Australia Approves Final R18+ Gaming Guidelines 67
dotarray writes "Despite stories suggesting that a change to the Australian ratings system may be as far as two years away, the Federal Minister for Home Affairs has announced that each Australian state and territory has signed off on the final guidelines required for the introduction of an adult R18+ classification Down Under."
Its been a long time coming (Score:5, Interesting)
What is particularly interesting about it is that it highlights the disparaity between the speed that technology moves, and the speed that our lawmakers move.
I believe we may be an entire generation away from a government of technology-savvy lawmakers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Its been a long time coming (Score:4, Insightful)
Censorship is never a solution. Soviet Union made owning a photo of an erected penis a criminal offense [soviet-empire.com]. It is perhaps not a coincidence that Soviet society was plagued with sexual maniacs like Chikatilo [wikipedia.org].
Meanwhile, the US never had a sexual predators and maniacs like Berkowitz, Gacy, Bundy, Gein, amongst others.
Your point that censorship never works is valid, but your example is horribly flawed. I read the wikipedia article on Chikatilo and one thing immediately stuck out at me, he had the same hallmarks in his childhood as western serial killers. Vicious parents (beatings et al.), early fascination with fire and death, above average intelligence, bullied and above all else, serious sexual problems in adolescence. It strikes me that Chikatilo would have been a serial killer in almost any society, communism had little to do with it, he almost fits the textbook conditions that created most killers in the west.
Re: (Score:2)
What guidelines? (Score:2)
Shouldn't R18+ simply be a catch all for anything that's not covered by the existing guidelines? What happens to games that don't fall under the definition of R18+?
The very thought that content would have to be approved before getting sold to adults is chilling. This doesn't seem to address that.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In Australia, X-rated material is still banned, with the exception of in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and the Northern Territories (NT).
Thus, anything which doesn't fall under R18 classification falls instead under "Refused Classification". As there's no X rating available, it's simply not saleable. Of course, there's plenty of X-rated material imported to Australia every day (via the internet, largely). There's no law against possession of X-rated material, however it is illegal to possess certai
Re:What guidelines? (Score:5, Interesting)
If it wasn't illegal to buy snuff films, they'd be widely purchased and a market created for such
Actually, I just read an article, I think it was by BBC, that said that after doing much research, their conclusion was there is no such thing as a snuff film, nobody has actually made a snuff film, and there is no market for snuff films. Its just too difficult / costly to murder people for entertainment as opposed to doing fiction.
:P
SOMETIMES the world isn't as bad as it seems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That said, child pornography is a serious concern.
Child abuse is a serious concern. But AFAIK there's no place left on Earth (where's there any rule of law) that it's legal to make or buy child pornography. Given there's no legal market anywhere, it would seem to me that it's the abuse, not the evidence thereof, that should be the first priority for concern.
Re: (Score:3)
Child abuse is a serious concern. But AFAIK there's no place left on Earth (where's there any rule of law) that it's legal to make or buy child pornography. Given there's no legal market anywhere, it would seem to me that it's the abuse, not the evidence thereof, that should be the first priority for concern.
Of course, the "child" part can vary substantially from country to country, also including ridiculous situations where there's a discrepancy between the ages where it's legal to have sex and be filmed having sex.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:What guidelines? (Score:4, Insightful)
You obviously have never a snuff film then because they are out there
Did you know, that when you see a character die in a movie, the actor didn't actually die? Strange but true.
People seem to forget that the same array of special effects and clever editing are available to adult film producers, if used (far) less often due to expense.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Most people are drooling idiots.
Then why in the world would I care to have them lording orver my life telling me what I can watch and what I can't? Your argument is rediculous. Your implying, no, strait out telling us your government knows better than you. Based on what? How in the world do you people believe that rot? What a thing, to sit and tell yourself you need some drooling idiots dictating what you, a drooling idiot, should read or watch. If 1000 monkeys sat at 1000 typewriters after 1000 years would they come up with Australia? Se
Re: (Score:1)
If my arguement is ridiculous, you would actually counter the points I raised. You're unable to. Carry on, 99%.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You're argument is that people are drooling idiots
You're argument
You're
Thanks for proving my point. But no. While that was a statement I made, it was not the crux of my argument at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Again, you've focused on five words of my post as if you're personally insulted by the fact, and instead refer to those five words as my "entire post". My argument, since you seem to have missed it on multiple attempts at comprehension, was that individuals create markets for certain material through the consumption thereof. In periods where, for example, child pornography, have been unregulated have created a considerable market-driven increase thereof. Only censorship and making this material illegal have
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If 1000 monkeys sat at 1000 typewriters after 1000 years would they come up with Australia? Seems so.
wouldn't take that long
Re: (Score:1)
Thus, anything which doesn't fall under R18 classification falls instead under "Refused Classification". As there's no X rating available, it's simply not saleable.
That's because Australia is simply not a free country. Free speech is a fundamental human right. Requiring classification violates that right.
You seem to overestimate the self-regulation abilities of your fellow man.
You seem to overestimate the self-regulation abilities of your regulators. People in government are not any better than the rest
Re: (Score:3)
Do you have any evidence to back this up?
In relation to snuff? No. As snuff films are largely un-verifiable, we can only look at anecdotal evidence surrounding popularity of extremely bad film where people have THOUGHT an individual died in the filming thereof.
