Game modability screwed by the ESRB?

Fuzzballx · Post by **Fuzzballx** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 3:50 pm

This has me concerned that games may never be made moddable again....

http://pc.ign.com/articles/650/650683p1.html

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:04 pm

If people can write homosexual themed Star Trek fan-fiction, I have faith mods will survive.

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:39 pm

Read more carefully. As I've been saying, this is only an issue when the game is shipped with the content on the disk but not immediately accessible ala Hot Coffee. It has no effect on, for example, the nude female amazon units made for Civ3, because the developer/publisher didn't ship those in any manner.

Sepiche · Post by **Sepiche** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:45 pm

Zurai wrote:Read more carefully. As I've been saying, this is only an issue when the game is shipped with the content on the disk but not immediately accessible ala Hot Coffee. It has no effect on, for example, the nude female amazon units made for Civ3, because the developer/publisher didn't ship those in any manner.

*cough*

Lastly, the ESRB also addresses third-party modifications (of which Counter-Strike, BF1942: Desert Combat, and GTA: Multi-Theft Auto are a few examples), with specific attention to violent and/or sexual content. The email continues, "ESRB remains concerned about third party modifications that undermine the accuracy of the original rating, and we are exploring ways to maintain the credibility of the rating system with consumers in light of modifications of this nature."

s

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 3:53 pm

Yes, except that they aren't taking any action based on entirely 3rd party mods. Again, READ the article (and the gamasutra article that's linked to in the one above - it has a little more detail). The only action they're taking is against content that is shipped.

ESRB wrote:"Coding around scenes, images, or similar elements that might be pertinent to a rating assignment does not render this content irrelevant from a ratings standpoint. If a publisher wishes to "edit out" pertinent content from a final product, it must remove the content from the disc altogether. If that is not feasible, the pertinent content must be disclosed to the ESRB during the rating process so it can be taken into account in the assignment of a rating."

All they say about 3rd party mods is they want the system to still be applicable to modded games.

Sepiche · Post by **Sepiche** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 4:20 pm

Zurai wrote: Yes, except that they aren't taking any action based on entirely 3rd party mods

Well.. except that the bit I posted clearly contradicts that statement...

ESRB remains concerned about third party modifications that undermine the accuracy of the original rating, and we are exploring ways to maintain the credibility of the rating system with consumers in light of modifications of this nature.

That to me implies that they are looking into ways to deal with mods from a rating standpoint.

I'm not saying I agree that mods will go the way of the dodo... that's fairly rediculous, but you were implying they were not looking into 3rd party mods at all when in fact they are.

s

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:04 pm

I think we're having communications issues.

The email is 95% about the ESRB cracking down hard on publishers and developers shipping objectionable content. They (the ESRB) are taking hard action against those publishers/developers - requiring a full inventory of all their games by january 6th.

None of that ACTUAL ACTION involves 3rd party mods at all. The ONLY thing that the entire email even mentions about mods is that they're trying to find a way to make mods work within the rating scheme. "Exploring ways to maintain the credibility of the system in light of modifications" in no way even remotely resembles "If you don't tell us everything objectionable in all your games by the start of next year we kick your ass" - which is what the article and email are about.

Seriously guys, this isn't anything to get upset or even worried about. The ESRB isn't cracking down on 3rd party mods. They're not even TOUCHING 3rd party mods. Right now and for at least the next 4 months all they're doing is cracking down on people not cleaning up their shipped products to within the rating their game is given.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:08 pm

Sepiche wrote:
ESRB remains concerned about third party modifications that undermine the accuracy of the original rating, and we are exploring ways to maintain the credibility of the rating system with consumers in light of modifications of this nature.
That to me implies that they are looking into ways to deal with mods from a rating standpoint.

It says to me that there will be a disclaimer similar to the one for online games that says 'Rating may not reflect online play' (or something to that effect). People say 'fuck' in online games, via chat or VOIP systems. Games are not held responsible for this, it doesn't affect the rating, and yet the ESRB 'explored ways to maintain the credibility of the rating system' despite it.

Expect to see "Third party modifications may alter game content" or some similar disclaimer in the future.

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:19 pm

Blackhawk wrote:Expect to see "Third party modifications may alter game content" or some similar disclaimer in the future.

That's pretty much what I'm expecting to come of it, yep.

SlapBone · Post by **SlapBone** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:19 am

Blackhawk wrote:
Expect to see "Third party modifications may alter game content" or some similar disclaimer in the future.

"Unapproved third-party modifications to this game could introduce tits, cocks, or fucking scenes that weren't approved by the ESRB"