Arena Ratings

[Sandy]

Yes, I know this subject has been discussed about previously, but I did a search on this forum and couldn't find a suitable thread that wasn't over half-an-year old, so I decided to create one.

I'm slowly but steadily becoming the official forum whiner, but if I can't whine in this section then I don't know where else to express my concerns.

So, the ratings in the OB Arena forums... I've accepted them by now, but I've also kept an eye on how they are used here, and I must say they are widely ineffective.

In OB Anthology the ratings aren't a problem, because the person who posts his or her work there already knows if it's suitable for everybody or if there is any mature content included.

But I'm baffled by the Adventure Arena and Inn - in case you haven't taken notice, the [M-LVS]-rating is in nearly [I]every single thread[/I] there!

It seems to be a standard that people put into their games - no matter if their game has any mature content or not, and mostly it's the latter.

I'm asking [B]what purpose do the ratings have anymore?[/B] They aren't mere guidelines that will direct the young and the sensitive to lighter games, as [I]there are no lighter games[/I]!

Well, in truth there [I]are[/I] rpgs at the Arena that consist no violence, no swearing and no sexual content, but just take a guess what rating those games have? Yes, [M-LVS]!

The ratings seem to have caused an inflation on the games, as people tend to think that their game needs to have the aforemention rating for it to be successful and "open to all possibilities".

Not to mention that the quality of the games has decreased greatly, when people want to act all "mature" because of the ratings, when in fact they might have little idea what actual "mature" content includes - beyond exposed breasts and bloody guts.

The rating is now overly inforced, people really don't think much about it so they just put the standard to be safe - and that goes against the whole reason the rating system was created in the first place!

I'm very aware of the noble and smart reasons behind the rating system, but I'm very worried to see that it has much more bad effects than good.

Please, Jamesy, Daggy, Dessy, everybody -[I] reconsider [/I]this rating system! I'm not necessarily saying you must throw it to the garbage bin, but it must change because of the reasons mentioned above.

If you aren't convinced, just check the Adventure Arena and especially Adventure Inn, and count how many ratings other than [M-VLS] you see there! Then check some of the recruitment threads and see if the content really matches the rating.

Honestly, I'm not whining just to whine, I'm truly concerned about the Arena! Lately, I haven't seen a single game there I'd want to join, when prior to the rating system there was always at least one...

[Boo]

[size=1]It?s true that the [b]Mature[/b] rating is greatly overused. I don?t think this is because people want to add gore or sexual content. I think it?s because people don?t want the chance to add more gore (accidentally) than the rating allows them to.

About the Role Playing Stories becoming worse? I had the same feeling about a year ago and since then I hardly posted anything there. This is not because of the rating system. It?s because I just looked differently at them and I realized I don?t like most RPStories. Most of the time they lack a deep storyline, background history and lots of other stuff that I like to see in a story.
But apart from that, I still have the idea something changed about them, maybe people force their stories. They are like ?I [I]Have[/I] to make a story?, force an idea and post it. This instead of combining those ideas to create a strong storyline.
Then again, in the past there weren?t many strong storylines either, but they felt more? Spontaneous.

Okay what am I saying right now? Back to the rating system.

The ratings are pretty much useless. I don?t think anyone has ever [I]not[/I] read a RPStory because of it?s [b]Mature[/b] rating.
[i]Edit: Except when it's because they grow sick of all the Mature tags.[/i]
Right now, the rating system seems to be only there so moderators can close threads who don?t have a tag in their title.

Maybe there should be a more clear explanation of how you rate threads. That, or the moderators themselves should check each thread and add ratings to it. Lots of work, but it seems to be necessary if you want to continue on using the rating system.

[So far for my confusing post >>' ][/size]

[Annie]

[size=1]There's no reason to be too concerned with the ratings. They are there because 1) it's required and 2) it helps members decide whether they'd like to be a part of the content within the RPG. Now, I see where you were going with the [M-SLV] tags, and no harsh content. People slap that tag on there for the possibility of adult content. The RPG doesn't necessarily have to use sex or violence for every post to qualify for the [M-SLV] tag. If there's a possibility that the RPG migh contain that usage, then it's best to let members know. Sometimes an RPG doesn't need that sort of usage, then sometimes it will. It's just a scapegoat, or a crutch.

