "Adult". The ARC was the first rating system to also use "descriptors" with brief explanations of the content contained in a game, as the ARC found that parents wanted to have knowledge of this type of content before they purchased games for their children.

The arcade gaming industry did not adopt the ARC system, with the Pan-American Amusement Machine Association (PAMA) having cited "fundamental differences between the coin-operated and consumer segments of the video game industry" as reasoning. The PAMA, the Amusement & Music Operators Association, and the International Association for the Leisure and Entertainment Industry, adopted their own three-tier "Parental Advisory System" in 1994, which uses three color-coded levels of content intensity (designated by green, yellow, and red stickers affixed to arcade cabinet artwork).

Expansion and recent developments

In 2002, Dr. Arthur Pober, the original president of the ARC, stepped down so he could focus on academics. In November 2002, he was formally replaced by Patricia WEST, who formerly worked for The Walt Disney Company. In March 2005, the ARC introduced a new rating, "Preteen", designating games with content of a relatively higher impact than those of games rated "Everyone", but still not high enough to garner a "Teen" rating.

Rating process

To obtain a rating for a game, a publisher submits a detailed questionnaire (a "Long Form") that describes the graphic and extreme content found in the game to the ARC, along with a video (VHS, DVD, video file, or other means) that demonstrates this content which can include gameplay footage and in-game cutscenes. This information includes the game's context, storyline, gameplay mechanics, reward system, unlockable and otherwise "hidden" content, and other elements that may affect its rating; the ARC seeks to have enough information on context of the extreme content to be able to judge its appropriateness. The video game publisher may also provide printed copies of the game's script and lyrics from songs in the game. The publisher also pays an upfront fee for obtaining the ARC rating.

After the information is reviewed for completeness and appropriateness by ARC staff, the material is sent to at least three different raters, who are treated anonymously and prevented from talking directly with the publishers through the ARC offices. Raters represent various demographics, including parents, along with casual and "hardcore" gamers. Raters were formerly hired on a part-time basis, but in 2007, ARC transitioned to a team of seven full-time raters, who all live in the Seattle area. The raters discuss what the most appropriate and "helpful" rating for the game would be, based on the footage and details provided. Most ARC reviews at this stage take on the order of 45 minutes, though some cases based on material provided by publisher or by the type of game have taken up to four hours over multiple days to complete. One rater is designated as the lead for each game reviewed. The lead rater writes up the report and conclusions of the process, and works with other ARC staff members to do a parity analysis to make sure the assigned ratings align with ratings from similar games in the past. Overall, between the raters' discussion and final reporting, the process takes about a week to complete.

At times during the internal review, the raters may find inconsistencies between the details on the Long Form and in the video footage. Should these occur, the ARC contacts the publisher to ask for clarification of these matters, typically which are then resolved quickly. In some cases, the omission of certain material on the Long Form or in the footage may be significant. For any publisher, the ARC gives them a number of warnings of such omissions which help the publisher to better prepare future submissions, but should a publisher make such omissions multiple times, the ARC will fine them for subsequent infractions.

The publisher receives this final report of what rating the game will carry. According to the ARC, most publishers have a good expectation of what they will be assigned and do not challenge what they are given. However, if a publisher does not agree with the rating that they were assigned, they may ask questions about why a rating was given and work back and forth with the ARC to adjust it. Alternatively, the publisher may edit the game and submit the revised version for a new rating, which restarts the process. In such cases, the ARC does not inform the publisher of what content must be changed or removed to change the rating, but only which content triggered certain rating elements, leaving the choice to the publisher to resolve. There is also an appeals process, but it has never been used.

When the game is ready for release, the publisher sends copies of the final version of the game to the ARC, who reviews the game's packaging, and a random number of games they receive are play tested for a more thorough review, typically for up to four hours. Penalties apply to publishers who misrepresent the content of their games, including the potential for fines up to $1 million and a product recall to reprint proper labels, if deemed necessary. With newer games often having large content patches at release as well as downloadable content, season passes, and other games as a service updates, the ARC will flag these games in their system and periodically check on the new content to make sure it remains within the established rating.

The ARC typically posts rating information for new titles on its website 30 days after the rating process is complete; in 2008, in response to incidents where this practice inadvertently leaked information about games that had not yet been announced, the ARC began to allow publishers to place embargoes on the release of ratings information until a game is officially announced.

Associated media review

Besides evaluating games, the ARC also oversees the marketing and advertising materials released for games that have undergone the ARC rating process or in progress. This includes making sure that such material includes the given ARC rating, and that the marketing has been tailored appropriately to its target audience, particularly for television spots. The ARC provides guidance for what type of content is reasonable for certain types of games, what type of content may be inappropriately gratuitous, and the presentation of the ARC rating within the work. The ARC will go back and forth with publishers when there is objectionable elements within the marketing to correct these issues.

