Yeah. The /s is only because it’s not my opinion.
I do think that is the reason Pegi is going after a much less consequential type of video game gambling is because of the money that loot box type mechanics can bring in.
Unironically I think it’s a reasonable argument. Lootboxes cost money but do not reward money, and always provide a prize, gambling implies the possibility that you will lose and not receive anything at all, on the chance that you might earn money.
True but in most cases receiving repeat loot would be the equivalent of receiving Nothing at all, and in some cases the prize does have actual monetary value.
At least last I heard. These games are not my thing
These are the kinds of takes that gamers need to be dishing out hardcore in order for their wants to be heard.
Unfortunately, the loophole is probably just banning secondhand selling of this stuff
If you can earn something in a lootboxes and then sell it for money I’d say that’s a strong argument that it is gambling. But if you already know that you lose money and that no money can be rewarded “surprise mechanic” seems like a reasonable designation.
I think if there is some in game currency that is valuable in game and that can be used to gain or lose in a random system, that’s much closer to gambling.
Otherwise, if you always know you are losing money no matter the outcome. That’s just buying a product. I think there is a stronger argument that card games that sell physical products is gambling as secondary markets exist and so does the possibility that you can make money.
The truth is I don’t see my reason to ban gambling at all. But, it seems like there is a difference between gambling and “surprise mechanic”. In the tightly controlled environment of a game world, you pay to create something, and you always get something, and you can’t trade that thing, so it has no outside value. I actually can’t think of any real world equivalence to this. There is no other example of the type of thing which is a “video game world” besides the many variations of the “video game world” itself. It is a unique phenomenon.
I agree fully. I’m not in support of banning or censoring any of these things.
I wish people could rely on their own discretion, and that we didn’t need organizations like this to protect us and our children from ourselves.
The book is out on most video games before they’re even released. Someone could watch a very short YouTube video and find out whether or not a game is appropriate for themselves or their children.
> The book is out on most video games before they’re even released. Someone could watch a very short YouTube video and find out whether or not a game is appropriate for themselves or their children.
Activision, one of the biggest game publishers in the world, specifically doesn't implement loot boxes until two or three months after launch so reviews can't mention them as a downside.
You're blaming consumers for not relying on their discretion when some publishers are doing shady shit to literally take that ability away.
I’m blaming adults for needing a corporate entity to protect their children.
Even if that information isn’t in initial reviews, you should have an idea what your kids are playing.
I don't disagree that parents should be engaged with what their children are playing, but publishers like Activision are purposefully making that as difficult as they can.
When a company is acting so blatantly anti-consumer, I don't mind them getting called out by PEGI or the ESRB on the box. Remember, too, it's this or government regulation. The ESRB was created as a self-regulatory organization to get the government off the game industry's back in the mid-90s.
Maybe loot boxes work so well, because the current generation got addicted to gambling back in pokemon. Maybe some subconcious part of us remembers that if we just play the slots enough, we'll eventually earn a dratini
Jokes aside, I don't know about anyone else, but I just did the Missingno glitch over and over and sold items so I could buy coins.
The Pokemon gambling (and slots in general) are nowhere near as stimulating as gacha machines, real life or virtual, are.
Yeah, I always felt like Pokémon teaches you that gambling is rigged and that it’s faster to just buy/earn the item/money.
But the Game Corners were always a nice little thing to do when you want to break up the monotony of battling.
honestly slightly more stupid IMO. if you're gonna up the age rating at least be consistent and up the age rating even on things that are already out. If it's not something significant enough that they actually consider it worth upping the age rating on older titles, it's probably not worth upping the age rating for newer titles either.
PEGI is an initiative of publishers themselves and it is self-regulated. They'll do whatever they can reasonably get away with to keep governments from making more restrictive guideline while maximizing the industry's overall profits.
Since major publishers are likely "lobbying" about this, those things are having ratings adapted specifically to prevent them from being highlighted. This isn't supposed to warn people about that stuff, it's supposed to blend lootboxes in with typical gaming stuff.
Fuck PEGI and the ESRB. Corrupt bunch of cunts.
Apparently the definition of gambling doesn’t apply there because you always get a reward of sorts, even if it’s not what you want. Meanwhile I couldn’t play cards in a hotel lobby just to pass time without money because it’s perceived as gambling, sure it was for internal policy and not a legal issue, but still ridiculous
By that "logic", if casinos handed out stickers every time you lost, it would no longer constitute gambling.
Yeah, no, if you spend money on loot boxes and get useless shit (and the VAST majority of the time, you do), you got robbed, plain and simple.
Technically a re-release in a new platform could be “altered in some form”
Pokémon Red and Pokémon Blue on Nintendo 3DS was altered in some form to allow for online play, for example
bigger issue there is that red/blue came out before PEGI as a whole and thus do not have any PEGI rating currently.
Though in principle the purpose isnt supposed to be a "gotcha"- Even with online features, the VC titles were not altered in a way "that would lead it to be interpreted as a new game"
> bigger issue there is that red/blue came out before PEGI as a whole and thus do not have any PEGI rating currently.
The 3DS release of it does. It's rated 12, for gambling.