I could make an RPG that might contain sexual content, or very brash/grotesque violence, but not throughout it. I'd still want to put that [M-SV possible] sticker there. I don't want to get into the middle of the RPG and finally have use for that sticker, then offend someone with it, understand? It's a warning for either jumping into the sex, violence, and language straight from the get-go, or later on in the story.

[b]Edit[/b]: [/size]

[quote name='Boo][size=1'] Maybe there should be a more clear explanation of how you rate threads. That, or the moderators themselves should check each thread and add ratings to it. Lots of work, but it seems to be necessary if you want to continue on using the rating system[/size][/quote]

[size=1]That's asking so much time from the moderator in charge. There are several RPGs that get created within a day to few days time, it would be a tough job to go through each and every one. Then, deciding what should be rated as "mature" or not...time consumption to the max. I think this was an issue when the rating rule first went into act. It would just be so much of a hassle. [/size]

[Sandy]

But Goddess... The problem is that almost every thread in the Adventure Arena has the [M-SLV]-rating! It completely nullifies the desired effect of the rating system, making it useless and unnecessary!

The rating system isn't "required" for anything, it's just a matter of preference. And as I pointed in my starting post, it really seems to cause more harm than benefit, now that I've watched how it works in practice for quite a while.

I also agree with Boo, it really [I]seems[/I] that the ratings are there only so that the Arena mods have something to do - even though this is a pretty mean thing to say and it's not really true. But it sure [I]looks[/I] that way!

The system really needs at least revising, although I honestly think we did pretty good without it in the past.

[Dragon Warrior]

The reason it's used is to make it so people looking through the boards can avoid content they wish not to see. Let's say something is rated Mature and, God smite me for saying it, it actually contains mature content (OMG). They see the Mature rating and then know they don't want to look at it. But of course, now that everyone uses the Mature rating, [i]that's[/i] what renders it useless and makes it so people who don't want a mature RPG to feel neglected and unsafe.

It's such a pity to see so many wasted storylines through to a Mature setting.

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]There is nothing wrong with the rating system itself. Thats like saying knives are bad because you can stab people with them. The rating system is fine - it's people's 'abuse' of it that is causing the problem here. And the solution is really quite simple. Let it be known that if your RPG will mainly have no LVS, but that some posts [b]may[/b] have elements of that in there. And the person who creates a post which exceeds the thread's own rating simply puts in a rating at the top of their post.

Simple. Easy. Stress free.[/size]

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]Interesting, most interesting.

The last time this particular subject came up I agreed with Sage's position, while RPGs may not contain any reference to language, gore or sexuality, or even require an M rating, people seem to just stick them on as an "[I]in the event of...[/I]" scenario. This time around, I still hold that position, it's not necessary for every RPG to have an M-VSL rating just because something might occur, in my mind that's poor planning on the creator's side.

The system itself is fine, though I think there should be an added rating somewhere between PG and M, a midpoint for RPGs that might have content above the PG rating but below the requirement for an M rating. The problem itself lies with the RPG creators who simply slap on the M-VSL rating because it's the safest bet, and because it basically gives people free-rein to post any kind of content they like. In my own mind the creator of the RPG should have a good idea of what the content for Square segment of it [the RPG] should be like.

The rating system is fine, it's those who want a more mature Pokémon RPG and slap on an M-VSL rating to cover it that need to wake up. Heck I'd even settle for them using M-V, M-L or M-VL ratings, but I hate seeing all three together when only one may require the M rating. [/SIZE]

[Desbreko]

[color=#4B0082]Like Baron said, it's not the ratings system itself that's the problem. The ratings are doing exactly what they were meant to do: Warn people that threads may contain things which they don't wish to read. The problem lies in people not having a firm idea of what they want their RPGs to be like, so they slap a [M-LSV] rating on them "just in case."

