Just wondering... T or M ...

They're trying for T

Ah, ok

It doesn't look like the game will have much in the way of gore or nudity so unless the dialogue is limited to grotesque profanity they'll probably get what they're aiming for. :hehe:

Gibs may be skewed as a bit mature in concept, but that's the only thing I can think of. To have to finish killing a guy to keep him downed, with a bonus to smashing his face in with the butt of your gun, is a bit gory (in concept, if not visually).

According to the Devs, they removed some language to stay in T

In Australia, it gets rated MA (15+ only) if it has guns, and stays there until it's at L4D2 level gore. Then we ban it.

Still, a 15+ rating will keep the 9 year olds away a bit. However, the 9 yr olds it keeps away will probably be the few ones you might actually want playing Brink.

I think a 15 or a 12 rating for the UK then, if they are aiming for a US T that's about right

Rated A for Awesome! :celebration:

Considering how many 9 year olds play Call of Duty, I don't think an ESRB rating of a game has much of a bearing on the audience who actually plays it.

What about the rumored hot coffee scene where if you ask a downed opponent for a drink you got to a cutscene of them humping in an alleyway?

I think that only happens when you interogate someone as an Operator, I mean you do hold onto their cloths afterwords.
That's [censored] stupid...

I don't see why they care about ESRB rating...it's primarily a multiplayer game, and there's always that "ESRB rating does not apply to online play."

So I mean...they should've kept the language/gore/alcohol or drug references and made the interactions just a little bit more gritty. But whatever.

I have a 9yr old friend, and he can occasionally beat me at Tekken 5/6. He's a gamer, and I think he's mature enough to play Brink, COD, Halo and all that without any problems. [Prototype and GTA, maybe not.] But he isn't allowed due to the ratings.

9 year olds mustn't play Call of Duty. Period. You cannot even discuss about them being mature enough, they are still kids on their way to grow into teenage.

Published by Bureau of Justice Statistics(U.S.), as video game sales have increased, overall total violent crime offenses has been literally cut in half. Sales of video games have more than quadrupled from 1995-2008, while the arrest rate for juvenile murders fell 71.9% and the arrest rate for all juvenile violent crimes declined 49.3% in this same period (ProCon.org). If video games are a causality of violent behavior, there would be an epidimic, not falling violence statistics.

Sorry to deviate from the point of the thread, but dont believe everything you hear about video games making kids crazy, but if the child is yours, its your call. I do understand the reasons for getting that T on the box though, because they might lose a customer who tells another customer, etc. Might want to delete all those wars out of the history books in school eh? Near 100million dead from WWII can't be leaving a very positive image if you believe exposure to violence causes violence.

I've played Wolfestein 3D in 92 when I was 7, and nearly every violent game created since. I have no violent tendancdies, nothing more than speeding tickets, but I REALLY WANT TO PLAY BRINK!!!!! Please send me a beta invite. I will <3 you even more. The videos are making me excited. Bravo, Splash Damage, bravo. I've already got my copy on Steam waiting....

Well, the point of ratings to me is customer information. It would be better if advlts could actually research games their kids are playing, but its been proven that it just doesn't happen most of the time. The real problem with the system is more the fact that the ratings are so up to interpretation. There's no law that a child cant play a certain game, just that a parent needs to make the purchase in order to make sure the parent is aware their kid has the game.

One of my favorite statistics that is abused by anti violent games crusaders is the fact that violent crimes and violent video games have a correlation. Which is true. The problem is that correlation does not imply causation. Its true that violent games could be causing the crimes, but a correlation could also mean that people who commit violent crimes have a tendency to like violent video games. Or, a third possibility is that some other factor causes the tendency for both.

If Brink receives a "T" rating I'll be happy due to that indicating wider circulation and therefore more people buying the game.

I wouldn't mind however if Brink was rated "M" though I honestly can't see any reason for it to become a mature game from everything I've seen.

You are truly a scholar Shadowcat. Correlation does not necessarily mean causation, as there are numerous variables that are unaccounted for when developing a simple plot graph. I personally think that it helps release violent tendencies more then creates them.

Let's say there's a kid that makes you incredibly angry. I mean ****** angry, so mad that you want to commit a violent act upon him. I know people who use video games as a stress therapy, to release their violent tendencies onto something that won't really hurt anything, like when I was a kid and hit the wall with my pillow when I was angry, relieving that feeling. Just saying.

It would be kind of weird if this game was "Teen". Since I've seen in recent gameplay videos and noticed the amount of blood shown when your getting hit and stuff makes me more convenced that it will be M. Here is my guess on its rating descriptors:

rated: M

Blood

Intense Violence

Language or Mild Language

I disagree. The blood and violence levels seem to be roughly the same as Uncharted 2, a game which has a T rating, and SD says they removed language specifically to get a T rating.

And that had an interesting multiplayer as well, Brink fits really well in the "T" genre. I can see personally where, initially, this might throw some gamers (subconsciously) off the game. We've been lead to believe that FPS multiplayer (on consoles, the 360 especially) is something that goes hand in hand with blood, gore, big guys, bigger guns, and a multitude of maps. While I realize this is not the standard of the genre I feel that it's enough of an issue to mention, especially with Brink shaping up to be an excellent "T" rated FPS.

Though if it is a sleeper hit, I look forward to seeing each and everyone of you everyday online.

I don't see it as being a sleeper hit. A lot of people I know personally have heard about Brink through Steam (it tops the list if you click on the action genre). And add to that awards like Eurogamer Best of Show, and it's been publicized pretty well. So it'll just be a hit, not a sleeper hit.

I wasn't aware, thank you for that enlightenment. Among my friends they just seem to be happy that the next CoD is out, or Gears 3 is coming, when I mention Brink it's just shrugged off or the initial "Bethesda's doing a shooter?" is soon quelled by talks about another game. If I mention Splash Damage I get nothing in reply. It's a sad world we live in, though there are many game developers out there in my friends defense.

Yea, at E3 and EGE, Brink had a wait line that was more than twice as long as any other game demo, including the popular mainstream games like Black Ops. Granted, people attending a game expo are going to be a bit more educated when it comes to future games than the average gamer, but it shows that quite a lot of people are interested.