This week, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer laid out the government’s plans to tackle child safety online, with a social media ban for under-16s being the headline measure. However, this restrictive action doesn’t just apply to socials – gaming will also be impacted. ‘Harmful features’ like livestreaming and chatting to strangers (via text or voice chat) will be blocked. Regardless of your stance on the ban, the ripples will inevitably be felt across the industry.
The extent to which gaming will be impacted is certainly a concern, especially considering how quickly the government is moving. Only three weeks have passed since the closing of the national consultation that underpins all of this, and regulation is expected to go into effect early next year. For Dr. Celia Pontin, Director of Public Policy and Public Affairs at consultancy firm Flux Digital Policy, this rush to act “bears a significant risk of overlooking unintended consequences,” and could have serious knock-ons for developers.
While, ostensibly, videogames with social features have gotten off lighter than social platforms as they won’t receive a blanket ban, firms now face fresh challenges. “To allow children to access multiplayer games, developers are going to have to engineer ways of ensuring that children can (if at all) only access chat functions with people they know, to a standard that will meet whatever requirements the law sets out,” Pontin explains. “This isn’t just about age verification, it’s also about enabling this level of control through the structure of the game or platform.”
As socials and gaming have, to an extent, been conflated by the government, there’s an outstanding concern that it may tar both with the same brush. “Social features in games are primarily there to enable and enhance multiplayer experiences, which is a world away from platforms built around social engagement for the sake of it,” Pontin argues. “The government’s separation of social media platforms and other forms of online contact may alleviate this to a certain extent, but there are still major concerns about whether the full diversity of approaches to in-game communications functions will be recognised when it comes to how ‘stranger contact’ restrictions will work in practice.”
Indeed, the devil is very much in the details, and there’s every chance the government’s need for speed will lead to more than a few legislative potholes. This is a breeding ground for uncertainty among developers, which Pontin stresses is “the threat that it [the plan] poses to innovation – even after regulations and guidance are created.”
As a result of this, Pontin posits developers will be “wary of doing new things with communications functions. It also means that smaller studios will be less likely to incorporate comms features because they might not have the resources to implement age verification. With a relatively large proportion of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the sector, this will have a significant impact on what games might be developed or brought to market in the UK.” Immediately, I’m thinking about the ever-growing library of co-op indie games – Peak, Lethal Company, and R.E.P.O., for example – that could end up having to nix proximity chat should implementing age verification prove too costly. But it isn’t just comms features at risk.
“Beyond communications functions, there have been concerns that regulation of what’s being termed ‘addictive features’ in social media will spill over to videogames in a way that isn’t appropriate for videogames,” Pontin continues. “Restrictions could limit features such as trophies, log-in bonuses, player performance comparisons, and other elements of game design that, in some instances, pre-date modern online functionality by decades. Although social media may employ some similar techniques to increase engagement, this is a markedly different context and purpose, which means that using blanket interventions across both media types wouldn’t be good regulatory design.”
Potential mechanical impacts aside, there is, for Pontin, a much more fundamental fear that videogames will end up ostracized from other forms of media, depending on how policymakers clamp down on kids’ screentime – something new guidance is being published for this fall.
“My biggest concern on a personal level has been the risk that time spent in-game could be used as a blunt metric for harm,” Pontin says, “since it gets right to the heart of what games are for – they are supposed to be fun and engaging, in exactly the same way as a compelling novel, TV series, or film. Their purpose is to be an entertaining pastime that rewards time with enjoyment, and this is what players are looking for when they choose what to play. If we demonize time, we are particularly turning children away from games with complex narratives or open-ended creative potential – a hugely important part of the videogame landscape.”
It’s currently too early to tell just how thorough the UK government is going to be in its separation of social media and gaming, and Pontin says her queries surrounding how it’ll all be put into practice “should largely be answered in due course” as further information becomes available. Looking forward, Pontin finds herself wondering, “‘what questions will I still have in the spring?'”
Once the regulations have come into effect, we will likely be looking at a very different online gaming landscape in the UK, which, for better or worse, will come under its fair share of scrutiny. Pontin explains that “dozens more” countries are “at various stages” of considering their own social media bans, so don’t be surprised if you’re eventually impacted, too. It all sounds incredibly headache-inducing, and if Pontin’s concerns materialize, then the gaming industry will face some painful trade-offs.
#social #media #crackdown #presents #quotthreatquot #gaming #comms #innovation #expert #warns1781787561