But the thing is, there doesn't seem to be any feasible way of correcting that problem. Yes, moderators could read every single post in every single thread and update the thread ratings as necessary, but that would require far more time than the staff has available. Removing the ratings altogether would put us back to square one, with people not being able to tell what kind of content is in an RPG, which is no better than the way things are now. Believe me, I've also thought a lot about this and I haven't been able to think of a solution.

So sure, if someone can come up with a better way of doing things, it'll be taken into consideration. But that hasn't happened yet, so I'm not really sure what you expect us to do. :huh:[/color]

[James]

[QUOTE=Desbreko][color=#4B0082]Like Baron said, it's not the ratings system itself that's the problem. The ratings are doing exactly what they were meant to do: Warn people that threads may contain things which they don't wish to read. The problem lies in people not having a firm idea of what they want their RPGs to be like, so they slap a [M-LSV] rating on them "just in case."

[/color][/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Bingo. The actual ratings are not broken - it's the way people apply them.

All we can do is try to make the specifics of the ratings more visible or understandable. I'm not sure how we can do that, because people will still try to buffer themselves by upping the rating "just in case". Unfortunately that's not what the ratings are really for - they are there to provide a general idea of the content of the RPG. A Pokemon RPG would never need M or PG really, unless it were a radically different spin on the concept. So there is no need to include those ratings "just in case".

However, RPGs can go in unexpected directions. And this may lead people to up the ratings on their own. Unfortunately that's just a reality - short of having Moderators go through and re-apply ratings everywhere, I don't know what we can do to really change it. Moderators are busy removing spam and keeping things tidy, asking them to read every post and to make qualitative determinations about ratings constantly, is simply asking too much.[/font]

[Sara]

[QUOTE=Baron Samedi][size=1] And the solution is really quite simple. Let it be known that if your RPG will mainly have no LVS, but that some posts [b]may[/b] have elements of that in there. [b]And the person who creates a post which exceeds the thread's own rating simply puts in a rating at the top of their post.[/b]

Simple. Easy. Stress free.[/size][/QUOTE]
[color=#6699cc]That was the approach I took for 55Fiction last winter. I don't remember how it ended up panning out, but I think it worked fairly well.

So yeah, there is a solution, it's simply a matter of bringing it to the attention of the happy masses.[/color]

[DeadSeraphim]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]Mods can change titles, nay? So why don't people just set the rating as something smaller to begin with (PG, G) and if it ever gets too gory/sexual/vulgar they could PM a mod to change the rating. That way assessing the rating of the thread would be in the participants hands (probably more specificially, the creators) and save the mods a lot more work.

Of course, people have to have the sense to ask to change the rating and whatnot, but it's ust a concept.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Sandy]

I still am not sure if I got my point accross, so let's try it again:

Currently, nearly all threads at the Adventure Arena and Inn contain the [M-LVS] rating.

Now, if the rating is there to guide people away from games they feel are too mature for them, where will they go at this situation? To the few and far between games with [PG] or [E] ratings, even though the game's theme wouldn't interest them one bit?

There are countless games hidden behind the [M-LVS]-rating that should have a lower one, but the aforementioned people aren't going to find these, thus they have no way to participate in roleplaying asides creating their own games.

I know it's the gamemakers' "fault" if they put an excessive rating to their game, but ultimately the problem lies within the system itself. It's flawed, it doesn't work like it's supposed to - to put it bluntly, it wars against its own purpose!

Another problem is that in my opinion the rating system has also lowered the quality of the games in general, as people think they [I]must[/I] have violence/gore/sex in their games in order for it to be cool. The rating system seems to [I]enforce[/I] the mature themes, not restrict them!

Even the rating rules say something like "Carebears the RPG would be rated [E]"! So people seem to think that if they put [E] as their game's rating, it'll be lame and childish.

I'm sorry that I have no other suggestion for solution than to put the system on ice for a while and see how it affects on the quality of the Arena, which to my experience is pretty low at this point. Anyways, thanks for even considering other options, admins!

