Public invited to get involved in the R18+ debate

PALGN News | Discussion paper on the way.

Late last year we reported that a discussion paper on the possible introduction of an R18+ rating for videogames in Australia was on the way. It's been awhile coming, but Gamespot has confirmed that the paper will now be released by the Office of the Minister for Home Affairs, Bob Debus, after the Ministers responsible for censorship (Australia's Attorneys-General) couldn't agree on the paper's content at the most recent meeting of the Standing Committee of the Attorneys-General (SCAG).

ACT Attorney-General, Simon Corbell said, "Because there was no unanimous agreement amongst all states and territories about the release of the discussion paper, the Commonwealth is circumventing our requirements for unanimous agreement and will release the discussion paper under their own name."

Unfortunately, no timeline for the release of the paper has been specified yet, but Mr Corbell did say the "paper will be released shortly." PALGN will publish more details as they become available.

It should be noted that following the period of public consultation, the decision over whether Australia should have an R18+ classification for videogames will still be made by the Attorneys-General, in their capacity as the Ministers responsible for censorship.

Usually cast as the villain in the R18+ debate, South Australia Attorney-General Michael Atkinson pointed out that he wasn't alone in his anti-R18+ view.

"The standard line is that I was the only one responsible for stopping this discussion paper. I think it's important that a discussion paper be released."

Atkinson is also critical of the Australian Classification Board, claiming that they can misapply the classification guidelines and incorrectly classify some games.

"I don't doubt gamers when they say that some games that are classified MA15+ in Australia should have been classified R18+; that is a possibility in my experience," said Atkinson. "I am critical of the OFLC. I believe it bends over backwards for the industry rather than the public interest."

Atkinson proposes a separate classification guide for games separate to other material. Encouragingly, he does claim to be open to debate on the matter.

"I'm open to discussion. My position now is that I'm opposed to an R18+ classification, but let's see how the debate progresses. Let's see what concessions gamers and the industry are prepared to make. This would involve the Classification Board applying the guidelines correctly."

To read more about the videogame rating issue in Australia, visit everyoneplays.org.au.

Related Content

Atkinson issues a challenge
12 Mar, 2009 Wants you to run against him.

R18+ rating discussion paper to be released
08 Nov, 2008 It's a start.

Michael Atkinson's speech cut off in parliament
07 Mar, 2008 Cut off by "raucous interjections".

16 Comments

Aftershock

4 years ago

Mr Atkinson wrote

"I'm open to discussion. My position now is that I'm opposed to an R18+ classification, but let's see how the debate progresses. Let's see what concessions gamers and the industry are prepared to make. This would involve everyone doing it my way."

Fixed that for ya buddy.

NegativeZero

4 years ago

He almost sounds reasonable.

Shame he's already made up his mind and the whole thing will be a farce regardless.

sobriquet835

4 years ago

Quote

"I don't doubt gamers when they say that some games that are classified MA15+ in Australia should have been classified R18+; that is a possibility in my experience. I am critical of the OFLC. I believe it bends over backwards for the industry rather than the public interest."

Pfft. Same old story. The OFLC wouldn't have to "Bend over backwards for the industry" if the R18+ classification was allowed.

Fly

4 years ago

Quote

I believe it bends over backwards for the industry rather than the public interest.

Would this be the public as a whole? The public according to his misguided view where we don't apply? Or the public who are under the age of 18? Because I was under the impression (which is probably misguided to him) that they are serving the public interest by releasing products to the market (local) instead of the product only beign available on the market (international) which ultimately should be released locally, but the point of contention being the circular logic of under what classification.

But hey, huzzah we have a faux discussion to make it look like something is being done about the issue. /cynic

I suppose the good thing is that the Commonwealth decided to screw the unanimous mandate and went with the (probable) majority mandate for release. Dare we claim some manner of common sense prevailing if that's the case?

Nietzsche

4 years ago

Sounds like something is being done finally

rufati

4 years ago

Nice that the government finally stepped in to push the discussion through. The downside is that the bloody SCAGs still have to agree on the changes.

I'm afraid of getting my hopes up over this whole thing =/

Additives

4 years ago

There are many games that are rated MA that I definantly don't think my 15 year old brother is mature enough to deal with (see Bioshock, the tape with the girl and the puppy is prety heavy).

The current complaint from my parents is that my grandparents bought him Saints Row 2 for his birthday, which I definantly don't think they would have if it was rated R.