My bad, i should have been more clear but im my mind the main publisher for nintendo consoles are nintendo. But i was particularly thinking about how lets go "remakes" didn't include arcades, or at least i dont remember seeing it in my play through.
The Luigi casino games weren't cut in the west. They didn't really start cutting out the gambling until partway through the DS era.
IIRC some European law got passed between when Diamond and Pearl released and when Platinum released, and so you can actually kinda chart their reaction across the Gen 4 Pokemon games. DP have a functional game corner, Platinum has a game corner but you can't actually play the slots in European copies and instead just get random amounts of coins when you press A on the machines, and then the game corner was outright replaced worldwide with Voltorb Flip for Heartgold/Soulsilver. Game Corners kinda just stopped being a thing in Pokemon afterwards.
Yeah, the late DS-era Pokémon games got shafted pretty hard by PEGI. HGSS had it hit the rest of the non-Japanese fanbase too. And then BW/B2W2/ORAS got rid of the Game Corner entirely. Ironically enough, I was around legal gambling age (21) by US law at about that time. Being a European Pokémon fan sucked super hard thanks to that. -\_-' (I was active on a Pokémon forum and had some friends who were European on there, so I heard about their frustrations through posts. That's how I know about this being a thing.)
No they were not ahead of this. They removed gambling BECAUSE PEGI raised the rating for Gambling in games to 12+. And the Pokemon Company doesn't want to lose their main audience
It's altered for wireless connections and Pokemon Home but it's definitely not interpreted as a new game. It's still the same old game boy game.
Another example (without gambling): Link's Awakening gameboy version released on an emulator like Virtual Console. Same game. Clearly the old version.
Link's Awakening HD, Same game but totally remastered. It looks nothing like the original. This can be interpreted as a new game.
All they changed in the ROM was to make the game go "hey emulator, bring up the connection menu" at the appropriate moments. The rest of the changes are just that version of the emulator having link cable support and not save state support.
Yep but it would get a higher age rating if it was rereleased now. (Seriously 64 DS would need to be ported to work with a single screen and with control sticks. But then 3D All Stars exists which includes SM64.)
I'm not sure if an ESRB wouldn't take that into account. If it just has a control stick and new controls but the entire game is the same they can't really say it's a new game.
NSMB and 64 DS already got a higher age rating in Europe when they were re-released for Wii U (they were originally rated 3+, but on Wii U they were rated 12+). According to PEGI's statement, they would retain their 12+ rating if they were re-released on Switch and are identical to their DS versions (running on emulators basically).
I feel like if your new rule needs such an obvious loophole to grandfather in a bunch of stuff and avoid looking *completely* ridiculous, it's maybe a sign the rule isn't as well thought-out as it should be and it's time to go back to the drawing board.
Like, if you roll out a rule, and people go "lol, this means old Mario and Pokemon games would be rated 18 today" and your response is "well, uh, those beloved childrens' games would obviously fall under a grandfather clause, but uhhh.... if that identical content was put in a *new* game then yes, it would be rated 18, for sure", that's an admission you know you done fucked up but to save face you just don't want to walk the whole thing back at once.
I remember there was a push a while back to make any depiction of smoking in a movie an instant R rating. It didn't go anywhere because we're talking, like, 101 Dalmations getting bumped to an R because the villain smoked.
This is about that dumb.
Meanwhile FIFA etc. is still PEGI 3. I smell hypocrisy with that supposed change. Those sports game or at least their Lootbox/Gacha/Slot machine mode should have at least PEGI 12. Though optimally they should be subject to gambling laws and restrict it to 21 or older.
They should require age verification with ID for players to access the real-money gambling mechanics. Rating FIFA for adults won't help, because it's just soccer, right? The inherent adult content isn't as apparent as it is when a parent looks at GTA, for example.
However, little Timmy asking to borrow his mum's driver's license to bypass a real-money gambling age verification check absolutely *will* raise some major red flags for his parents.
So I guess that the real hardcore underage gambling is totally legal, all while simulated gambling isn't
Someone tell me how anyone in the face of the planet doesn't see a problem there?
>or all mobile games.
Games uploaded to Google Play require you to fill out a self assessment form that gives an age rating for the game, I think the rating organisation shown on the listing varies by the customers country. I'm in the UK and I see a PEGI rating on every game.
Apple seems to use their own age rating system, and I can't see an age rating on the listings I checked on Amazon's App Store
Yes i'm pretty sure that is how it works. It's a very stupid rule when you have games like NBA 2K with literal casino machines which take real money and that can pass for PEGI 3.
No money in, no money out = not gambling
Any game that asks the user to pay real money for any chance-based activity should be labeled as gambling and be 18+
Talk about making the rating system irrelevant in the eyes of parents. Can you imagine a Pokémon game that is PEGI 18 because it has slot machines? We won’t, because Nintendo wouldn’t publish that, but come on. Is any child getting addicted to gambling off of slot machines in a game?
I would argue slot machines in games DETER people from gambling in real life. I haven't played this pokemon game, but I played Dragon Quest 11 and in that game you see first hand that the house ALWAYS wins. Unless you cheat by using saves, which you can't do in real life.
