May 16, 2024
Introducing Midgard's Sustainability Rating for Video Games
Whether it's a letter, number, or a mixture of both, companies from other industries have been using labels and ratings to easily showcase their commitment to sustainability. However, there are hundreds of labels in the market for different types of products, the majority of which don't provide easy to access guidelines to help consumers understand what those labels mean.
Although gamers are used to seeing ESRB or PEGI ratings in games, there are no widely adopted sustainability labelling and rating system for game development. At Midgard, we see this as a critical gap within the game industry as sustainability labels have been proven to help influence positive behavioral changes. With 3.1 billion active gamers worldwide, we believe that a sustainability rating and labelling system for video games can be a good first step for the industry to contribute to helping solve the climate crisis.
Since November 2023, we've been helping game studios track and manage their carbon emissions during game development. Transparency is one of the core pillars of Midgard, which is why we have been open to publishing our audits on our website for every stakeholder in the industry to see. While we initially focused on estimating carbon emissions during game development, we quickly realised that we need to take a holistic view on a studio's game development processes and practices instead of focusing on a single number.
Today, we're proud to introduce Midgard's Sustainability Rating.
Each game we work with is rated on a progressive scale of E to A. In order to move up in the scale, each game must satisfy certain criteria in every level. The criteria can be summarised into three categories: (1) Data Integrity, (2) Reduction Efforts, and (3) Climate and Risk Management.
E - Initial Disclosure
To get the minimum rating of E, the studio must simply disclose their Scope 1 (emissions from fuel usage, i.e. owning and using a company car) and Scope 2 emissions (emissions from the purchase of electricity, heating, and cooling).
D - Initial Awareness
In order to get a rating of at least a D, the studio must disclose their Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. Scope 3 emissions are the most difficult to track as they refer to everything else. This includes travelling, purchases, and even emissions from gamers playing the game. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol lists 15 categories under Scope 3. Not all of these will apply to every game and we work with the studio to identify which ones are relevant.
C - Advanced Management
Although we can make estimates based on simple information (i.e. a studio has 10 people working from home in Germany on a full time basis), carbon disclosures require the presence of good quality supporting documentation. In order to get at least a C rating, studios must provide supporting data on 50% of the emission sources that we identify.
A rigorous data review process not only reinforces the credibility of the emissions data reported by the studios but also encourages better record-keeping and accountability in environmental reporting. This approach helps ensure that when studios claim to have reduced their emissions or improved their sustainability practices, these claims are substantiated by reliable data, providing transparency and trust in the sustainability achievements reported.
B - Proactive Reduction
At this level, we focus on reduction strategies that the studio has or are planning on implementing. We have identified five main reduction strategies that apply to video games.
Energy Efficiency Improvements - Studios that have an office must replace older systems with energy-efficient alternatives for lighting, heating, cooling, and office equipment.
Renewable Energy Adoption - The studio must be working with green energy providers. 50% of the energy provider's sources must come from renewable sources in order to be considered a green energy provider. For studios that has a completely remote setup, half of their employees should be working with green energy providers.
Waste Reduction & Management - To reduce waste and unnecessary packaging and production, the studio must exclusively distribute their game digitally. In the case of deluxe editions or editions with physical outputs (i.e. t-shirts, books, etc), the supplier must show proof that they have done their part in reducing waste by adhering to known sustainable production processes.
Sustainable Procurement - In order to decarbonise the value chain, we encourage studios to choose service providers (QA, localization, marketing, art, etc) that are already accountable for their emissions.
Employee Incentive & Engagement - The studio and its employees must have undergone workshops and other training sessions related to sustainability education.
Reduction Strategies 1 and 4 might not apply to all studios as not every studio has an office. Furthermore, not every game requires external service providers as some functions are done in-house (and are already accounted for). To get a B, the studio must have implemented at least 50% of the strategies that can apply to them before the release of the game. For games planning on going into Early Access, the studio must have implemented the strategies before the full release.
A - Game Sustainability Leadership
The previous levels focused more on actual production and development of the game as a product. As part of our services, we help studios with long term strategy by assessing potential climate risks and establishing long term reduction goals. To reach the A rating, the studio must commit to the strategies that Midgard recommends, which will be disclosed in each game's profiles on Midgard. At the same time, the studio must offset 1.5x their estimated carbon emissions by supporting rated carbon offset projects.
If a studio gets an A for Game X, the studio must have implemented the strategies we recommended by Game Y. In the scenario where the strategies were not met, Game Y will have a maximum rating of B. The studio will once again be eligible to get an A rating for Game Z.
Where is the carbon footprint and why are flights not mentioned?
As you might have noticed, the actual carbon footprint is not included in the assessment. We decided not to include the emissions number in the assessment because we want to focus on encouraging a change in processes than obsessing over a number. Including carbon emissions will automatically put bigger studios at a bad light even though they might have implemented more sustainable practices than smaller studios.
Most game studios usually have to travel to far away places, usually to get in touch with publishers and other backers that can finance the development of the game. Therefore, it did not feel right to punish such a crucial part of the studio's business. After all, there will be nothing to track if the game does not get the financing it needs! However, this does not mean that flights are not including in the accounting. It will be, but it just will not affect the rating of the game.
What's a "Projected Rating" and how do they differ from a complete rating?
Projected Ratings allow us to inform the developer on what their rating would given the quality and quantity of data that they initially provided. We also look at the likeliness that a studio will be able to provide certain types of data. For example, your office electricity bill is quite easy to source. Another example would be WFH team members being able to upload energy bills from last year or plane tickets (which, again, are easy to gather). However, some data might be more difficult such as consumption data of service providers. We also look at which reduction strategies the studio are already employing (i.e. the studio can already tell us if there will be a physical version of the game. We can also check the likeliness that they can switch to more renewable sources of energy based on their country and options available) or how likely they are to implement it (i.e. we might have initial conversations with the studio that they will do a sustainability workshop at some point before release). Apart from giving the developers an idea on which parts of the audit they can still improve on, giving projected ratings allows them to already inform their user base of their sustainability initiatives. The Projected Rating is finalized approximately 1-3 months before full release.
What's next? What if I have feedback?
We're currently busy applying our rating system to the games we have audited and we encourage our developers to use our rating as part of their game marketing (packaging, trailers, and splash screens) to amplify their messaging. This rating system is by no means final and we will continuously refine it with the help of the world's leading climate scientists (to be announced later). If you have any feedback or questions, feel free to email us at research@midgard.earth. We welcome any comment from all stakeholders within the game industry.