real.geizterfahr: I think PEGI is a good system. I love that they differ between "violence" and "violence". Metro 2033, for example, is rated 16, because of "
Realistic looking violence" whereas Hitman: Absolution is rated 18, because of "
Extreme violence - Multiple, motiveless killing - Violence towards defenceless people". In Germany (the infamous USK) both games are rated 18, because they contain violence. That's stupid and doesn't help parents to decide what their (older) kids can play. And then there are games like Dead Island (PEGI 18, Extreme violence), which got no rating, because it's too violent to get an rating that says "this is not a game for kids" (=18 =adults) -.-
I don't know much about other systems. Except the australian one, because it's even more broken than the german one *lol*
I know the USK is fucking useless, but to give them credit, they do differentiate between different types of violence. They often differentiate between violence by the player in first-person perspective or third-person perspective, and violence performed by sympathetic NPCs or NPCs to which the player is not intended to sympathise.
It's why Tomb Raider and The Last of Us got passed uncut rated 18, despite all the blood, gore and heavy violence. Most of the worst violence is the result of enemy actions; anything done by the player is usually necessary for survival or self-defense.
The key word in German when it comes to violence is "Selbstzweckhaftigkeit", which essentially means violence for violence's sake. If a game's purpose is specifically to allow the player to conduct acts of violence without sound moral justification (self-defence, defence of others), it is less likely to be smiled upon by the USK. A deeper and more prominent storyline is also usually a good way of getting the USK's blessing.
Where the USK often falls down on its face lies in the excessive focus on the depiction of violent acts - blood, amputations etc. The USK in the past would often refuse a game a rating for having blood but pass a game that allowed the player to commit the same acts bloodlessly, although the two version would allow you to shoot someone in the face in exactly the same context. It's why developers often worked "with scissors in their heads" (as we say); they just eliminated blood from the game as a precautionary measure to avoid future problems, regardless of whether it was necessary or not.
Not to mention that the refusal of such publication rights is not something you'd expect of any civilised country outside of a tinpot dictatorship.