Just my 2c, but I would rather the soloution to teenagers getting their hands on innopropriate games didn't remove those games from people who are mature enough to deal with them.

syvergy

4 years ago

It would probably be a good idea if someone actually updated that "Everyone Plays" site, rather then making a big fuss for a month then forgetting about it.

meesh

4 years ago

I'm an Australian who's recently moved to NZ - it's amazing the number of games here with the R18+ sticker pasted over the top of an Australian MA15+ sticker. I don't think the NZ ratings system is that much more conservative than Australia, in fact they've released a bit of stuff here which was never released in Australia.

I believe whole lack of R18+ rating in Australia makes the system a bit of a joke. Atkinson claims "I don't doubt gamers when they say that some games that are classified MA15+ in Australia should have been classified R18+; that is a possibility in my experience" - simple solution: add an R18+ rating and let adults decide if it's for themselves!

Dragonfly93

4 years ago

When I saw the title for a split second I thought you meant the 18+ Rant Thread

kezzby

4 years ago

I don't know why it is such a hard decision, why don't they bring out R18+ classifications and make the stores that sell the games ask for ID before purchase - just like alcohol and cigarettes.

Anyway, most of the MA15+ Games out there already contain drug use, gore, violence, criminal activity, etc. I can't see how much worse they can make games. The only thing they can do is bring it in like i said, that will at least (hopefully) stop adolescents buying the games themselves, that being said, who says they just won't get someone else to buy it for them. Hopefully Adults that buy them for adolescents will think about what they are buying them.

James

4 years ago

syvergy wrote

It would probably be a good idea if someone actually updated that "Everyone Plays" site, rather then making a big fuss for a month then forgetting about it.

Yeah, sorry. I was going to update it last night, but was totally swamped.

Fly

4 years ago

meesh wrote

I believe whole lack of R18+ rating in Australia makes the system a bit of a joke. Atkinson claims "I don't doubt gamers when they say that some games that are classified MA15+ in Australia should have been classified R18+; that is a possibility in my experience" - simple solution: add an R18+ rating and let adults decide if it's for themselves!

I think that's part of the problem, that the solution seems easy enough and he seems to at least be for an overhaul of the classification system to fit an R18/21+ classification but that for whatever reason we're stuck on the same arguments, the same discussion, the same individuals debating the same points to reach the same conclusions.

If you're worried about the OFLC miss classifying items with a mature rating logic dictates that you'd look at why they would be and possible solutions to alleviate that problem, (of which separate classification guideline was hinted)

Quote

This would involve the Classification Board applying the guidelines correctly.

I am critical of the OFLC. I believe it bends over backwards for the industry rather than the public interest.

Atkinson proposes a separate classification guide for games separate to other material.

Then why is it entirely unworkable? Why was discussion halted barring Commonwealth intervention? Why are we still using the same arguments to debate the same points to dance around in circles? And why for the love of god do we again have "I'm not the only one against it" and nothing by way of clarifying who else is in support or against? We have 6 states and 2 territories, surely if one man was being blamed and claimed backup you'd at least say "yup WA is with me!" but instead silence is met with more silence.

Yuppieville

4 years ago

kezzby wrote

I don't know why it is such a hard decision, why don't they bring out R18+ classifications and make the stores that sell the games ask for ID before purchase - just like alcohol and cigarettes.

I think this is supposed to be the case at the moment with MA15+ games. However, I've seen too many times where some 13 year old snot has bought Grand Theft Auto off some apathetic 18 year old retail snot.
And unless it's accompanied with a halfway decent education campaign, gum chewing department store zombies will still sell inappropriate games to minors and parents will still purchase ultraviolent games for their 9 year old son just because "it's only a video game" or because "they're going to play it at their friend's house anyway".

Not that I'm against an R18+ rating, far from it. I'm just saying that it's just one step in protecting the kiddies from grown up games.

Like Fly said above me, the games classification system doesn't just need an R18+; it needs a complete overhaul to be more in line with cinema/DVD classifications and actually relevant with today's standards of realism in games. If a game like Nerovision (I refuse to capitalise the V and the other N) can be banned for the exact same things that could be found in Fallout 3, you know there's problems in the Classification Board.

YMM

4 years ago

PALGN wrote

"I don't doubt gamers when they say that some games that are classified MA15+ in Australia should have been classified R18+; that is a possibility in my experience," said Atkinson. "I am critical of the OFLC. I believe it bends over backwards for the industry rather than the public interest."

Translation: "I think these games, which are currently classified as MA15+ but would be better suited to an R18+ classification, should actually be banned."

Make no mistake! Michael Atkinson's goal is not just to stop us getting games which are currently being banned, but also to stop us getting games which are currently being squeezed into the MA15+ rating. That is why he believes that the OFLC is bending over backwards for the games industry.

Introducing an R18+ rating is completely opposite to this goal, since this would possibly allow even more "mature" games into Australia.