I can easily back it up in relation to child porn though. Look at Ukraine, early 2000s, BD Company and LS Studios and various subsidiary and even unaffiliated companies. A market was created for CP through the temporarily unregulated sale of material from Ukraine. It started out with some sm
Re:What guidelines? (Score:4, Informative)
The very thought that content would have to be approved before getting sold to adults is chilling.
yeah, Orwell thought it was scary too. :) In all seriousness though, censorship is a problem.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Apparently you don't know about the problems with video games down under.
That's not a problem with video games down under. It's a problem with free speech down under. Namely, the lack of it. The Australian government may be giving its subjects a little more chain, but they're still not free.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Very few places hold 'free speech' as an absolute right like the Americans idealise it as. Most places have a balance between freedom of expression, and other considerations which may conflict with that ideal. The key international human rights instruments (Australia is a signatory to these, of course) also note that freedom of expression is not an absolute and has to be weighed against other competing rights. It is very important and should never be unduly interfered with - but it's not an absolute. I don'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently you don't know about the problems with video games down under.
That's not a problem with video games down under. It's a problem with free speech down under. Namely, the lack of it. The Australian government may be giving its subjects a little more chain, but they're still not free.
We're maintaining a lot more freedom then the US at the moment. How are those free speech zones going. I still have the ability to protest in the open and on the steps of parliament.
Meanwhile, the US copyright and trademark laws have subtly stripped what remains of your much vaunted "free speech".
And yes, no one will stop me from calling Tony Abbott a cunt, a wanker, or a nance. It does stop me from saying "Tony Abbott has sex with the corpses of little boys" without evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
A difference between M15 and MA15, if you're wondering, is that M15 is "recommended" for 15 years or older, whereas MA15 is "restricted" to 15 years and over. So a 13 year old can go to the movies with their parents and watch an M flick, but could not be granted admission for a MA15 flick.
(Having said that there is not really much actual enforcement of any of this - but on paper, that's the difference).
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it's MA (15+) and the M rating allows for:
- Violence.
- Frequent course language.
- Sexual references.
- Simulated Sex.
- Some Nudity.
It's in no way compatible to Teen. That would be our PG rating. It's important, when berating someone else does not understand the classification system, to have an understanding of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Live action porn movies would generally get the X in Australia rating. (However it is only legal to sell X rated material in the ACT and NT, and not in the other 6 states - remember classification is a State matter, not a Federal one, though the States have voluntarily agreed to harmonise most aspects of their classification guidelines with the exception of the treatment of X and RC material)
However the X rating does not exist for games. So a game that had live action porn would probably be RC, even under t
Drug incentives still not allowed (Score:3, Interesting)
In the article for R 18+ classifications:
Drug use related to incentives and rewards is not permitted.
Depending on how 'drug' is defined, a game could be banned if using apsrin was part of the plot to recover some ailment.
If this was only related to controlled substances, then a fictional drug could be used instead without problem, making the rule near useless.
Re: (Score:2)
Left 4 Dead 2, pictured right below that drug use notification and a major point of contention in this classification debate, would still have trouble because it features downing a bottle of pills or injecting yourself with a syringe of adrenaline in order to continue killing zombies, and has an achievement related to that as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's all binary logic, just like computers, which are the GP's only friends and thus his only frame of reference, so no human will have a chance to make that choice and see it's silly, and there's obviously no room for case-by-case decisions.
When dealing with decisions decided by bureaucrats or people who deal with lots of red tape, it's often wise to expect them to behave in blind obedience to the letter of the law, even in cases where most humans would feel it was excessive or an exception should be made. We had an example just recently where a woman and her husband were arrested, and their child taken away by protected services, because they forgot to pay for a sandwich which they ate in the store, and we've had past examples in the states (
Re: (Score:1)
It would vary on a) the type of drug and b) how the drug was used in game.
Fallout 3 for example was initially refused classification because they used morphine to heal the player rather than one of the made up drugs they used in previous fallouts. Once they changed it to one of the made up drugs it went through without issue.
The company can then also appeal the d
Re: (Score:1)
So no, it is not that simple or stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Would "Whiskey" be banned, but "Buffout" OK, because one has the same name as a real drug?
And does that extend to "potions"? They're a staple of any fantasy game, and are exactly the same thing as drugs but with a different name.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Fallout's 'drugs' have names like Med-X, Rad-away, Jet etc. for that very reason.
And Whiskey is fine - alcohol isn't an illicit drug in Australia, so that classification guideline is irrelevant to it.
Re: (Score:2)
So is Fallout banned under these guidelines? There are a variety of drugs, including alcohol types, you can take in the game to give you various boosts.
Would "Whiskey" be banned, but "Buffout" OK, because one has the same name as a real drug?
Fallout is available here.
Context is everything in the Australian rating system. When the say "drug based incentives" they mean something clearly identified as a narcotic that has only a positive effect. This is generally restricted to real world restricted drugs, for example a trucking simulator where "Speed" is used as a power up (makes time go faster, reduces fatigue level) would be restricted where as using "Coffee" or "Magic time bending potion" for the same effect would not. To rephrase it, the gam
Drug use (Score:2)
Under the R18+ guidelines:
Drug use related to incentives and rewards is not permitted.
I guess that means Pac Man will be banned in Australia :(
Re: (Score:2)
Bonza Borrowin Wheels
You run about chattin to Sheila's, showing them a good time, and walking them home in the evening, you know to make sure they get home safe. Then you borrow mike's car and drive it over to mike's bar where you meet up with mike and mike for a few brews before heading over to mike's diner for a bite to eat. Then you return mike's car (remembering to fill it up along the way) then walk back home for a good nights sleep.