Jeremy Jastrzab – PALGN Executive Editor
Most of what I wanted to say will be covered by my colleagues. So instead, I'm going to cover the more left-field issues at hand. Firstly, not having the R 18+ classification leaves significant flaws in the system. For one, Dark Sector was initially banned due to violent death reactions. However, the problem was a minor flaw in the games programming, not real violence. A more prominent example was the debacle surrounding drugs in Fallout 3. Eventually, the developers compromised and removed the references for all regions. Now, as much as we liked the game, we would have much preferred the developers spent the time refining the game rather than fiddling around with these frivolous issues. For two, when games like Left 4 Dead 2 are banned, it raises questions about the consistency of the system, where many other just as explicit games, including the original Left 4 Dead are let through. In short, not having an R 18+ rating literally costing developers and gamers, and regardless of the magnitude, it's something that can easily be avoided if common sense prevails.
Onto another issue and Atkinson (and his personal agenda) aside, how many times have you heard ‘ignorant’ parents or (supposedly) mature aged adults whinging about the supposedly violent and inappropriate content in video games. Then, video games are the source of blame when something goes astray. One of the more prominent examples is the murder of a British boy, where the accused was apparently played a lot of Manhunt. Any connection between playing the game and the murder was subsequently rejected.
There is yet to be any conclusive evidence that video games, like action movies and gyrating hips before, have the grossly negative impact that they are made out to have on the masses. I'm sure you will find that it's always the most minor of the minority that spoil it for the majority. Take the ‘sport’ of wrestling for example. The WWE and others have massive followings, yet there are a few isolated cases of youths injuring themselves trying to imitate their ‘idols’. Yet, are there calls for bans or questions raised over the legitimacy of the entertainment it provides? Are you prevented from watching it because of someone's misguided personal agenda?
And so, we get to the fundamental source of the issue. In short, there is a wide social misunderstanding surrounding the legitimacy of video games as an entertainment medium, and that games are “meant for kids”. What does this have to do with Australia not have an R18+ classification? Well, having one would be a great step towards legitimising our preferred form of entertainment to the otherwise ignorant social masses. Also, it will protect children by otherwise putting borderline games into the classification that they belong. In my opinion, despite the advances in the casual scene, gaming is still looked down upon.
The second part to this post is something of a call to arms. It's all good and well to have the stats and the articles to back up the fact that the general public approves of an extra classification. However, unless you're actually willing to do something about it, there's not much use to it. See, here is the thing. One problem that we've had in the past is that the gaming public doesn't have the best representation. From my experience in the industry, most gaming journalists are usually more interested in where their next free drink is coming from or flaunting a useless agenda, rather than actively campaigning for a liberal change. Sure, they'll write the articles, they'll post news, but if you want something real to be done, you're going to have to do it yourself.
Secondly, gamers have a nasty reputation of being a lazy, uninspired bunch. While most of us cringe at this blatant stereotype, the question remains, why haven't there been enough talking heads to have already resolved this issue? Well, by supporting initiatives such as Everybody Plays, you now have a chance to dispel the above mentioned notions as well as play an active role in supporting your favoured hobby and bring some common sense back into system.
Anthony Capone – PALGN Writer
The Australian classification system is geared towards ensuring that individuals can only view content appropriate for their age. Unfortunately, this is something that the South Australian Attorney-General does not appear to comprehend.
Michael Atkinson opposes an R classification regime for interactive entertainment software, as he believes children should be protected from violent and inappropriate content. If it were introduced, an R classification would indeed help ensure that young minds are shielded this type of material, despite what politicians would have you believe. In the year 2009, children under the age of 18 can play games which involve shooting infected human beings in the head and plunging chainsaws into aliens – all quite legally.
Indeed, teenagers may even be content with the current Australian classification system. Mr Atkinson's stance on this issue has meant that they can legally purchase and play games such as Grand Theft Auto 4 or Fallout 3. Both titles fell under the censor's axe last year, in order to meet the lower MA 15+ classification. Nonetheless, each game still exhibits high levels of violence. Hence, by opposing an R 18+ classification, Michael Atkinson may be exposed youths to the very material he wishes to keep them away from.
Issues surrounding the videogame classification debate go further than the chief legal mind of South Australia. Ultimately, it is the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General who has the power to introduce an R 18+ classification. By law, the Attorney-General of every Australian state must support the scheme. As Australia has a uniform classification scheme, nothing less than a unanimous vote by the Standing Committee will guarantee success. Much like Mr Atkinson, any Attorney-General has the right to veto the proposal. While the Victorian Attorney General Rob Hulls and strongly voice his support, questions marks still hang over other Standing Committee members. So instead of focusing our attention on solely one person, we must ensure that the message is spread as far across the land as possible.
While an overwhelming majority of surveyed Australians support the introduction of R 18+ classification, the message is only starting to get through. In a day and age when interactive entertainment continues to grow and push conceptual boundaries, we should have the same rights as those enjoyed by other developed nations. To ensure Australia keeps up with the rest of the world, nothing less then a nation-wide push will convince the major legal stakeholders that we need to get our act together now.
The Standing Committee of Attorneys-General.
Joseph Rositano – PALGN Writer
Before I begin let me make it clear I've always supported the motion for games to have an R 18+ rating, but over time my interest in the topic has slowly diminished. It's not the fault of any one side, but rather the immaturity of politics and gamers as a whole.