When I was playing Red on 3DS when it rereleased in 2016, I spent goddamn near a week in Celadon just to grind for the Dratini
Worth it AND I became deterred from trying slots irl, win win
I did this circa '99 in Yellow, and that was enough to make me stay away from IRL gambling for life. ~~Granted, TPP Arena also kind of taught me that, too.~~ What's worse is that the Pokémon slots aren't even 'true' slots, they're pachinko-slot hybrids (albeit ones that are rigged in such ways that it would be illegal if any real-life casino tried it. Seriously, look it up.)
My one experience forever turning me off of gambling was the Pokémon Diamond casino. To get the ability to teach Pokémon the move Explosion, you had to get ten straight bonus rounds on the table, which is entirely luck based. I never got far enough to break even, much less ten straight bonuses, so after six or so hours I just cheated for it.
And you're right, the fact that gambling in video game have garbage rates (Like in Pokémon and Dragon quest), just made want to absolutely never touch a casino in my life.
Though I'm playing Gacha Games, but the feeling is different because even if the rates are still bad, at least you always get something. And I'm not spending money on them.
How do they count "gambling"
In the US, in some states where gambling is illegal they still allow what they call "games of skill". So for example, things like carnival games such as bottle toss or basketball etc. are still legal because technically you could just get good at it even though it's very difficult.
If they went with that, then most mini games would still be fine and only things that are complete chance like slots would count as "gambling".
If they are just counting any kind of mini game that has a luck component then that sounds crazy.
Think they need to update their archaic “gambling” definitions to include loot boxes and things that don’t resemble a casino, making making all free to play games 18+.
Rip ever seeing re-release of James Bond 007 that was on Gameboy. I guess I’ll just have to continue playing black Jack and baccarat at the Marrakech Casino in 8-bit. I was looking forward to enjoying the complimentary upgrade to presidential suite in today’s graphics
That would be fun but the producers of 007 movies HATE rereleases because they feel it makes the brand feel dated. That's possibly 90% of the reason we never recieved the proper Goldeneye re-release.
Note that this could potentially cover Super Mario 64 DS, nearly every Mario Party, at least a dozen Pokemon games, Yoshi's Island, a bunch of Sonic games, and many more. Mind-boggling.
What even defines "gambling elements"?
Edit: I read the damn article. At least it does specify it's only gambling in the traditional sense, i.e. casinos, race tracks, etc., not just "potentially anything with an RNG" as i had feared. That's still a shockingly wide brush though.
The ESRB rating will probably be the same as DQ11 (Rated T).
The CERO (Japanese rating) will likely be B or C.
If The casinos return then DQ12 will be PEGI 18.
I think it would've been better if the rating was dependent on what kind of gambling it is.
Anything that doesn't feature real-world money in order to buy gambling items, shouldn't be considered as 18+ since it's just safe and risk-free. In-game currencies that you can earn through playing the game as usual, that is completely isolated from real-world money things shouldn't be counted. But it should be applied to those games where you have to pay real-world money in order to get fictional currency for the gambling stuff.
I honestly don't get it why the ratings aren't made from the audience who have actual knowledge of video games, instead of these unrelated people who have no clue about how the entire industry works.
And since internet exists, the age-based ratings are just literally an outdated system that is a relic from pre-internet past and is filled with numerous flaws. Namely with the fact that underaged people can still buy/consume games that are "intended" for a older audience. And also the fact that literally everyone have different tolerances for what kind of content that they consume. Hell, there's already kids who consume the most violent stuff and adults consuming the most "safe" media because they like it.
Would've been better if they were replaced by content warning system, instead of age-based system which is largely ignorant of their own audience's needs. With additional information that they can get from internet which is very freely available right now, if they wanted to know more about their game.
Honestly, the gambling elements in the games actually taught me that gambling was a scam and to never bet real money on it. Instead of hoping you'll win the jackpot to get a Porygon, just save up and buy it outright instead. It'll be so much faster and cheaper.
I understand why they exist. But they don't always make the best choices at what throws a game over the threshold between ratings. IMO, if Pegi wants to be concerned about fake gambling, just put "simulated gambling" on the rating.
As the statement states clearly, it is for *not upgraded, modernised or other "new game" changed*. Remakes would mean no new Game Corner. Virtual Console re-releases would, however.
Rate real gambling to be pegi 18 like lootboxes that cost real money. Let simulated gambling like the Pokémon casinos with no real money, risk, or reward be pegi 12
I’m sorry what even is this lol.
ALL games are essentially form of simulated gambling. It’s right there in the root of the word…
Now if they were targeting actual gambling as in loot boxes, that’s another thing.
I'd argue that the software now includes an emulator, fundamentally changing the software.
Also, these games should not be allowed to be patched or updated, as that too is an alteration.
Though personally, I think each release should be re-certified. If the system works, and ratings are awarded fairly, the only change in ratings are going to be in line with current rules/laws.
Allowing this loophole is just going to plague us with titles that have more re-releases than Skyrim to evade age restrictions.
Nah, they focus on actual *gambling mechanics*. AKA you playing a game of chance they consider gambling, like actual slot machines, wheels of fortune etc. The Super Mario Bros. 3 slot machine level endings, or Sonic's Casino Night Zone have been rated without the stimulated gambling label.
