We Dare Retains Its PG Rating

We Dare Retains Its PG Rating

We’ve just spoken to a representative from Ubisoft, who has confirmed that We Dare, the ‘controversial’ game from Ubisoft has retained its PG rating. According to the Classification Board, the “overall impact… does not exceed mild”.

A statement from the Classification Board claimed that this decision was a unanimous one.

A three-member panel of the Classification Review Board (the Review Board) has by unanimous decision determined that the computer game We Dare is classified PG (Parental Guidance) with the consumer advice ‘mild sexual references’.

Material classified PG may contain material which some children find confusing or upsetting, and may require the guidance of parents or guardians. For this reason, PG games are not recommended for viewing or playing by persons under 15 without guidance from parents or guardians. Consumer advice is additional information about the main content of the game which is intended to help consumers decide if they want to view of play this type of material.

It seems as though the trailer released by Ubisoft itself was far more titillating than any content featured in the game itself, which just goes to show that the mainstream media won’t let the facts get in the way of a halfway decent, moral panic stoking yarn.

The statement from the Classification Board confirmed that the game, for the most part, is harmless.

This game contains a series of mini games which provide a single player (or a multiple of players up to four) with a variety of tasks. These mini games, which are randomly available to players based on a choice of ‘moods’, include dance moves and activities, which may require interaction with other players. There are no sexual references in actual game play. Text boxes, which contain miscellaneous facts about gender differences and interactions, randomly appear whilst a mini game is loading. Some of those text boxes contain mild sexual references. The text boxes contain no interactive elements.


  • Mark, is the boxart you’ve embedded in the article the same as the Aus version?

    If so, I’m surprised the pink fluffy handcuffs didn’t trip it into a higher rating, regardless of what’s on the disk.

    And no, I’m not suggesting the *ads* contribute to a rating, but surely the boxart is something that is erm, ‘consumed’ by the consumer in the act of purchasing the game?

    • Is that a bra hanging over the chair too? If there’s no kinky sexual references in the actual gameplay aren’t the box-art and preceding ad a kind of false advertising?

    • it was funny 😀

      It also made me realised something.What does this game and the latest Dead And Alive game on the 3DS got in common? sure youll all know the answer to that.

  • If this got banned and games like GTA, Prototype, etc are classified and sold on our stores I’d facepalm in the direction of our country.

    Sexual refences? HELL NAW.

    Incredibly graphic violence and killing random pedestrians? Looks like fun!

    Luckily this isn’t the case, at least thus far. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying GTA/Prototype should be banned. But if I had to choose between GTA & Mortal Kombat, I’d ban GTA every time.

    /end pointless comment

  • I’m more curious about it’s balance board compatibility, mentioned on the box.

    *imagination runs rampant*

  • I was thinking about AAA as a game definition the other day and how the industry definition and my own are not the same.

    Industry take,
    1st A = we spent heaps of moolah on making this.
    2nd A = we spent heaps of moolah on marketing this.
    3rd A = you know one of our employees by name.

    My take
    1st A = Original concept (eg. it could just be play mechanic, I give the some wriggle room on this one)
    2nd A = Original art and assets
    3rd A = Original engine/code

    Most games I see these days are only ABB titles. At least from my picky and petty view.

Show more comments

Log in to comment on this story!