When the R 18+ debate initially sparked with Michael Atkinson under the limelight, I always noted the responses from the gaming community. We have every right to oppose Atkinson's stance on the issue, but the way some people reacted was less than impressive. While a majority of comments raised different points as to why we needed the rating, it struck me hard seeing comments threatening the minister. As a gamer, I really don't see how this is supposed to help our cause. There are arguments out there suggesting videogames promote violence and rot away our minds; how is calling Atkinson a “f**king c**t” and sending him death threats opposing this? It isn't, and that's why I get frustrated by it. We should be mature about the issue and show the gaming community is ready for a change. Say how the OFLC is giving MA15+ ratings to games that would have otherwise received an R 18+ rating, argue that parents and retailers are uneducated about the ratings system. DON'T leave a one-liner questioning Atkinson's sexuality.
As for Mr. Atkinson, to be quite frank I'm not a fan of his either. Every time he releases a statement it says the same dribble over and over again. It's almost like a political stunt, he constantly refers to the death threats he's sent. Sir, you're in politics. I understand you're upset and fear the safety of your family, but do you see Kevin Rudd or Mike Rann crying every time someone threatens them? We get the point already, some of us are acting immature and you're trying to link it to the ‘games promote violence’ debate. Another thing, you claim to play videogames with your children and understand the appeal in them yet seemingly have this vendetta against FPS. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of shooting games either, but that doesn't mean I can't see why people like them. Broaden your mind; games are like films. You'll either like a good action or comedy flick, or you'll want a serious drama. This all said, I admire Atkinson for sticking by his words. It shows he's in politics not because he's some bloke who got lucky at the elections, but because he's tough and won't easily change his mind on a subject (this can be both a good and bad thing depending on your perspective).
So what do I exactly want in the immediate future? It's clear an R 18+ classification is a long way off, so I'm just going to conclude by asking the minority group of gamers to grow up. While there are lots of people out there voicing their opinions on the issue and justifying it, that one tiny group stands out for all the wrong reasons. Next time, think before posting. If you aren't adding anything to the conversation, then just leave the message board and go do something constructive with your time. As for Atkinson, again, I admire him for sticking to his guns but I feel he's not necessarily doing it in an effective manner. I honestly hope that both sides can make peace, sit down and have an intelligent debate one day, but until then I'm staying well clear of it.
Michael Pincott – PALGN News Writer
I propose a simple hypothetical scenario, one that I hope might occur in the future. Let's say that South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson retires from his position, or is voted out. His replacement, much to Mr Atkinson's horror, supports an R 18+ rating for games. The Attorney-Generals find themselves without a strong opponent to the rating, and wisely decide to put Australia in line with the rest of the world. It is put to Parliament that an R 18+ rating should be introduced for computer games. A bill is submitted and passed. The OFLC announce that their guidelines will be reviewed and restructured to incorporate an R 18+ rating.
And then what? Will the Four Horsemen descend from the heavens (or perhaps rise from the magma crust beneath - I've never quite been clear on where they hang out when not causing the apocalypse) and lay waste upon civilization? Will the Hadron Collider reactivate itself and plunge the Solar System into a black hole, compressing our planet into nothingness? Or will Mr Atkinson's deep fear come true, that the OFLC will suddenly be flooded with the many games that he purports to contain extreme sex and extreme violence. With an R rating at their disposal, Mr Atkinson presumes they will all get through and into the hands of vulnerable children. This, as much as the other two scenarios, is nonsense.
So what will happen? Perhaps some current titles would be deemed worthy of re-evaluation. Titles like Dead Space, Fallout 3 and MadWorld come to mind as titles that the OFLC wouldn't mind taking another look at. Naturally the OFLC would want to give games the maximum appropriate rating. Because they didn't have the R 18+ rating at their disposal they could justify that MA15 was an appropriate maximum rating for those games (and no doubt they all flirt with the line of what would be acceptable within that rating). Provided with an R 18+ rating, they could shift those games from the upper extremities of the MA15 rating to the lower ranges of an R 18+ rating. It would be in all senses a stricter, more conservative system. It's this fact that makes Atkinson's strong opposition to it somewhat baffling.
Gamers will walk into an EB or JB Hi-Fi store and see a few more black stickers and a few less red ones. We won't be met with headlines every few months announcing that a game has been banned or modified. We won't be the subject of derisive laughter from gamers of other countries, who no doubt wonder, as we do, why we haven't caught up with the rest of the world. Gamers will be asked for photo identification when they purchase an R 18+ game in the same way they would be if they were purchasing alcohol or entering a club. Gamers with children who purchase R 18+ games will activate the necessary parental lock on their consoles which will deny them access to those games, despite Atkinson's convenient dismissal of this entirely effective feature. Children may be technologically savvy, but to my knowledge they aren't psychic.
Whether or not Australia should get an R18+ rating is a complicated issue, with many points from both sides worthy of consideration. But approaching the matter armed with facts and logical thinking will always yield the same result: an R 18+ rating for games is the correct course of action. Mr Atkinson's reasons for opposition are either hyperbole, misunderstanding or just plain inaccurate. I have no doubts at all that eventually we will receive an R 18+ classification for games. I'm sure Mr Atkinson understands this as well; he seeks only to delay the inevitable - an entirely pointless process. I appreciate that he believes what he's doing is right. But to attempt to enforce the moral stance of an individual upon an entire country is wrong. It is an abuse of his position to do so.
I would implore Mr Atkinson to consider the legacy he will leave behind. Does he want to be known as somebody who stood in the way of progress, or somebody who helped it advance? He could be the person who brings Australia into line with an internationally accepted stance on games classification, or he could be the person that ensures we remain a backwater of the international gaming community. Unfortunately, Mr Atkinson has already made his choice, and it doesn't seem he will soon change it.
Will the introduction of an R rating change Australia's spending habits?
----------------------------------------------------------------
For more information on the R18+ debate visit EveryonePlays. Let us know your thoughts on the classification debate in the comments below.
Loading...