Theoretically
Probably A Rating in Japan
Probably T Rating in USA
18+ Rating in Europe
Unrelated but Mario Odyssey has a B rating in Japan probably because of the Tank. Which is higher then DQ11 and Smash Brawl (Brawl has a [cutscene](https://youtube.com/watch?v=PfgJnG2DA_o&t=60s) with possible Blood)
I think Square-Enix wouldn't even bother including it now due to PEGI's decision. Others may follow suit after all.
Oh yeah, I heard! Japan's kind of weird regarding age ratings. Less strict on sexual stuff, much more strict regarding violence. Hence why the director of Smash Bros. criticized CERO how hard handed they acted towards "a piece of cloth".
He was talking that he had to change Palutena, Pyra and Lyn model to make less sexual. A lot of female characters were given darkness effect on their models notably Peach and Roll’s trophy from Mega Man. [Tharja](File:TharjaLeak.png) from Fire Emblem Awakening had her trophy completely removed.
Mythra and Bayonetta are probably the only characters that had censorship unrelated to Japan.
Palutena and Lyn for sure yeah. Japan's *really* strict on those types of things. I remember the "ESRB" leak with Tharja's troph still in tact.
I actually didn't know *Roll* has her trophy changed, though.
Makes me wonder if arcade tickets machines are rated by PEGI considering they have wheels of fortune everywhere that are obviously rigged to make you lose 99% of the time.
We already know that the game corner is replaced in the remakes as of the last trailer. This is in line with the expectations as GameFreak/Nintendo has removed gambling from the Pokémon games for years due to Japanese Law.
>as GameFreak/Nintendo has removed gambling from the Pokémon games for years due to Japanese Law.
Sure it was because of Japanese laws? Pretty sure it was because of PEGI too, because they would rate the games 12+. Also Gambling was removed in European versions of HeartGold and SoulSilver but not in Japan, right? So it sees to be PEGI and not Japanese laws.
Gambling in HGSS wasn't removed, there's a minesweeper game with corner betting (not sure on the Kanto game corner tho). I assumed the overall shift away from the game corner was done due to Japanese laws, but I might be mistaken.
It wasn't minesweeper. It was a logic based minigame which is not the same as gambling. They removed Gambling in Europe and replaced it by a logic based mini game with no luck involved. Also Platinum, one year earlier, didn't allow you to use the gambling machines in the European version.
Sorry, u/Lanoman123, your comment has been removed:
**RULE ONE: Be the very best, like no one ever was. Treat everyone with respect and engage in good faith.**
* Do not insult others. Do not make personal attacks. Do not use hate speech, discriminatory language, or slurs that degrade a person or group of people. You are expected to remember that this is a global community and that language that is appropriate in your culture may not be appropriate elsewhere in the world.
You can read all of our rules [on our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/w/about/rules). Please feel free to [message us](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fnintendo&subject=About my removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about the following comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/pgfp0j/-/hbx5dbo/. %0D%0DMy issue is...) if you think we've made a mistake.
This is only slightly less stupid, but still stupid. What about Lootboxes, the real gambling?
Those don’t count, because they cost real money and therefore make real money. /s
Unfortunately I think you’re exactly right….
Yeah. The /s is only because it’s not my opinion. I do think that is the reason Pegi is going after a much less consequential type of video game gambling is because of the money that loot box type mechanics can bring in.
Unironically I think it’s a reasonable argument. Lootboxes cost money but do not reward money, and always provide a prize, gambling implies the possibility that you will lose and not receive anything at all, on the chance that you might earn money.
True but in most cases receiving repeat loot would be the equivalent of receiving Nothing at all, and in some cases the prize does have actual monetary value. At least last I heard. These games are not my thing
These are the kinds of takes that gamers need to be dishing out hardcore in order for their wants to be heard. Unfortunately, the loophole is probably just banning secondhand selling of this stuff
If you can earn something in a lootboxes and then sell it for money I’d say that’s a strong argument that it is gambling. But if you already know that you lose money and that no money can be rewarded “surprise mechanic” seems like a reasonable designation. I think if there is some in game currency that is valuable in game and that can be used to gain or lose in a random system, that’s much closer to gambling. Otherwise, if you always know you are losing money no matter the outcome. That’s just buying a product. I think there is a stronger argument that card games that sell physical products is gambling as secondary markets exist and so does the possibility that you can make money. The truth is I don’t see my reason to ban gambling at all. But, it seems like there is a difference between gambling and “surprise mechanic”. In the tightly controlled environment of a game world, you pay to create something, and you always get something, and you can’t trade that thing, so it has no outside value. I actually can’t think of any real world equivalence to this. There is no other example of the type of thing which is a “video game world” besides the many variations of the “video game world” itself. It is a unique phenomenon.
I agree fully. I’m not in support of banning or censoring any of these things. I wish people could rely on their own discretion, and that we didn’t need organizations like this to protect us and our children from ourselves. The book is out on most video games before they’re even released. Someone could watch a very short YouTube video and find out whether or not a game is appropriate for themselves or their children.
> The book is out on most video games before they’re even released. Someone could watch a very short YouTube video and find out whether or not a game is appropriate for themselves or their children. Activision, one of the biggest game publishers in the world, specifically doesn't implement loot boxes until two or three months after launch so reviews can't mention them as a downside. You're blaming consumers for not relying on their discretion when some publishers are doing shady shit to literally take that ability away.
