Where we also had a chance to speak with lead designer Charles Staples from Obsdidian on all things space-faring!
Outta this World - Hands-On with The Outer Worlds
We've now given the next Call of Duty a true multiplayer run, and believe us - this is very legit.
Straight Up Fact: This is the Biggest CoD Multiplayer. Ever.
To celebrate the upcoming release of Gears 5, Seagate is releasing a limited Special "Gears 5" Edition of its popular Game Drive for Xbox
Win - A 'Gears 5' Special Edition Seagate Game Drive For Xbox
Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order is shaping up to be a franchise in waiting and exactly the sort of Force experience we've been craving for a number of years...
Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order - The Force is Strong in This One
Post by Steve Farrelly @ 04:34pm 10/12/10 | 23 Comments
After a pretty tense day of following varying Tweets from people on-site at the SCAG meeting to discuss the introduction of an R18+ rating for videogames, the Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O'Connor emerged to an eager room of journalists to declare that the Attorneys-General had made no decision on the issue, and that it would be broached once more at the next SCAG in early 2011.

Despite there being no firm decision made today, O'Connor stressed that this was still a "step in the right direction" and that more deliberation needed to be made, along with an overhaul of Australia's ratings system. It was also confirmed there was a vote and that not all Attorneys-Generals agreed, obviously halting movement.

Despite the decision not going forward, at the very least it wasn't shot down, either.

Stay tuned for more once all the details from today's meeting have been revealed in full.



r18+ ratingr18+videogamesaustraliascagattorneys-general





Latest Comments
Jav
Posted 04:35pm 10/12/10
Awwwww man...
Spook
Posted 04:38pm 10/12/10
better than a no decision
Eorl
Posted 04:41pm 10/12/10
F*** sake. These people are ridiculous. I hope the government intervenes and just says yes.
`ViPER`
Posted 04:42pm 10/12/10
It was also confirmed there was a vote and that not all Attorneys-Generals agreed, obviously halting movement.

Despite the decision not going forward, at the very least it wasn't shot down, either


Sounds like there was a decision and the decision was no, its just that this time there isnt one AG out there saying he wont ever support it.
Sc00bs
Posted 05:01pm 10/12/10
Wow, dont you just love it how its up to a group of f*****s in a room.

they Need a simpsons style vote yes on proposition 34

Go into booths if u want to vote, tally votes up at the end of day and thats the decision.
F*** these wankers in their closed rooms that are probably well into their 60's and have no idea of whats going on
Jav
Posted 05:12pm 10/12/10
What you're talking about is a plebiscite I'm pretty sure.

Yes - the decision for R18+ games should be in the hands of the people I think, kind of. I mean most people don't know much about games, especially the older generation and thus make crappy presumptions about them.

Oh well, so we wait. And as spook said, at least it was an arbitrary 'no' decision.
th4w
Posted 05:13pm 10/12/10
For the people, by the people...

Afraid of the people.
Punisher911
Posted 05:14pm 10/12/10
Had a feeling this was going to happen, and I also get the feeling that the early 2011 meeting won't go ahead because one of them won't show up or some such garbage.
Honestly, how long have they had to make their minds up about this? How long has it been since the first meeting that one of them didn't show up for? The best they can give us is "Urh, we're not too sure right about now", it's utterly pathetic.
Sc00bs
Posted 05:17pm 10/12/10
it is and its pathetic that no-one is making a big fuss about this.

Over a f***** year to make a yes or no decision is just f***** ridiculous, especially when we are the people paying their salaries.
fade
Posted 05:51pm 10/12/10
it is and its pathetic that no-one is making a big fuss about this.

Over a f***** year to make a yes or no decision is just f***** ridiculous, especially when we are the people paying their salaries.

you understand AGs do a lot more than r18 right?
Hogfather
Posted 05:55pm 10/12/10
Once again, if you want one discussion thread per issue, please lock the NEW news thread and direct discussion to the existing one. That way we don't need to have disjointed discussions over multiple threads because you decided to make a news post on the outcome rather than updating your first article.

Ideally, you could implement a system where multiple news posts could 'subscribe' to the same set of replies rather than locking s*** like mad.

Quoting Pinky from the original thread:
Yeah, you're right Hogfather.