This isn't a question of life and death to me, but call me a "worried citizen", if you will. I'm sure everybody in the staff and most of us members want the great quality of these boards to maintain its level.

[Annie]

[QUOTE=Sage]
This isn't a question of life and death to me, but call me a "worried citizen", if you will. [/quote]

[size=1][color=#660000]Then let it go. There is nothing to worry about.

Personally, I think the threads are just fine. I look through them, out of curiousity, and they live up to the rating that's tagged on them. I can't speak for every RPG creator, but I know that slapping the larger rating tag on the story isn't about being "cool" or whatever. It's just that the story they wish to carry out happens to be violent, or may become violent. People can choose to write in them, or go after the lighter threads, and that's all based on a personal decision. I'll agree that you don't really see lighter-rated RPGs often, but it's all based on the person's story and preference.

The main problem that the rating system [b]had[/b] was "why do I have to do it in the first place?" I had a hard time gripping onto the reason, but now, I understand it. And agree with the system. Since it's been initiated, the only suggestions/requests/complaints I've seen is "do we have to..and why?" This question has been answered over, and over; the answer is always "yes, you have to" and the reason everyone in this thread has explained.

You say it's useless because it is defeating the purpose of the system? I think not. Everyone is doing what their supposed to. It happens that they like to have more of a violent story. And you can't change what people feel.[/size][/color]

[quote name='Sage']I'm sure everybody in the staff and most of us members want the great quality of these boards to maintain its level.[/quote]

[size=1][color=#660000]The OB has only gotten better over they years. In fact, I've been here a little over 2 years now, and I've seen outstanding progress in quality of both threads, members, and the Boards all around. I don't see how this worn out issue with the rating system would boof the quality of the OB. Clearly, the rest of the forums break the clouds.[/size][/color]

[Gavin]

[quote name='Goddess][size=1][color=#660000]The OB has only gotten better over they years. In fact, I've been here a little over 2 years now, and I've seen outstanding progress in quality of both threads, members, and the Boards all around. I don't see how this worn out issue with the rating system would boof the quality of the OB. Clearly, the rest of the forums break the clouds.[/size'][/color][/quote]

[SIZE=1]I'm just going to nip in here and add to Annie's statement, in probably two weeks or so I'll have been around Otaku[B]boards[/B] for four years and I can't express fully how amazed I am in the rise in quality of the entire boards since back in 2001. If you want to see the difference in four years just take a gander at the RPGs from back in Version 3 and then compare it to what you'll see in the Arena now. I know the Ratings system won't have had a huge impact on the overall level of quality but it does given a person an idea of what to expect in an RPG he/she looks at.

While I said it won't have had a huge impact, in my own view it has allowed people to be much more specific in what their posts detail. Those people involved now know the score of the RPG exactly and can much more easily match the tone set by the creator, which in turn can only increase the fluidity and quality of the RPG. While I accept that lately it seems to have been abused in the "just in case" scenario, I still feel it has had a positive effect overall.[/SIZE]

[Lady Asphyxia]

[quote][i]Originally posted by Gavin:[/i]

[size=1] The system itself is fine, though I think there should be an added rating somewhere between PG and M, a midpoint for RPGs that might have content above the PG rating but below the requirement for an M rating.[/quote]
[font=Arial][size=2]I think you hit a very important point. At present, we have three ratings: [b]E, PG, M[/b]. E is for Everyone, which would suggest the RPG was quite tame in terms of violence etc. M is the high ground; it's heavy on violence, language and sex. Therefore PG is the middle ground. What detracts a lot of people from using it, I think, is that it's one short step up from E. Does this make sense?

For instance, [b]E[/b] would be something like Charles' [b][url="http://otakuboards.com/showthread.php?t=47459&highlight=Charles"]In Memoriam: Ducky[/url][/b] thread. It's [dare I say it?] squeaky clean.

For me the tricky issue is of themes; for example, what if a poem has a very strong suicide theme, but no actual death? Personally, I would rate it [b]PG[/b], because it obviously is not squeaky clean or for everyone.

Which leaves [b]M[/b], containing explicit material/language.