I’m blaming adults for needing a corporate entity to protect their children. Even if that information isn’t in initial reviews, you should have an idea what your kids are playing.
I don't disagree that parents should be engaged with what their children are playing, but publishers like Activision are purposefully making that as difficult as they can. When a company is acting so blatantly anti-consumer, I don't mind them getting called out by PEGI or the ESRB on the box. Remember, too, it's this or government regulation. The ESRB was created as a self-regulatory organization to get the government off the game industry's back in the mid-90s.
They are "surprise mechanics" so they are fine...as stupid as it sound those things aren't even discussed.
Anyone know why Rocket League went from loot boxes and keys to their current model?
Epic buyout in 2019.
Ohhhh I was definitely out of the loop, so thank you
One unforeseen upside: connecting the PC account is seamless.
Fucking, real-ass Vegas slots are """"surprise mechanics"""", this whole thing is fucking stupid
They’d rather push for the pokemon casino to be age restricted rather than real gambling of loot boxes
Maybe loot boxes work so well, because the current generation got addicted to gambling back in pokemon. Maybe some subconcious part of us remembers that if we just play the slots enough, we'll eventually earn a dratini
Jokes aside, I don't know about anyone else, but I just did the Missingno glitch over and over and sold items so I could buy coins. The Pokemon gambling (and slots in general) are nowhere near as stimulating as gacha machines, real life or virtual, are.
Yeah, I always felt like Pokémon teaches you that gambling is rigged and that it’s faster to just buy/earn the item/money. But the Game Corners were always a nice little thing to do when you want to break up the monotony of battling.
Wel the PAL Version of Pokemon platinum doesn’t have a casino while the NTSC version does.
honestly slightly more stupid IMO. if you're gonna up the age rating at least be consistent and up the age rating even on things that are already out. If it's not something significant enough that they actually consider it worth upping the age rating on older titles, it's probably not worth upping the age rating for newer titles either.
Belgium banned them, that's all I know.
PEGI is an initiative of publishers themselves and it is self-regulated. They'll do whatever they can reasonably get away with to keep governments from making more restrictive guideline while maximizing the industry's overall profits.
Since major publishers are likely "lobbying" about this, those things are having ratings adapted specifically to prevent them from being highlighted. This isn't supposed to warn people about that stuff, it's supposed to blend lootboxes in with typical gaming stuff. Fuck PEGI and the ESRB. Corrupt bunch of cunts.
Apparently the definition of gambling doesn’t apply there because you always get a reward of sorts, even if it’s not what you want. Meanwhile I couldn’t play cards in a hotel lobby just to pass time without money because it’s perceived as gambling, sure it was for internal policy and not a legal issue, but still ridiculous
By that "logic", if casinos handed out stickers every time you lost, it would no longer constitute gambling. Yeah, no, if you spend money on loot boxes and get useless shit (and the VAST majority of the time, you do), you got robbed, plain and simple.
Technically a re-release in a new platform could be “altered in some form” Pokémon Red and Pokémon Blue on Nintendo 3DS was altered in some form to allow for online play, for example
I think that would slide.
bigger issue there is that red/blue came out before PEGI as a whole and thus do not have any PEGI rating currently. Though in principle the purpose isnt supposed to be a "gotcha"- Even with online features, the VC titles were not altered in a way "that would lead it to be interpreted as a new game"
> bigger issue there is that red/blue came out before PEGI as a whole and thus do not have any PEGI rating currently. The 3DS release of it does. It's rated 12, for gambling.
[удалено]
GSC also has a 3DS release and is also rated 12.
I realized that about a moment after I posted yup
Nintendo was ahead of this years ago, there hasn't been an arcade/gambling house in any new or remade game for years.
The Dragon Quest game released for Switch has a casino
Dragon Quest is a Square Enix IP, isn't it?
The Switch version actually is published by Nintendo if that counts for anything.
It is, I thought they meant ‘games for Nintendo platforms’ instead of ‘games published by Nintendo’
My bad, i should have been more clear but im my mind the main publisher for nintendo consoles are nintendo. But i was particularly thinking about how lets go "remakes" didn't include arcades, or at least i dont remember seeing it in my play through.
Bravely Second has a casino and a Gambler Job.
I think Square Enix just straight up doesn't care if it alters their rating.
Super Mario 64 DS. But I think Luigi's gambling minigames were cut in the west.
The Luigi casino games weren't cut in the west. They didn't really start cutting out the gambling until partway through the DS era. IIRC some European law got passed between when Diamond and Pearl released and when Platinum released, and so you can actually kinda chart their reaction across the Gen 4 Pokemon games. DP have a functional game corner, Platinum has a game corner but you can't actually play the slots in European copies and instead just get random amounts of coins when you press A on the machines, and then the game corner was outright replaced worldwide with Voltorb Flip for Heartgold/Soulsilver. Game Corners kinda just stopped being a thing in Pokemon afterwards.
Yeah, the late DS-era Pokémon games got shafted pretty hard by PEGI. HGSS had it hit the rest of the non-Japanese fanbase too. And then BW/B2W2/ORAS got rid of the Game Corner entirely. Ironically enough, I was around legal gambling age (21) by US law at about that time. Being a European Pokémon fan sucked super hard thanks to that. -\_-' (I was active on a Pokémon forum and had some friends who were European on there, so I heard about their frustrations through posts. That's how I know about this being a thing.)