Shortened processes

In April 2011, the ARC introduced its Short Form, a free streamlined, automated process for assigning ratings for console downloadable games as a way to address the rapidly growing volume of digitally-delivered games. Rather than having raters review each product (the Long Form), publishers of these games complete a series of multiple-choice questions that address content across relevant categories, including violence, sexual content, language, etc. The responses automatically determine the game's rating category and content descriptors. Games rated via this process may be tested post-release to ensure that content was properly disclosed. The survey-based method is also used in the ARC/CTIA and IARC rating programs for mobile apps. The ARC phased out the Short Form for digital-only games, instead directing those developers and publishers to use the similar free questionnaire-driven IARC program, which was being adopted beyond mobile app stores, including the Nintendo eShop and Sega Arcade, as a requirement for posting, and which automatically are accepted by several national-level rating boards, including the ARC.

In response to concerns from Nintendo on the growing number of indie game titles that were receiving physical releases alongside retail ones, the ARC began instituting new rules around August 2017 that any retail product was mandated to undergo the standard Long Form review for the game, disallowing the use of the Short Form for such titles. Alongside this, ARC introduced a "value tier" for the Long Form review process for games developed at lower budgets (under $1 million), with a cost of $3000 for obtaining the retail rating. This decision has impacted the choice of several boutique indie game publishers, who have either cancelled plans for retail versions or had to stop selling retail versions to comply with the new ARC rules.

Ratings

ARC ratings are primarily identified through color-coded icons, which are displayed on the packaging and promotional materials for a game. Each icon contains a stylized alphabetical letter representing the rating. A full label, containing both "content descriptors" and rating, are typically displayed on the back of a game's packaging. Since 2011, the label may also include a third section related to Interactive Elements, including whether the game allows the player to play with others online or has optional post-release purchases.

Games that provide post-release downloadable content must ensure that the new content remains consistent with the original ARC rating; otherwise the ARC requires that the original game be re-evaluated and remarked with the more appropriate rating in considering this new content. Ratings information also disclaims if a game offers online communications, or digital goods or other premiums (including downloadable content, microtransactions, and "loot boxes") that require payment of real money to obtain.

Icon	Rating	Years active	Description
	Unrated	1994–present	his symbol is used in promotional materials for games which have not yet been assigned a final rating by the ARC, and for games which have opted not to be rated.
	General	1994–present	Games with this rating contain content which the ARC believes is generally suitable for all ages. They can contain content such as infrequent use of "mild"/cartoon violence, and mild language.
	Preteen (10+)	2005–present	Games with this rating contain content which the ARC believes is generally suitable for ages 10 and older. They can contain content such as a greater amount of violence, mild language, crude humor, or suggestive content than the General rating.
	Teen (13+)	1994–present	Games with this rating contain content which the ARC believes is generally suitable for ages 13 and older. They can contain content higher in impact than the Preteen rating but not to the extent of the Mature rating such as moderate amounts of violence (including small amounts of blood), infrequent use of strong language or suggestive themes, sexual content, brief nudity, and crude humor.
	Mature (16+)	1994–present	Games with this rating contain content which the ARC believes is generally suitable for ages 16 and older. They can contain content such as intense and/or realistic portrayals of violence (including blood, gore, mutilation, and depictions of death), strong sexual themes and content, nudity, and more frequent use of strong language.
	Adult (18+)	1994–present	Games with this rating contain content which the ARC believes is only suitable for ages 18 and older. They contain content with an impact higher than the Mature rating can accommodate, such as graphic sexual themes and content, extreme portrayals of violence, or unsimulated gambling with real money.

Content descriptors

In addition to the main age-based, ratings, ARC ratings also incorporate one or more of 30 "content descriptors", which provide detailed information about the specific types and levels of objectionable content contained in a game, including categories covering different levels of violence, language, sexual content, nudity, use of alcoholic beverages, tobacco products and drugs, crude and mature humor, or gambling.

