No doubt a lot of you
caught wind over the weekend of the Gillard Government backing the R18+ rating for games position, with Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O'Connor, stating that "if the new category is introduced it could result in computer games that are currently classified as MA 15+ being reclassified R 18 +, providing a new level of protection". The support is a massive win for gamers and supporters of the position Australia-wide, but the real test comes this Friday where the proposition will be discussed by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG), who will either pass it, or shoot it down. O'Conner was careful, however, to remind anti R18+ lobbyists the Federal Government also carried their concerns, echoing in his statement that "children and teenagers shouldn't be exposed to the gratuitous sex, violence and adult themes that are contained in some computer games".
But it's not all hunky dory. Within the SCAG, which needs a unanimous vote for the introduction to pass, not all of the AGs appear to be in line, though John Rau, who replaced the rating's most staunch protester, Michael Atkinson, in South Australia definitely appears to be much more progressive on the subject, telling the
ABC that "there’s no doubt that these things are available either by mail order or through downloads off the internet, so it’s not as if there’s a complete impossibility of getting hold of these things anyway". While that might sound like good news, he's still of the mind that games can be bad for you, it seems his stance then, is more one of common-sense.
"The issue is about what's offered for retail sale and who gets access to what," he said.
Michael Atkinson, however, remains as against the rating change as ever.
"I think some perfectly normal adults could be affected by these games because they are so violent," he said. "I don't think [people] who don't play video games know how gory and horrific some of these games are."
Western Australia's Attorney-General, Christian Porter, however, is yet to decide his stance and is coming under pressure from within his own party room to block the introduction of an R18+ rating.
"I'm in favour for more protection of children and kids but I think the borders of our morality have been extended to such an extent where we almost don't have any borders at all," said Frank Alban, MP for Swan Hills, to the AAP in protest of the introduction, while Upper House MP Nick Goiran joined in, saying in response to a submission to Porter by the joint children's commissioners that "If all of the children's commissioners are collectively saying this is bad news, this is a bad idea, then I take that very seriously". He also said that he was "concerned" at the Government support of the position, adding "it makes [you] wonder what is the point of having a children's commissioner".
So we're clearly moving forward, but the more major support we get, the more opposition seems to crop up. One thing's for sure, Friday's meeting is going to be keenly watched by the gaming community at-large, here's hoping everything comes up Milhouse when it adjourns.
Posted 03:22pm 06/12/10
I wouldn't be surprised if "they" just heard the part of the arguments they wanted to hear (ma15 games are too violent, they should be r18) and ignored the gamers side of the argument which was an r18 classification should be introduced to fit the banned games.
Posted 03:27pm 06/12/10
In this case the consumer is able to make a better guess between M15 (proper m15) rated stuff, versus R18 being significantly different. In that respect people who complain that something R18 is too violent for children is actually correct! This is maybe not a major win for someone hoping for games refused classification so far, but it's a huge win for correctly labelling things in its proper place.
With a label to accurately define games as appropriate now they may start to see some of the games which are adult oriented actually be released, although that would be a far sight rather than a short one. The previous reasons are less valid now.
Posted 03:33pm 06/12/10
Posted 03:35pm 06/12/10
err, no.
I cant stand these bulls*** conservativists. They need to be kicked in the balls. Lots.
Posted 03:39pm 06/12/10
Posted 03:46pm 06/12/10
Posted 03:47pm 06/12/10
Posted 03:51pm 06/12/10
Posted 04:30pm 06/12/10
You call the former SA AG "Atkins" when it's actually Atkinson, and then you attribute one of his quotes "I don't think [people] who don't play video games know how gory and horrific some of these games are." to John Rau.
Apart from that, this is awesome news!
Posted 04:49pm 06/12/10
Getting them (ACB) to go back and reclassify L4D2 gory version is probably something that needs to be pushed by the community ?
Posted 05:05pm 06/12/10
Public push to get a Minster to submit it for reclassification. Or get Valve to re-submit (Which they would have to pay for and risk their now MA15+ game being reclassified R18 as well.)
Or you could claim that the stress about not being able to see blood oozing out of zombies and dismembered bodies causes you stress and is harmful to the general public.
Posted 05:13pm 06/12/10
But at least this might allow the ones who are a little unconcerned by the MA15 nature and aligning it with movies and TV to maybe think again.
Posted 05:14pm 06/12/10
Posted 05:15pm 06/12/10
Posted 05:15pm 06/12/10
I will totally admit I got the quotes wrong - have fixed it now.
Posted 05:18pm 06/12/10
This is the reason we can't have nice things
(eg: real R18 content games, unfiltered internet for much longer, laws which enable us to sue someone else when we're at fault but they didn't compensate for how completely incompetent we can be at times)
Posted 05:38pm 06/12/10
Posted 05:43pm 06/12/10
I like the approach the government is taking. If it's all about protecting the kiddies from violence the anti R18 lobby loses most of their ammo.
The comments in that Lyle Shelton thing are hilarious. Even his readers don't support him.
Posted 05:41pm 06/12/10
Picture caption from Steve's article.
Sure they don't - that's why one shouldn't be used to argue against the other.
Posted 06:01pm 06/12/10
The lack of classification of material for adults prevents or hinders the bolded requirements from being met, making principle a and b of the Code obviously mutually antagonistic. Adults may NOT "read, hear and see what they want" if it must also be suitable for children; ie the Classification Categories as they stand are incompatible with the law.
Just fix the broken f*****g system already so that the Board can get on with its job.
Posted 09:56pm 06/12/10
I've tried to come up with a funny thing to say to this for the past 15 minutues, writing and re-writing over and over and I just can't work out anything to say how stupid this sounds other than this is arse of the highest order. What magical world does this toss live in? Saying to kids "no you cant have this game, it's got to much violence/language in it" is a good thing. But of course that is logic and we all know how religion is on that.
Posted 10:34pm 06/12/10
Prolly because it's the perfect way to go under the radar and acquire military training without being accused of running terror camps.
*looks at COD: BO with evil grin*
Posted 10:47pm 06/12/10
Posted 11:07pm 06/12/10
Posted 11:14pm 06/12/10