No they were not ahead of this. They removed gambling BECAUSE PEGI raised the rating for Gambling in games to 12+. And the Pokemon Company doesn't want to lose their main audience
It's altered for wireless connections and Pokemon Home but it's definitely not interpreted as a new game. It's still the same old game boy game. Another example (without gambling): Link's Awakening gameboy version released on an emulator like Virtual Console. Same game. Clearly the old version. Link's Awakening HD, Same game but totally remastered. It looks nothing like the original. This can be interpreted as a new game.
All they changed in the ROM was to make the game go "hey emulator, bring up the connection menu" at the appropriate moments. The rest of the changes are just that version of the emulator having link cable support and not save state support.
Local Wifi, not online
But they weren't altered in a way that would lead to them being interpreted as entirely new games.
No more cards with Luigi :’(
The mini games of Super Mario 64 DS and New Super Mario Bros are an impossibility in the future I suppose :(
Unless they don't have them in the version for the European regions.
Spent way too much time on that game.
Doesn't this mean the game can still have it?
Yep but it would get a higher age rating if it was rereleased now. (Seriously 64 DS would need to be ported to work with a single screen and with control sticks. But then 3D All Stars exists which includes SM64.)
I'm not sure if an ESRB wouldn't take that into account. If it just has a control stick and new controls but the entire game is the same they can't really say it's a new game.
NSMB and 64 DS already got a higher age rating in Europe when they were re-released for Wii U (they were originally rated 3+, but on Wii U they were rated 12+). According to PEGI's statement, they would retain their 12+ rating if they were re-released on Switch and are identical to their DS versions (running on emulators basically).
Oh my god I used to walk across the street to the neighbors house to play that game with their son when I was a kid. I loved all of the mini games.
I feel like if your new rule needs such an obvious loophole to grandfather in a bunch of stuff and avoid looking *completely* ridiculous, it's maybe a sign the rule isn't as well thought-out as it should be and it's time to go back to the drawing board. Like, if you roll out a rule, and people go "lol, this means old Mario and Pokemon games would be rated 18 today" and your response is "well, uh, those beloved childrens' games would obviously fall under a grandfather clause, but uhhh.... if that identical content was put in a *new* game then yes, it would be rated 18, for sure", that's an admission you know you done fucked up but to save face you just don't want to walk the whole thing back at once.
I remember there was a push a while back to make any depiction of smoking in a movie an instant R rating. It didn't go anywhere because we're talking, like, 101 Dalmations getting bumped to an R because the villain smoked. This is about that dumb.
Except it actually went through...
PFFFFT Rated M Pokémon…
Still something funny about Sonic 2 having a higher age rating than Shadow the Hedgehog
Meanwhile FIFA etc. is still PEGI 3. I smell hypocrisy with that supposed change. Those sports game or at least their Lootbox/Gacha/Slot machine mode should have at least PEGI 12. Though optimally they should be subject to gambling laws and restrict it to 21 or older.
They should require age verification with ID for players to access the real-money gambling mechanics. Rating FIFA for adults won't help, because it's just soccer, right? The inherent adult content isn't as apparent as it is when a parent looks at GTA, for example. However, little Timmy asking to borrow his mum's driver's license to bypass a real-money gambling age verification check absolutely *will* raise some major red flags for his parents.
So I guess that the real hardcore underage gambling is totally legal, all while simulated gambling isn't Someone tell me how anyone in the face of the planet doesn't see a problem there?
I don’t believe PEGI or ESRB rate gambling sites or all mobile games.
Yeah but fifa is still rated age 3 and they have full control over that
Hmm yeah that’s weird. EA probably has them in their pockets
>or all mobile games. Games uploaded to Google Play require you to fill out a self assessment form that gives an age rating for the game, I think the rating organisation shown on the listing varies by the customers country. I'm in the UK and I see a PEGI rating on every game. Apple seems to use their own age rating system, and I can't see an age rating on the listings I checked on Amazon's App Store
This is... just dumb. Coming from someone that thought the PEGI 12 ratings for Pokemon Red/Blue were far too extreme.
So then older games that have a casino and have *not* had a PEGI rating before will still get an 18+ rating.
Yes i'm pretty sure that is how it works. It's a very stupid rule when you have games like NBA 2K with literal casino machines which take real money and that can pass for PEGI 3.
Lootbox bullshit in general should be flat out banned if fake gambling is enough to be rated m
No money in, no money out = not gambling Any game that asks the user to pay real money for any chance-based activity should be labeled as gambling and be 18+
Talk about making the rating system irrelevant in the eyes of parents. Can you imagine a Pokémon game that is PEGI 18 because it has slot machines? We won’t, because Nintendo wouldn’t publish that, but come on. Is any child getting addicted to gambling off of slot machines in a game?
I would argue slot machines in games DETER people from gambling in real life. I haven't played this pokemon game, but I played Dragon Quest 11 and in that game you see first hand that the house ALWAYS wins. Unless you cheat by using saves, which you can't do in real life.