Do you see what I mean? There can be quite a large gap between PG and M, and so it's understandable that people aren't sure the PG rating [which can contain mild violence, some suggestive themes and some adult language] will cover it.

I propose the use of the [/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=2][color=SeaGreen][b]PG-13[/b][/color][/size][/font][font=Arial][size=2] rating as a higher rating than PG, but less than M. It isn't so much the actual meaning behind the rating [I.e. mild violence, suggestive themes, some adult language] which needs to change, but the interpretation of it. It fills this seemingly large gap between PG and M, creating a little bit of distinction for people who worry about their RPG going over the ratings.

PG covers a lot of ground. From a theme to anything-below-explicit. Perhaps breaking it up a little more will help in the ratings.



Also, perhaps we [erm, the mods] can recommend in the Arena threads that unless you are very sure your thread will reach the M rating, to put a PG/PG-13 in place and just ask those who break that limit to rate the top of their post. As Sara said, this worked very effectively in the 55 Fiction thread, and making this recommendation could help.[/size][/font]
[/size]

[Sandy]

Umm, I'm not sure if [PG-13] is an answer to the problem, as to my knowledge there is quite few members here below that age. So I would see it the same as [PG]-rating, they have no symbolic difference at least to me.

The point is that the ratings aren't so much age-oriented as they are feeling-oriented. If one thinks that the [M-VLS]-games are only created and played by people over 18 or even 16, one is very naïve.

I still keep my opinion that people over-use the [M]-tag just to be cool, or just to have a successful game. It's completely understandable, but it really negates the purpose of the tags.

The thing is that the ratings shouldn't be made such a big deal. I'm honestly bothered by the fact that ratings are mandatory.

What if only the [M]-tag was mandatory? Or perhaps only the [LVS]-tags were mandatory, meaning that [I]if[/I] your game would include some of the following, you should put one into it. I still can't quite grasp the idea of [E, PG, M]-hierarchy, because obviously the player's age isn't a factor here.

[Lady Asphyxia]

[font=Arial][size=2]The [E, PG, M]-hierarchy, as you call it, has nothing to do with age. E is is for 'everybody', it has nothing that people would want to avoid. PG has some themes/mild violence/suggestive themes/some adult language. M has explicit violence/language/sex scenes.

The ratings have nothing to do with age. It's to do with people not wanting to see certain content. The subratings help by saying exactly what is included; perhaps there's violence but no sex. This helps someone who doesn't mind violence but is opposed to the idea of coming across sex in an RPG.

This is the reason for ratings. It's mandatory for people because it makes it easy for readers to tell exactly what is involved in the story/RPG. Then they can avoid it by not entering it at all.

Not everything a person wants to avoid is M.

In addition, if something isn't a standard for everybody, it becomes a nuisance to enforce. Try explaning to a new member why [i]their[/i] thread must be rated while no one else's must. New members learn by example; if they don't read the board and forum rules, and they don't see anyone using ratings, how are they going to know they need to be used in cases of M ratings? By keeping it mandatory for people to use ratings in all cases, it creates fairness, and it makes it easy for people to know what they're getting into.

As others have said, the problem isn't the ratings, it's the way people are using them. And frankly, people will be people no matter what we do.

The reason I suggested the PG-13 is that it's quite widely recognised as a 'higher' version of PG, while not necessarily M level. Another name for the level would work just as well, however it would mean introducing it etc., while the PG-13 could generally just slide in there -- lots of people know it.
[/size][/font]

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]Or, perhaps a different addition to the set... [b]E - PG - M - R[/b].

R for Restricted ~_^[/size]

[James]

[QUOTE=Lady Asphyxia][font=Arial][size=2]
The ratings have nothing to do with age. It's to do with people not wanting to see certain content. The subratings help by saying exactly what is included; perhaps there's violence but no sex. This helps someone who doesn't mind violence but is opposed to the idea of coming across sex in an RPG.


[/size][/font][/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Exactly. I have spoken to several people who are fine with violence and mature storylines, but they don't want sex in the RPG because it may not suit what they are wanting to create.

