Kathryn's pointed me to an article on NMK in which BBFC Examiner Jim Cliff explains some of the issues associated with rating an online game. From the post:
Lawyers disagree but many argue that online games are not currently covered by the law that requires some games to be classified by the BBFC. This means that if a company chooses to send their game to the BBFC and receives, say, a PG rating, there is no compulsion to have the game reclassified when the game is patched, even if the patch would potentially introduce stronger elements into the game.
A very good point indeed. Conversations I've had in the past with deep thinkers on these subjects often centre on what would happen if the more conservative elements discover some of the more risqué aspects of what goes on behind the scenes in many of these games.
While the post doesn't offer any specific solutions, it outlines some of the grey areas which may emerge in public debates about online products. It certainly cites areas where they could be vilified.
