The Association for UK Interactive Entertainment

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  The Association for UK Interactive Entertainment, known as Ukie, has not always answered to that name. In March 2010, its members voted for the change. They said it reflected how much the industry had grown and diversified, making room for activity the organization had not covered before. That vote sat at the end of a longer story. The association had once tried to absorb a rival trade body. It weathered a government report questioning whether video games were safe for children, and spent years chasing a tax break. Who was this association before it became Ukie? How did a group built to speak for software publishers end up shaping rules that decide what a child in the UK can legally buy?

• 2. From ELSPA to Ukie

  ›

  In 1989, a group of publishers formed the European Leisure Software Publishers Association, using the acronym ELSPA, to represent video game companies. Around 2002, the organization renamed itself the Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association, keeping the same ELSPA initials. The change reflected where its real work was happening. Its concerns had always centered on video game development within the United Kingdom, not the wider European mainland its original title suggested.

  Full completion of the name change to Ukie did not arrive until September 2010, months after members had approved it in an earlier vote.

  In 2011, Ukie proposed merging with The Independent Game Developers' Association, TIGA, another UK trade body representing game developers. The goal was to consolidate the industry under a single trade organization. TIGA's board rejected the proposal. When Ukie raised the same idea again in 2013, TIGA's position had not changed. With the merger rejected twice, Ukie continued to grow its own membership independently in the years that followed.

• 3. Representing the Industry

  ›

  By December 2017, Ukie represented more than 395 video game companies worldwide. That membership base was Ukie's foundation for representing the UK's video game industry as a whole.

  Ukie's day-to-day work includes offering strategy and advice to developers and publishers. It also collects and publishes retail data on UK video game sales. Ukie lobbies government directly too, meeting with officials to help shape policy affecting the video game industry. That lobbying stretched back decades, into a fight over who should decide which games children could legally buy.

• 4. Rating the Games

  ›

  Under its former name, ELSPA provided voluntary age ratings for video games sold in the UK from 1994 until 2003. That role passed to the Pan European Game Information system, PEGI, when it took over in 2003.

  Before 2012, UK law did not require most video games to carry a British Board of Film Classification rating. The exception was titles containing sexual content, nudity, or violence. Publishers could still submit titles to the BBFC voluntarily. Games that received a high enough rating could not legally be sold to minors. ELSPA worked instead with the Video Standards Council, a government body. The VSC's job was to create a code of practice for informing consumers about ratings across games and other video formats. ELSPA recommended that any game not requiring BBFC classification be rated instead under the PEGI system, with the VSC helping determine the right rating.

  In March 2008, Tanya Byron published a report commissioned by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, describing potential harms video games could pose to children. Known as the Byron Review, it reopened debate over how games should be labeled. It argued that parents needed more than a single BBFC rating to go on. ELSPA and other groups argued that BBFC ratings lacked the clarity video games specifically needed. The association's chief executive at the time, Mike Rawlinson, said BBFC ratings were built for linear content. PEGI's ratings, he argued, better suited interactive works such as video games.

  Starting in 2008, ELSPA pushed hard to get PEGI approved as the UK's official rating system. In the meantime, it petitioned the BBFC to color-code its own labels to resemble PEGI's scheme. Parliament then passed the Digital Economy Act 2010. It required that by July 2012, rating authority for most video games move from the BBFC to the VSC. The law excluded titles with strong pornographic content. It formally adopted PEGI and introduced legal enforcement against selling mature games to minors. The association kept working with the VSC afterward, helping decide how PEGI ratings would appear on packaging and building public awareness of the change. That same lobbying effort would soon turn toward an entirely different target: how the industry's tax bill was calculated.

• 5. The Fight for Tax Relief

  ›

  In 2012, Ukie submitted recommendations to a government consultation on tax relief, drawing on responses from more than 200 video game companies across the UK.

  A tax incentive scheme had originally been slated for the outgoing Labour government's budget in March 2010, but it was never finalized under that administration. The relief was not actually introduced until 2014, once the European Commission approved the decision. Once in effect, the scheme let video game developers and companies claim back up to 20 percent of production costs on projects meeting certain conditions. Ukie estimated the relief was worth about 188 million pounds a year to the UK games industry. In 2017, the European Commission granted a six-year extension to the scheme, pushing its expiry to 2023.

  In December 2023, Ukie gave oral evidence to the House of Commons on the benefits of Video Game Tax Relief. The scheme had been in place for eight years by then. Earlier in January that year, Ukie's chief executive, Dr Jo Twist OBE, had urged the UK games industry to take part in a community survey. Responses would feed into the government's consultation on the relief's future. That consultation was still open when Ukie's evidence reached Parliament, leaving the scheme's next phase undecided.