Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Australia Government Games

New Aliens Vs. Predator Game Doesn't Make It Past AU Ratings Board 277

Posted by Soulskill
from the gauntlet-thrown dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Australia refused to give Rebellion's new Aliens Vs. Predator game a rating, effectively banning it in the country. Rebellion says it won't be submitting an edited version for another round of classifications, however. (As Valve did with Left 4 Dead 2.) They said, 'We will not be releasing a sanitized or cut down version for territories where adults are not considered by their governments to be able to make their own entertainment choices.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Aliens Vs. Predator Game Doesn't Make It Past AU Ratings Board

Comments Filter:
  • by Mr. Freeman (933986) on Saturday December 05, 2009 @06:03AM (#30333770)
    Jack Thompson, you've moved to slashdot. Your so called "public safety measure" is really censorship.
    Normally I'd tell you to get the hell out of my country but, well, you already did. So, good job. I commend you. Most people who live in the US throw away their freedom and ruin it for the rest of us. You actually did the proper thing and moved to a country where you don't have that freedom in the first place.

    Thank you, really, thank you.
  • by Wyatt Earp (1029) on Saturday December 05, 2009 @03:34PM (#30337456)

    If you have blood on your hands you are doing it wrong.

    Guns let you have some standoff distance so you don't get splatter.

  • by L0rdJedi (65690) on Monday December 07, 2009 @04:04PM (#30357048)

    We may believe everybody deserves these rights, but we don't normally go around trying to enforce our rights onto every country. Our track record lately, as in the past 10 years, is actually still pretty good.

    Look back at our nation's history. We have not been in the habit of "spreading democracy" throughout the world. What we have been in the habit of doing is pushing communism back and containing it, which we sometimes failed miserably at doing. We've also been in the habit of pressuring communist countries to free their citizens. With enough pressure, they eventually fall (see Russia and East Germany for two good examples).

    Until recently, no war criminal was tried in a civilian court. It is what military tribunals are for. If you are captured on the battlefield, military tribunals are suppose to be used, not civilian courts. Civilian courts have a much higher burden of proof than military tribunals. All it's going to take is a little reasonable doubt and KSM will either walk free or have a hung jury. That's not justice, it's insanity.

    This has set a precedent. If bin Laden is captured tomorrow, there is now a chance that he will have to be read Miranda rights and then tried in a civilian court. So while we keep telling the world that we're going to try him in court because "it's the right thing to do" we're also telling the world "he'll likely be found guilty and even if he's not, we won't let him go". What kind of justice is that? If we've already decided that he can't be set free and that he'll be convicted, that's just hypocrisy. The trial is a big show and it's a show we don't need.

I'm all for computer dating, but I wouldn't want one to marry my sister.

Working...