So, ratings have nothing to do with age. We could not - and would not - restrict people based on that. Ratings are all about a quick summary of what kinds of things the RPG will include. As I mentioned, you may want an RPG with violence but no sex, or you may want one with only language and no sex or violence.

If everyone uses the M rating, they are doing themselves a disservice, because they are failing to accurately summarize the general level of content in their RPG. If I sign-up to an M-rated RPG, I expect something on that level - if I am getting a PG-RPG, then why would I bother? It's very important for RPG creators to think about what their RPGs will contain and to rate them accordingly.

As I mentioned earlier, the problem is not with the ratings or the ratings system. If you read the ratings and their descriptions, you'll find that they cover the entire spectrum pretty much. The core issue is that people are not correctly using ratings in some instances.

So the core question is how people can be advised on how to use the ratings more effectively. The only way this can really be done is by making the meanings of the ratings more prominent. I would like to do this via an actual software-upgrade to OtakuBoards, so that we can hardwire the ratings into the site itself. This way you would not need a ratings thread at all - your actual post editing page would contain ratings and their information.

But I don't know when it will be possible to do that, because Justin is very busy with the new myOtaku site right now. Unfortunately it's a question of having only a certain amount of resources and having to assign them with some priority - OB is usually unlikely to be high up on the list.

In any case, I do welcome suggestions on how this area can be improved. I do not want to remove ratings altogether, but I am happy to see some constructive ideas on how the system can be improved.[/font]

[Sara]

[QUOTE=Sage]I still am not sure if I got my point accross, so let's try it again:

Currently, nearly all threads at the Adventure Arena and Inn contain the [M-LVS] rating.

I know it's the gamemakers' "fault" if they put an excessive rating to their game, but ultimately the problem lies within the system itself. It's flawed, it doesn't work like it's supposed to - to put it bluntly, it wars against its own purpose![/QUOTE][color=#6699cc]Carebears the RPG was awesome, incidently (if short-lived).

I think everyone here sees your point, Sage. They simply do not agree that the system itself is at fault. The suggestions in this thread tend to look for ways to improve the effectiveness of the system, contingent on creator's eventual "honesty" with thread ratings. Does that make sense?

Anyway, I think three levels of ratings, ([b]E, PG, M[/b]) are great. However, perhaps a different [i]name[/i] for the "PG" level would make a difference. I know that, at least for me, it has a childish connotation. Perhaps a [b]T[/b] for Teen (that relies a bit too heavily on the "age" thing we are looking at, maybe?) or another letter that would make it seem like more of a middle ground than a small step up.

Because really, how [i]far[/i] a step up we are looking at is largely based on the subratings (or whatever they're called). You certainly could have a PG/T/What-have-you RPG rated for LSV (which is probably what many of the current threads are. I haven't looked into them, but I don't see many people on these boards writing explicit sex scenes. I hope. :p)

Also, as mentioned several times by several people, the "just in case" scenario is a bit heavily used. I think the best way to combat this, though, is simply for people "in the know" to set example by making more honest thread ratings.

Perhaps (unless such is already the case) the Thread Ratings sticky could link to shining examples of RPGs that fall into each category. I think it's a given that many people would not take the time to read them, but I think most earnest RPG creators would at least get a feel for the examples, given the chance. Right now, I agree with Sage: there is an assumption than in order to be taken seriously, one must have an M rating. If people are fully aware that such a rating isn't necessary, I think the other ratings might get some more use.

Not that there's something wrong with people using the rating if their thread warrants it, but it does seems like many people are stretching or cheapening their stories by relying on a high rating to interest people.[/color]

[Sandy]

Okay, I [I]think[/I] I have a good suggestion to this problem now...

Perhaps the fact that people overuse [M-VLS]-tags is based on the letter [M] for Mature!

Everybody wants to have a "mature" rpg, as opposed to childish, right? And Parental Guidance? Who would want parent's guidance in their rpg (to put it simply and overly exaggerated)?!

So what if the [PG] and [M]-tags would be replaced with something less symbolic and age-oriented, and more practical?

