-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
What rating do you think SwSh is gonna get
- Thread starter Mega Ampharos the Dragon
- Start date
Oh boy, you made me log in to respond.
First, Im very curious to see the demagraphs of whos playing, but if you look at masters divisions for vgc and tcg theres a lot of adults (18+). Ontop of that if you recieved a copy of Red or Blue, even Yellow, when they were currant that would put you at around 30+. Sure theres some outlaying cases of real smart 4 year olds and younger siblings but im confident calling that a minority.
Second, why would you want a teen rating? To feel edgey? Outside of that I cant find a reason to make it teen. Would i like a more mature anime? Yeah totally, thatd be cool.
Lastly, to hit on the "why do you want things you enjoyed as a kid to grow up with you?" Well id like to feel some loyalty back from the companies i and my parents supported for 20 years. Thatd be nice, especially in this era of "get new fans at the expense of established fans" its a weird double edged sword. No i dont want more mature pokemon games, but id also like gamefreak and nintendo to acknowledge my demograph as well, considering my money is just as green. And as stated, im tired of being left by the road for fans who are younger than tattoos that I have. So gimme some post game and a battle tree, ive been at it 20 years i think my attention span is just fine.
First, Im very curious to see the demagraphs of whos playing, but if you look at masters divisions for vgc and tcg theres a lot of adults (18+). Ontop of that if you recieved a copy of Red or Blue, even Yellow, when they were currant that would put you at around 30+. Sure theres some outlaying cases of real smart 4 year olds and younger siblings but im confident calling that a minority.
Second, why would you want a teen rating? To feel edgey? Outside of that I cant find a reason to make it teen. Would i like a more mature anime? Yeah totally, thatd be cool.
Lastly, to hit on the "why do you want things you enjoyed as a kid to grow up with you?" Well id like to feel some loyalty back from the companies i and my parents supported for 20 years. Thatd be nice, especially in this era of "get new fans at the expense of established fans" its a weird double edged sword. No i dont want more mature pokemon games, but id also like gamefreak and nintendo to acknowledge my demograph as well, considering my money is just as green. And as stated, im tired of being left by the road for fans who are younger than tattoos that I have. So gimme some post game and a battle tree, ive been at it 20 years i think my attention span is just fine.
TheWanderingMist
Paladin of the Snow Queen
Ratings aren't enforced by the government here in the US, only the individual sellers. Same goes for movies, actually.
As for what it's going to get, I don't see why it can't be E.
Erron Black
The Outlaw
At least where I live in the states, if a person under 18 wants a game rated M, then they need a parent/guardian there for the purchase.
It's pretty... dumb. When I was around 14/15 I wanted to get the remaster of the first Halo game, and the GameStop employee wouldn't let my Aunt make the purchase because she wasn't my parent or legal guardian. However, for the most part, employees really won't care unless you're clearly young and w/o an adult.
Some parents are pretty strict and won't let their children 12 and younger(sometimes even older) purchase games with a rating T or higher though. So changing the rating of Pokemon to T(again, for seemingly little to no reason) would affect sales for their younger audience.
Satoshi & Touko
Peanuts aren't just a nut.
Okay. yeah, I think it's time I respond again.
Eutus actually pretty much explains the things I truly want. I'm not really asking for Pokemon to start shoehorning in content like language, blood, that kind of stuff. Not per se anyway.
I, ultimately just want Pokemon to create some things, a game or two, and maybe an anime series, that tells us: "Hey. We're aware of how much you OLDER fans actually contribute to our success. And we are so ever thankful for that. So we're doing these games/anime/etc only for you and not for kids or newcomers to the series." I think they full-powered OWE it to us, (and any replies I see that say otherwise will probably enrage me.)
I hope I'm being more clear now with what I want.
Eutus actually pretty much explains the things I truly want. I'm not really asking for Pokemon to start shoehorning in content like language, blood, that kind of stuff. Not per se anyway.
I, ultimately just want Pokemon to create some things, a game or two, and maybe an anime series, that tells us: "Hey. We're aware of how much you OLDER fans actually contribute to our success. And we are so ever thankful for that. So we're doing these games/anime/etc only for you and not for kids or newcomers to the series." I think they full-powered OWE it to us, (and any replies I see that say otherwise will probably enrage me.)
I hope I'm being more clear now with what I want.
BCVM22
Well-Known Member
And if you received a copy of Sun & Moon when they were current that would make you nine years old (if you played Sun/Moon as a six year old). Saying that people who played Generation I when they were current are now old doesn't really say much besides the fact that... time has passed since 1998?
This is valid, but this has absolutely nothing to do with the game's content rating.
This reads like you're somehow being prevented from playing the games because you're older. Is your experience different now than it was in 1998? Absolutely. But you're also twenty years older than you were then. That's going to change any experience. You're not being "left by the road" nor is anyone at fault because these games court younger fans, as they did when they hooked you twenty-some years ago.
Again, wanting more to do in the games is fine, but the second you admit that's the crux of your argument is the second that the discussion slips beyond this particular thread.
