安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
Second at these time i think the dev set to put it on, i assume they do not as they just forget or just not see it needed that much
And i think maybe setting it as an automated thing will not be too bad any how, for games that do have it, and maybe also have a few others? i do not think all contrary use ESRB Ratings for there games
http://www.esrb.org/ratings/faq.jsp#2
They're actually not likely to do that for fear of lawsuits.
The ERSB is not a global standard just like the MPAA is not an international standard. Different countries have different taboos and different contextual weight for taboos. A famous example is what counts as 'Underaged' in Japan is different from the US. It's when many games come stateside the characters have their ages bumped up by about 3-5 years.
Most publishers though even if they don't used the ESRB or PEGI rating system will voluntarily point out any potentially offensive material. Because otherwise there would be a nasty repercussion.
2) Each game requires you to pay a few grand to get the certification for each authority
3) Ratings for most countries is voluntary since most rating agencies aren't even government agencies at all but entirely independent authorities
In several countries the law-regulated ratings systems are used as a form of censorship, by requiring a rating by law but then rating something as unclassified. That wouldn't fly here in the USA, and while we have our problems this is one of our strengths. Now de facto commercial censorship occurs, even with Steam, where a store will refuse to carry a product with an Adults Only rating or without a rating, but that's another issue altogether.
Because of this, while obviously people should be easily able to filter by rating or lack thereof (and I have no idea how well Steam does this as is), I have to strongly voice my personal opposition to the idea of requiring posted ratings. Looking it up, it seems the ESRB does scale the fee to rate a game based on the game's budget. That's fair. Still, I think a filtering system does the job just fine, and imposing more limiting rules would be a grave mistake.
Incorrect on that last part there mate. truth be told you as a customer have the right to fyll disclosure from the producer. Just in the same way a customer at a diner has the right to know if any peanuts were handled by the cook. It's why even in games without ERSB ratings there is typically disclosure as to content. Nuditic, violence, Sexual content, etc.
Need to look up what censorship means sometime. A retailer choosing not to sell a product is not censorship, a retailer has the right to sell or not sell an item. Simply put, certain stores don't want to be associated with certain products.
Bigger budget games usually have much more content that requires review. In any case, regardless it is usually in the publisher's best interest to give some disclosure about the content, it helps to avoid law suits.