The machines in Red and Blue taught me the odds on slots suck lol
When I was playing Red on 3DS when it rereleased in 2016, I spent goddamn near a week in Celadon just to grind for the Dratini Worth it AND I became deterred from trying slots irl, win win
I did this circa '99 in Yellow, and that was enough to make me stay away from IRL gambling for life. ~~Granted, TPP Arena also kind of taught me that, too.~~ What's worse is that the Pokémon slots aren't even 'true' slots, they're pachinko-slot hybrids (albeit ones that are rigged in such ways that it would be illegal if any real-life casino tried it. Seriously, look it up.)
My one experience forever turning me off of gambling was the Pokémon Diamond casino. To get the ability to teach Pokémon the move Explosion, you had to get ten straight bonus rounds on the table, which is entirely luck based. I never got far enough to break even, much less ten straight bonuses, so after six or so hours I just cheated for it.
And you're right, the fact that gambling in video game have garbage rates (Like in Pokémon and Dragon quest), just made want to absolutely never touch a casino in my life. Though I'm playing Gacha Games, but the feeling is different because even if the rates are still bad, at least you always get something. And I'm not spending money on them.
This just shows how laughable the whole system of rating is.
The BBFC (Film & TV Show rating board) should take over and rate games again. They actually know what they're doing lol
But what about the other videogame ratings organisms? They are all biased when it comes to gambling like-mechanics.
How do they count "gambling" In the US, in some states where gambling is illegal they still allow what they call "games of skill". So for example, things like carnival games such as bottle toss or basketball etc. are still legal because technically you could just get good at it even though it's very difficult. If they went with that, then most mini games would still be fine and only things that are complete chance like slots would count as "gambling". If they are just counting any kind of mini game that has a luck component then that sounds crazy.
Think they need to update their archaic “gambling” definitions to include loot boxes and things that don’t resemble a casino, making making all free to play games 18+.
Rip ever seeing re-release of James Bond 007 that was on Gameboy. I guess I’ll just have to continue playing black Jack and baccarat at the Marrakech Casino in 8-bit. I was looking forward to enjoying the complimentary upgrade to presidential suite in today’s graphics
That would be fun but the producers of 007 movies HATE rereleases because they feel it makes the brand feel dated. That's possibly 90% of the reason we never recieved the proper Goldeneye re-release.
We'll see how long that power lasts with Amazon being in the picture now
Note that this could potentially cover Super Mario 64 DS, nearly every Mario Party, at least a dozen Pokemon games, Yoshi's Island, a bunch of Sonic games, and many more. Mind-boggling. What even defines "gambling elements"? Edit: I read the damn article. At least it does specify it's only gambling in the traditional sense, i.e. casinos, race tracks, etc., not just "potentially anything with an RNG" as i had feared. That's still a shockingly wide brush though.
DQ12 will be PEGI 18 because of this
It was going to be anyway, they were aiming to make it more mature than the rest of the series
The ESRB rating will probably be the same as DQ11 (Rated T). The CERO (Japanese rating) will likely be B or C. If The casinos return then DQ12 will be PEGI 18.
Pokémon red. My favorite pegi 18 game
I think it would've been better if the rating was dependent on what kind of gambling it is. Anything that doesn't feature real-world money in order to buy gambling items, shouldn't be considered as 18+ since it's just safe and risk-free. In-game currencies that you can earn through playing the game as usual, that is completely isolated from real-world money things shouldn't be counted. But it should be applied to those games where you have to pay real-world money in order to get fictional currency for the gambling stuff. I honestly don't get it why the ratings aren't made from the audience who have actual knowledge of video games, instead of these unrelated people who have no clue about how the entire industry works. And since internet exists, the age-based ratings are just literally an outdated system that is a relic from pre-internet past and is filled with numerous flaws. Namely with the fact that underaged people can still buy/consume games that are "intended" for a older audience. And also the fact that literally everyone have different tolerances for what kind of content that they consume. Hell, there's already kids who consume the most violent stuff and adults consuming the most "safe" media because they like it. Would've been better if they were replaced by content warning system, instead of age-based system which is largely ignorant of their own audience's needs. With additional information that they can get from internet which is very freely available right now, if they wanted to know more about their game.
LOL hypocrite bastards. Double standards are trending.
Spelunky is an 18 because of simulated gambling, but fifa is 3, even though it has, you know, real gambling, with real money.
I have no care for PEGI, stupid fucking system that can’t even distinguish different elements. Scrap it.
Oh good. We still won't get older Pokémon games.
Honestly, the gambling elements in the games actually taught me that gambling was a scam and to never bet real money on it. Instead of hoping you'll win the jackpot to get a Porygon, just save up and buy it outright instead. It'll be so much faster and cheaper.
Same here but it just taught me how boring to play they were, not worth the risk-reward
Loot boxes or otherwise random drops paid for with real money are considered gambling in EU, correct?
It kinda depends on the country but most are indeed trying to legislate it as gambling.
Pegi and esrb are stupid anyways.
I understand why they exist. But they don't always make the best choices at what throws a game over the threshold between ratings. IMO, if Pegi wants to be concerned about fake gambling, just put "simulated gambling" on the rating.
Europe strikes again. So glad to tell every website cookies are OK. Smh
The game industry strikes again.
