| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MikeZombie777
Status: Offline
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 130
$poons: 9.20
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Sin Ogaris wrote: | Actually the guidelines for film and video games are the same, only difference is the lack of an R and X rating for games (though no X rating is kind of understandable).
. |
Well, no they're not. The classification markings are the same but the guidelines are different. Read the legislation. Video games are treated differently under the law because the government assumes they are more impactual on the audience than films due to their interactivity, hence different classification guidelines and legislation.
There are many things permitted in MA15+ films that aren't permitted in MA15+ games, and it doesn't always have something to do with incentives or rewards. For example, laws relating to advertisement and exemptions from classification differ with video games. But more to the point, the process of classification just isn't the same. The government might try to make you believe that but it just isn't the case in reality. There is a very big double standard.
http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Classificationpolicy_Classificationlegislation
http://libertus.net/censor/laws/censlaw.html
| Sin Ogaris wrote: |
In terms of games containing the same content like I previously said, there was a massive overhaul of the classification system in 2005 to bring everything to a more unified position, whereas before ratings were based on the level of violence,sex, etc now it is based upon the impact. Therefore a lot of titles pre change could have gotten through on the level of content even though the context and impact matches that of banned games today.
. |
Yes and no. Legislatively, video games are still treated differently to other media. You seem to be making an awful lot of assumptions without providing any sources. 'impact' and 'context' are not the only factors, the level of classifiable content is still very relevant. You also have to take into account the fact that the states and territories have quite a few differences when it comes to classification, despite the ever hypocritical 'co-operative classification system'. The rest of the country can't have R rated games due to SA, but the NT & ACT can have X18+ films despite such not being legal to sell/rent in all other jurisdictions. Or CAT1 & 2 publications being illegal to sell in QLD, but legal in all other Australian jurisdictions.
There is a massive amount of hypocrisy when it comes games.
| Sin Ogaris wrote: |
Oh, and in terms of film, no they don't get released uncut "regardless of content" they get released uncut if the content is deemed to be within the classification guidelines OR the artistic nature of the piece (I've mentioned it a few times already but Romance is the perfect example of this situation, it quite clearly breaches the R and X ratings, for different reasons obviously, yet after lengthy appeals was finally given the ok) outweighs the graphic nature of the themes.
|
I never said all films get released uncut regardless of content. My point was that the context test is not applied so arbitrarily and anally with films because they are much more diverse and the content differs dramatically between films (ignoring my disagreement with context altogether). I don't feel this is the case with games. I feel that the CB nit picks when it comes to classifying games, which results in the embarrassing number of bans. Comparison of the violent content in Dark Sector & Fallout 3 displays this best of all.
| Sin Ogaris wrote: |
I wouldn't say I grasped that you said context was a "big" factor in the CB rulings (still feels wierd for me typing that instead of OFLC, force of habit I guess) but I understand now. If you honestly believe that the context should be seen as "negligible" in the rulings of the classification board well, "you can deny the sky is blue and despite it being your opinion, which you're entitled to, you're still factually wrong and your reasons for believing such a thing are very questionable".
|
Different scenario I'm sorry to say. There is no scientific merit in so arbitrarily applying the context test to video games (Or movies for that matter) and the reason I say this is because I just don't feel the context of said questionable content differs so dramatically between say, Dark Sector & Fallout3 or whatever other reason. It's a whole different kettle of fish when you compare films like Cannibal Holocaust and Irreversible, because the context of the sexual violence in those films is immediately obvious. HOWEVER, that being said there is still no scientific merit in treating them differently, which is half of my point: the entire system is based upon assumptions.
All in all my point is this: video game content is just not diverse enough to warrant banning games due to the context which certain content is presented in. As a result it seems to be that the CB resorts to nit picking in order to justify their decisions. If an R rating existed it would give them some breathing room, BUT the classification guidelines themselves should be adjusted according to science and not assumptions. Yes video game legislation at a federal level is practically the same as films, but you have to take into account state/territory enforcement legislation as well. But only taking about the classification PROCESS, it is different to films regardless. I mean, how the hell can a viewer be 'rewarded' in a film? It then becomes an interactive DVD, which is a sub-category of film classification. Different to a game, different to a regular movie. The documentation the CB needs to be provided with differs, so even different types of movies are classified differently - let alone video games.
SOURCE: http://www.classification.gov.au/www/cob/classification.nsf/Page/Industry_ApplyforClassification_ApplyforClassification-FilmnotforPublicExhibition
Ok this is really my final post. I've made my point and all the evidence is there for people to read. I fully support an R rating but it is not by any means the be all end all solution.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Networker42
Status: Offline
Joined: 10 Sep 2010
Posts: 1
$poons: 0.00
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Ive been researching Risen and i see no aspect of the game that differs from any other MA game that has been allowed to australia, Fall out 3 involves syeinges, there is sexual content in Dragon Age where u can seduce a girl/guy or even a Guy/guy in the game. The Witcher u mix different drugs to get different effects, There even alot of swearing in game. There has been no real judgement against Risen, just the fact that the classification board are trying to justify their jobs and trying to feel like they are worth something when all there doing is forcing people to Import the game via online merchants shops etc. Alot of people want to play these game for the story line, the adventure due to RPGs being a rare breed nowadays. If u want to ban this game from australia u better start banning movies with drug sexual content in them.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fetidchimp
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 8666
$poons: 60.20
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I have nearly finished it, smoked the weed once went tee hee and that was it, i mean this banned over gta and saints row is a travesty really, now that you bring it up. Saints row 2 has exaclty the same thing in it you can smoke weed and it gives you health back, exactly the same. Yet risen is rc for it.
_________________
kill, kill, kill.....the white man. Kill the white man, kill
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Island_Wolf
Status: Offline
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 3126
$poons: 849.10
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Networker42 wrote: | | Fall out 3 involves syeinges |
_________________
"Work hard now, play even harder later"
I am an Industry Ambassador at Girl Geek Coffees (Sydney)
Unofficial PALGNchat - IRC Client *New Server!*
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Island_Wolf wrote: | | Networker42 wrote: | | Fall out 3 involves syeinges |
|
The drugs in this had a fake name too so I don't see the difference.
| Quote: | | but the NT & ACT can have X18+ films despite such not being legal to sell/rent in all other jurisdictions. |
I was wondering I've heard this a lot but never actually read it anywere offical, and it's not exactly a difficult task to find a x18+ dvd in Queensland.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Island_Wolf
Status: Offline
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 3126
$poons: 849.10
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | Island_Wolf wrote: | | After Bethesda has to change the drug "Morphine" to "Med-X" for Australia and other regions of concerned to them. Otherwise it would remain banned. |
|
_________________
"Work hard now, play even harder later"
I am an Industry Ambassador at Girl Geek Coffees (Sydney)
Unofficial PALGNchat - IRC Client *New Server!*
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