This is... well, a lot of words come to mind. Let's go with puzzling. This is puzzling. "I DEMAND that they make something SOLELY for me, that adheres SOLELY to the list of what I want!" Why would they do that? Why are you - or I, or we - special just because we've been around Kanto a few times? Comes off as a really odd and kind of self-centered demand when we spell it out like that.
What makes a longtime fan somehow more valid than a new fan? It's definitely not the years. This isn't a credit system. None of us are special because we played Red or Blue, much as we like to think otherwise. The fandom of a kid who picked up the franchise with Generation VII is just as valid as the fandom of someone who started in Generation I. Accepting that basic tenet is central to being at peace.
The people working at the stores in your area clearly are not doing their job properly.
OshyHikari
c l a r i t y
Funny you say that, as both Europe and Australia bumped up the rating starting in Gen 6. PEGI bumped the rating for Pokemon from 3 to 7, while Australia's equivalent, the government-controlled OFLC, bumped up the rating from G to PG.
In PEGI in gens 1-4 3 was just a recommendation while it was a definitive rating just for gen 5
Xuxuba
Well-Known Member
Not really. It's just part of our culture not to censor things. They couldn't stop these kids from buying it even if they wanted to.
I don't remember my parents ever restricting me from seeing anything when i was a kid. If i ever thought something was too disturbing for my age, i would just not see it even though i could. It is funny how when you prohibit kids from seeing things they are far more likely to have interest on them.
It's not censorship, the ratings are there for parents to make decisions about the type of media they're giving to their children. But if your government doesn't really care about ratings systems, then yeah it's kind of all irrelevant.
Xuxuba
Well-Known Member
Well, if the vendors are actively stopping them from buying, like some people suggested above, then it kind of is a censorship. Whether that is a good or bad censorship that is up to debate.
Now, if the ratings are just a recommendation and they don't actually stop people from buying anything, then i would agree with you.
BCVM22
Well-Known Member
American retailers are supposed to require identification/proof of age to sell software with the highest level of content rating. I’m sure it’s drilled into the heads of retail workers who handle such things, but there’s always one location that elects not to bother and it leads to pearl clutching from people who demand safeguards to in place to ensure a ten year old can’t easily get their hands on an M-rated title, ignoring that such safeguards exist and were themselves ignored.
I don’t think it’s “censorship” and I’m positive it isn’t a bad thing to (attempt to) keep insanely violent, vulgar, and/or gory media out of the hands of young kids.
I don’t think it’s “censorship” and I’m positive it isn’t a bad thing to (attempt to) keep insanely violent, vulgar, and/or gory media out of the hands of young kids.
paipr_christian
grass type fan.
Imagine general confusion if it gets a T rating.
Leonhart
Imagineer
paipr_christian said:
I sometimes wonder if most parents who buy the Pokemon games for their children even pay attention to game ratings. I just get the feeling that most people tend to ignore the ratings and just buy whatever games their kids want just to keep them from throwing temper tantrums, so even if Shield and Sword ended up being rated T for Teen, I imagine that sales wouldn't be affected.
shoz999
Back when Tigers used to smoke.
For me personally, I think it's pretty appropriate if Sword & Shield gets an E10 rating if I believe what tone they are going for and to understand why, you have to understand why I think SM and USUM should've got an E10 rating. The subject matter explored there and the story as a whole was definitely far darker than previous entries but it's still maintains a good amount of lightheartedness that this is still a game for kids, so a T rating does seem a bit far off. I believe the Pokemon series should be up there with your Breath of the Wild's, Super Mario Odyssey's or your Splatoon 2's which also have E10+ ratings. It's strange that SMUSUM does not have an E10+ rating considering that I believe it's at the very least darker than Super Mario Odyssey and to an extant, Splatoon 2 in both subtle and obvious ways. Considering that the ESRB board doesn't seem to really delve deeper in the Pokemon games based on these grounds, I think it's safe to say that Sword & Shield will have a E rating even though it's directed by the same guy who helped created the darkest generation of the Pokemon series and that there's a lot of sinister tones and clues hinted about Sword & Shield from the website, trailers and rumors have been given to us.
Divine Retribution
Conquistador de pan
I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world to see an E10+ Pokemon game, but I also don't think it'll ever happen as that would probably cut out a not insignificant portion of GameFreak's consumer base (even though a lot of parents would let their younger kids play anE10+ game, I imagine there's a solid percentage who wouldn't) and for really no benefit.
No, it's not. Constitutional rights apply differently to minors (kids don't have the right to own a gun, for example). Preventing a minor from purchasing an M-rated game is not censorship by any reasonable metric.
No, it's not. Constitutional rights apply differently to minors (kids don't have the right to own a gun, for example). Preventing a minor from purchasing an M-rated game is not censorship by any reasonable metric.
Xuxuba
Well-Known Member
Censorship is when you block someone from reading, hearing or seeing something. It doesn't matter if it is based on their age or not. By the literal definition, it is censorship.
Your argument doesn't prove it isn't, it just proves there are legal limitations to certain rights. And what do you think censorship is? It is a restriction of the freedom of speech.
Do not mistake me tho. I do not think every limitation is unnecessary. I studied Law, i know that rights aren't absolute and that they sometimes need to be restricted, depending on the situation.