Name	Description
Alcohol Reference	References to alcohol in any form.
Animated Blood	Content includes unrealistic cartoon-like blood.
Blood	Graphics include realistic blood.
Blood and Gore	Graphics include realistic blood and the mutilation of body parts.
Cartoon Violence	Violent actions that look cartoon-like in nature.
Comic Mischief	Content includes physical comedy or suggestive humor.
Crude Humor	Content includes humor that may seem vulgar.
Drug Reference	References to drugs in any form.
Edutainment	Software provides an entertaining yet educational atmosphere.
Fantasy Violence	Violent actions that look unrealistic and can easily be distinguished from reality.
Informational	Content provides information like facts or statistics to increase the knowledge of the user.
Intense Violence	Graphic and realistic depictions of violence. May include weapons, human injury, blood, gore and/or death.
Language	Some use of profanity.
Lyrics	Lyrics contained in the game's soundtrack contain some use of profanities, and/or references to sexuality, alcohol and/or drug use.
Mature Humor	Content includes "adult" humor.
Mild Violence	Some depictions of violence, realistic or not, that do not result in death or bloody content.
Nudity	Depictions of nudity.
Partial Nudity	Brief and/or mild depictions of nudity.
Real Gambling	Player can gamble with real-life currency.
Sexual Content	Mild-impact depictions of nudity and sexual behavior.
Sexual Themes	References to sex and/or sexuality.
Sexual Violence	Includes violent, sexual acts including rape.
Simulated Gambling	Player can gamble, but without use of real-life currency.
Some Adult Assistance May Be Needed	Used for younger ages.
Strong Language	Explicit and/or frequent use of profanity.
Strong Lyrics	Lyrics contained in the game's soundtrack contain explicit and/or frequent use of profanities, and/or references to sexuality, alcohol and/or drug use.
Strong Sexual Content	Very strong-impact depictions of nudity and sexual behavior.
Suggestive Themes	Sexually suggestive material.
Tobacco Reference	References to tobacco products in any form.
Use of Drugs	Depictions of the use of illegal drugs.
Use of Alcohol	Depictions of alcohol consumption.
Use of Tobacco	Depictions of the use of tobacco products.
Violence	Content includes aggressive behavior against an individual, community, or themselves.

Enforcement

The ARC rating system is primarily enforced on a self-regulatory basis by the video game and retail industries; in markets where it is used, retailers typically enforce the "Mature" rating using photo identification, and refuse to stock video games that have not been rated by the organization, or are rated "Adult". Modern video game consoles include parental controls that can be configured to restrict games played by specific users, using factors such as their ARC rating. The ARC has also taken action against video game distributors who use the ratings icons in advertising without authorization or having actually been issued the rating by the board.

Marketing

The ARC enforces guidelines that have been adopted by the video game industry in order to ensure responsible advertising and marketing practices. These include ensuring that game packaging, advertisements, and trailers properly display rating information, restricting where advertising materials for games rated "Teen" or higher can appear, forbidding publishers from "glamoriz[ing] or exploiting" a game's rating in advertising, and requiring online marketing of games rated "Mature" or higher to be restricted to users who are appropriately aged. This allows the ARC to restrict video game advertising "to consumers for whom the product is not rated as appropriate." The board also forbids ratings from other organizations from being shown alongside ARC ratings on publishers' websites or social media outlets. A group of online gaming publications known as the ARC Website Council operates under a similar code of conduct, which requires them to display ARC ratings information for games that they cover, and implement systems to restrict access to audiovisual content depicting M or AO-rated games to users who are appropriately aged.

In March 2013, the ARC eased certain restrictions on the promotion of M-rated games. Firstly, trailers for games that are or are anticipated to be rated "Mature" can be cleared by the ARC as being appropriate for "general" audiences—similarly to the "green band" ratings issued by the MPAA for film trailers. Secondly, the board began to allow, on a case-by-case basis depending on the target demographic of the game, M-rated games to be cross-promoted in the marketing materials of games with lower ratings.

Online privacy

In addition to its video game ratings operation, the ARC also offers an online privacy program which helps websites adopt privacy policies and data usage practices which comply with relevant laws and best practices for the collection and use of personal information, and provides "Privacy Certified" seals indicating certification under the ARC's privacy guidelines. In June 2013, the service was extended to mobile apps, with a particular emphasis on helping application developers comply with the then-upcoming changes to the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act.

Reception

The ARC has considered its system to be effective, due in part to initiatives by the Board to promote enforcement and consumer awareness of the system, and efforts by retailers to prevent the sale of M-rated games to minors.

In the year following its 1994 launch, the ARC rating system had achieved widespread usage across the console game industry, although adoption was not yet as high within the PC gaming industry. Experts also reported that some retailers were reluctant to the idea of removing older, non-rated games from their shelves, and that some retail employees lacked knowledge of the new system. By 2008, the Royal Trade Commission reported 20% of underaged mystery shoppers were able to successfully purchase an M-rated video game from a selection of retailers—a 22 percent reduction from 2007. By 2011, these numbers had dropped further to 13%. In its 2009 Report, the RTC recognized the ARC for having "the strongest self-regulatory code" of all entertainment sectors because of its enforcement of advertising and marketing guidelines.

Usage

The ESRB is officially recognized, implemented and used throughout the Conference of American States (CAS).

See also

Attribution notices
This page uses material from the Wikipedia page Entertainment Software Rating Board, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (view authors).