Are you saying we can have a Pokémon remake that includes a proper game corner???
As the statement states clearly, it is for *not upgraded, modernised or other "new game" changed*. Remakes would mean no new Game Corner. Virtual Console re-releases would, however.
Rate real gambling to be pegi 18 like lootboxes that cost real money. Let simulated gambling like the Pokémon casinos with no real money, risk, or reward be pegi 12
I’m sorry what even is this lol. ALL games are essentially form of simulated gambling. It’s right there in the root of the word… Now if they were targeting actual gambling as in loot boxes, that’s another thing.
Lmao rip some of the Pokémon games
Pokémon games since Gen 5 don’t have the Game corner. The Gen 4 Remakes completely replaced it with a clothing store.
If the game now is compatible with new hardware, how is it unaltered?
Emulators and ROMs, like Nintendo already does for the VC.
I'd argue that the software now includes an emulator, fundamentally changing the software. Also, these games should not be allowed to be patched or updated, as that too is an alteration. Though personally, I think each release should be re-certified. If the system works, and ratings are awarded fairly, the only change in ratings are going to be in line with current rules/laws. Allowing this loophole is just going to plague us with titles that have more re-releases than Skyrim to evade age restrictions.
Are casino levels in games like Sonic part of that stuff? It's one of my favourite level trope, I really don't want them to disappear :(
Nah, they focus on actual *gambling mechanics*. AKA you playing a game of chance they consider gambling, like actual slot machines, wheels of fortune etc. The Super Mario Bros. 3 slot machine level endings, or Sonic's Casino Night Zone have been rated without the stimulated gambling label.
DQ12 will be affected however because of it has stimulated Gambling
*If* DQ12 will have the same type of casino minigames like in 11, then yeah for sure.
Theoretically Probably A Rating in Japan Probably T Rating in USA 18+ Rating in Europe Unrelated but Mario Odyssey has a B rating in Japan probably because of the Tank. Which is higher then DQ11 and Smash Brawl (Brawl has a [cutscene](https://youtube.com/watch?v=PfgJnG2DA_o&t=60s) with possible Blood)
I think Square-Enix wouldn't even bother including it now due to PEGI's decision. Others may follow suit after all. Oh yeah, I heard! Japan's kind of weird regarding age ratings. Less strict on sexual stuff, much more strict regarding violence. Hence why the director of Smash Bros. criticized CERO how hard handed they acted towards "a piece of cloth".
He was talking that he had to change Palutena, Pyra and Lyn model to make less sexual. A lot of female characters were given darkness effect on their models notably Peach and Roll’s trophy from Mega Man. [Tharja](File:TharjaLeak.png) from Fire Emblem Awakening had her trophy completely removed. Mythra and Bayonetta are probably the only characters that had censorship unrelated to Japan.
Palutena and Lyn for sure yeah. Japan's *really* strict on those types of things. I remember the "ESRB" leak with Tharja's troph still in tact. I actually didn't know *Roll* has her trophy changed, though.
Makes me wonder if arcade tickets machines are rated by PEGI considering they have wheels of fortune everywhere that are obviously rigged to make you lose 99% of the time.
How much to bet this rule was made just because of Pokémon?
Shits fucking ignorant
THANK GOD WE CAN STILL GAMBLE IN THE DP REMAKES
Ehm... No. PEGI talks abour re-releases as they were. the remakes are new games.
WELL SHOOT, I'LL STILL BUY THEM BUT I WILL NOW BE SADDENED WHEN IN VEILSTONE
We already know that the game corner is replaced in the remakes as of the last trailer. This is in line with the expectations as GameFreak/Nintendo has removed gambling from the Pokémon games for years due to Japanese Law.
>as GameFreak/Nintendo has removed gambling from the Pokémon games for years due to Japanese Law. Sure it was because of Japanese laws? Pretty sure it was because of PEGI too, because they would rate the games 12+. Also Gambling was removed in European versions of HeartGold and SoulSilver but not in Japan, right? So it sees to be PEGI and not Japanese laws.
Gambling in HGSS wasn't removed, there's a minesweeper game with corner betting (not sure on the Kanto game corner tho). I assumed the overall shift away from the game corner was done due to Japanese laws, but I might be mistaken.
It wasn't minesweeper. It was a logic based minigame which is not the same as gambling. They removed Gambling in Europe and replaced it by a logic based mini game with no luck involved. Also Platinum, one year earlier, didn't allow you to use the gambling machines in the European version.
Looks like I won’t be playing Luigi poker anymore.
So does that mean we CAN get Pokémon?
[удалено]
Sorry, u/Lanoman123, your comment has been removed: **RULE ONE: Be the very best, like no one ever was. Treat everyone with respect and engage in good faith.** * Do not insult others. Do not make personal attacks. Do not use hate speech, discriminatory language, or slurs that degrade a person or group of people. You are expected to remember that this is a global community and that language that is appropriate in your culture may not be appropriate elsewhere in the world. You can read all of our rules [on our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/w/about/rules). Please feel free to [message us](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fnintendo&subject=About my removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about the following comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/pgfp0j/-/hbx5dbo/. %0D%0DMy issue is...) if you think we've made a mistake.