I think what's at risk here is that interactive media will have it's own ratings system in which MA15+ is watered down on what it is now and R18+ is basically what MA15+ is now or a little bit more generous.

Completely unnecessary. The Board's job is to determine what material fits in what strata, it doesn't need to be defined in its own Code. Creating an entirely new Code for video games is an epic waste of money.

Remove (or amend) the MA15+ video games clause and let the Board do their job IMO.
you understand AGs do a lot more than r18 right?

And this issue is a completely stupid diversion from their actual job.
Tollaz0r!
Posted 06:02pm 10/12/10
Lol, these guys get paid big bucks to make no decisions. I want their job!
Pinky
Posted 06:12pm 10/12/10
Completely unnecessary. The Board's job is to determine what material fits in what strata, it doesn't need to be defined in its own Code. Creating an entirely new Code for video games is an epic waste of money.

I know. I can just see them coming out with something like, "We've decided that interactive media needs to be classified separately." and making a whole new category system just for interactive media.

It's not unfathomable!
Eorl
Posted 06:31pm 10/12/10
Hogfather, what is your stance on R18+ rating? I'm getting a sense of "it's a waste of money, but it can be done in a simpler way".
carson
Posted 06:54pm 10/12/10
No suprise there wasn't a decision.

To be honest I'll be suprised if we even get it.
skythra
Posted 07:02pm 10/12/10
Yes - the decision for R18+ games should be in the hands of the people I think
If the people were able to make decisions about ratings for games then we wouldn't need classifications in the first place :P
Dazhel
Posted 07:21pm 10/12/10
you understand AGs do a lot more than r18 right?


I wonder if they're able to make a decision on the rest of the other crap that they do.
Reverend Evil
Posted 07:32pm 10/12/10
Wow. What a bunch of softc****, seriously. How hard is it to vote yes and f*****g move on with other important issues.

F*** me dead. Such a f*****g stupid waste of time. People like them need to be stripped naked in a field and shot in the head.
Trauma
Posted 08:13pm 10/12/10
Yea sure rev that's the solution.

Only issue in this process is that it needs to be unanimous.
Hogfather
Posted 10:06pm 10/12/10
Hogfather, what is your stance on R18+ rating? I'm getting a sense of "it's a waste of money, but it can be done in a simpler way".

Its a non issue that has been allowed to turn into a national policy item because of shrilling of moral fundamentalists. It makes me wonder what our Governments are drawing attention away from that they've allowed this to continue.
  • Most gamers are adults.

  • Many games are made for adults.

  • The Act says that adults should be able to watch and play what they like.

  • The Board can easily and simply classify games for adult consumption. A well-understood classification framework and set of penalties exist for this.

"Children might get hold of the games" does not apply to anything else that adults are allowed to enjoy to the exclusion of children, even if children are observed to from time to time gain access to the prohibited material. The issue can be resolved with a tiny amendment to the Code.

The system of review of the Code that requires the unanimous assent of the AGs needs ot be fixed, it is clearly not representational and in effect dysfunctional. A simple majority for most matters is a core principle of our Government, and a unanimous decision from the States is only reserved for the most extreme of changes, often determined by plebiscite. I don't think changes to the Code warrant this level of reserve.

The Act should be reviewed by the Federal Parliament and appropriate measures taken so that its core principles are upheld. Any reading of the Act plainly and without demur states that adults should be allowed to enjoy adult entertainment. This is clearly not the case with video games as adult classification is not permitted.

Instead our typically dithering and ineffective Governments continue to pass the buck and wallow in bureaucracy, wasting our money on what is - at best - an item of legislative clerical administration.
Eorl
Posted 10:38pm 10/12/10
That's pretty much my standard on it. Throw in the global standard that is R18+ and how it should be in Australia, and you've got my views all summed up :)
Pinky
Posted 11:27pm 11/12/10
Threads are all over the shop about this issue on this forum. Somewhere in one of them is a comment on the WA AG so this is interesting:

http://au.gamespot.com/pages/news/story.php?sid=6285276&skipmc=1

The Liberal Party's WA State Council today passed a motion urging WA Attorney-General to support introduction of adult rating for games in Australia.
ravn0s
Posted 11:36pm 11/12/10
guess thats some good news since i read that him and the SA attorneys general were completely against the rating at the SCAG meeting.
Commenting has been locked for this item.
23 Comments
Show