I suggest this:

Rating [B][E][/B] for a game that suits everybody despite age and sensitivity.

Rating [B][Mild V/L/S][/B] for mild language, sexual themes and/or violence.

Rating [B][Heavy V/L/S][/B] for excessive language, sexual themes, gore and/or violence.

Sure, you'd have to type a few letters more in this case, but would that be a problem? In my opinion this way the ratings would be more clear and useful, and people would be more couraged to put a "lighter" rating for their games without the fear of sounding childish.

I know that the [M] and [PG]-ratings are more familiar in the English speaking countries, but frankly they have too much side-value in them besides the suitability.

[Desbreko]

[color=#4B0082]That might help, but I don't think a simple name change for the ratings will clear things up entirely. And I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't do much of anything.

The reason being, I don't think it's so much an issue of people wanting their RPG to look "mature," as that they want it to look like it has the themes and content that goes along with the M rating. As long as large amounts of language, sex, and violence are deemed "cool" by people, they're going to keep using the ratings in the same manner they are now, regardless of the name.

Right now, the only thing I can think of that would help the problem is for people to start creating more accurately rated RPGs. Especially if more lower rated RPGs could be made successful and popular, maybe more people would see that an RPG doesn't need an [M-LSV] rating to attract people. Lead by example and all that, you know?[/color]

[Shy]

[size=1]I agree with Des. My rating system is perfect, and everyone else just needs to figure out how to rate their threads accurately. Also, I'm very handsome.

-Shy[/size]

[Gavin]

[quote name='Lady Asphyxia][font=Arial][size=2]I think you hit a very important point. At present, we have three ratings: [b]E, PG, M[/b]. E is for Everyone, which would suggest the RPG was quite tame in terms of violence etc. M is the high ground; it's heavy on violence, language and sex. Therefore PG is the middle ground. What detracts a lot of people from using it, I think, is that it's one short step up from E. Does this make sense?[/font'][/size][/quote]

[SIZE=1]That's exactly what I was getting at, [B]PG[/B] has always seemed like a little baby-step up from [B]E[/B] which makes people so reluctant to use it instead of M. I personally have no problem using it, because most of my RPGs of late haven't required anything higher than a PG but it still seemed as if I was only going a small bit above E rather than halfway between E and M. I think Lore's [B]T/Teen[/B] rating wasn't a bad idea, though I disagree with her about it being too related to age. The Ratings are based on what level of content is in the RPG, not who can get in.

In truth I think the problem is that M seems to be seen as a kind of "[I]anything goes[/I]", which puts it on the opposite end of the spectrum to E and PG. I think perhaps because the Ratings are based on the American/Australian ratings it sows a small bit of confusion in people's mind. In Ireland up until recently we had about five ratings, [B]G/General[/B], [B]PG/Parental Guidance[/B], [B]12s[/B], [B]15s[/B] and finally [B]18s[/B], and I think a similar system would work well on OB. Having say the three years between each rating in terms of content gives people more freedom to control what happens rather without resorting to the "[I]just in case[/I]" scenario.

The ratings as they are now seem to divided at either end of the spectrum, E being the same as General, PG being slightly higher and M being somewhere around 17s if I remember correctly. Adding in another one near M [Teen/15s we?ll call it] and even one between that one and say PG would be a good idea, but as was said in the beginning it's down to the creators themselves to use the rating they see as most prudent.[/SIZE]

[Dragon Warrior]

[QUOTE=Baron Samedi][size=1]There is nothing wrong with the rating system itself. Thats like saying knives are bad because you can stab people with them. The rating system is fine - it's people's 'abuse' of it that is causing the problem here. And the solution is really quite simple. Let it be known that if your RPG will mainly have no LVS, but that some posts [b]may[/b] have elements of that in there. And the person who creates a post which exceeds the thread's own rating simply puts in a rating at the top of their post.

Simple. Easy. Stress free.[/size][/QUOTE]

The system is broken if it doesn't have enough boundaries to stop people from misusing it. If it was made for people to rate their threads correctly, but no one does it, what's the point of having it?