Australia now has AO rating

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:32 am

http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/newsbusiness/8276146/australia-edges-closer-to-advlt-only-game-classification

What do people here think of this news?
I find it amusing that it is now legal everywhere except for NSW, how are they going to manage that? Tasmania could but NSW? Really?
User avatar
Solina971
 
Posts: 3421
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:40 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:56 am

About [censored] time!

:)



It'll be interesting to see just how much abuse the NSW Attorney General cops for not endorsing the proposal.
User avatar
Sweet Blighty
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:39 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:32 pm

Is this the "solution" that was suggested a while back that involved replacing MA15+ with R18+, or does it actually include both now? The article isn't very clear.
User avatar
Nomee
 
Posts: 3382
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:18 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:42 am

"The introduction of an R18+ classification" seems to suggest that it won't be replacing anything.

...Not to mention "gamers [...] rejoice today". :P
User avatar
Laura-Lee Gerwing
 
Posts: 3363
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:46 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:33 am

Is this the "solution" that was suggested a while back that involved replacing MA15+ with R18+, or does it actually include both now? The article isn't very clear.

I doubt it, the NSW attorney general would have no problem with harsher laws.
User avatar
James Wilson
 
Posts: 3457
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:51 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:26 am

"The introduction of an R18+ classification" seems to suggest that it won't be replacing anything.

...Not to mention "gamers [...] rejoice today". :P


In that case, that's definitely a good (albeit long overdue) thing. Good to know that our Australian friends won't miss out on any more great games because a few politicians wanted to decide what kind of media was best for everyone. :celebration:
User avatar
dav
 
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 3:46 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:28 am

I'm so happy *sheds manly tear*
User avatar
Nikki Hype
 
Posts: 3429
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:38 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:59 am

While it doesn't effect me directly since I'm not in Australia and don't plan on going there any time soon, it does seem like good news for Australian gamers, as it should logically mean that they won't need to worry about missing out on certain games because the ratings board isn't willing to give them... whatever their previous maximum rating was.
User avatar
willow
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:43 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:53 am

I've heard Australia was about as strict as Germany when it came to violent video games. While I can understand Germany's reasoning, Australia seemed kind of odd. Glad to see Aussies catching a break :P. I wonder how Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw will feel about this?

Zero Punctuation game reviewer

User avatar
Mizz.Jayy
 
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:56 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:59 am

A few things to note:

1. We dont have an AO rating yet. All thats happened is that most of the states have agreed to implement one. This means things could change in the future if a state decides to backtrack.
2. New South Wales (where your beloved Robbio lives) has not agreed to an AO rating because our AG is a bastard who doesnt know what he's doing and is trying to hold the state to ransom like a......*cough* excuse me. So for the moment it looks as though people in NSW will have to import their AO games from other states.
3. At the moment this isnt a nation-wide thing. Rather, because the Attorney Generals are mindless old fools who cannot make a unanimous decision, the states that agree to the implementation of an AO rating will individually implement changes to their individual systems. This means at the moment the systems can be different across different states, thus the South Australian AG wants to simply remove the MA15+ rating and have an AO rating instead while other statres simply want to add an AO rating to the current system.
4. The federal government still wants an AO rating, so they may try to implement a nation-wide change in the future from a federal level.
5. Games currently banned will most likely not be released in Australia unless the publishers make the effort to re-classify their games (an expensive process).

Otherwise this is still good news. The problem is however this isnt what we really wanted. The push was for a complete overhaul of the classification system (as the current system doesnt work for games) and instead we're getting a disjointed effort from individual states who are ultimatly doing this on their own terms. Nonetheless, as the classification system is currently under review, great change may be ahead.


And I would like to repeat that the NSW AG is a bastard.
User avatar
Scott
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:59 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:44 am

A few things to note:

1. We dont have an AO rating yet. All thats happened is that most of the states have agreed to implement one. This means things could change in the future if a state decides to backtrack.
2. New South Wales (where your beloved Robbio lives) has not agreed to an AO rating because our AG is a bastard who doesnt know what he's doing and is trying to hold the state to ransom like a......*cough* excuse me. So for the moment it looks as though people in NSW will have to import their AO games from other states.
3. At the moment this isnt a nation-wide thing. Rather, because the Attorney Generals are mindless old fools who cannot make a unanimous decision, the states that agree to the implementation of an AO rating will individually implement changes to their individual systems. This means at the moment the systems can be different across different states, thus the South Australian AG wants to simply remove the MA15+ rating and have an AO rating instead while other statres simply want to add an AO rating to the current system.
4. The federal government still wants an AO rating, so they may try to implement a nation-wide change in the future from a federal level.
5. Games currently banned will most likely not be released in Australia unless the publishers make the effort to re-classify their games (an expensive process).

Otherwise this is still good news. The problem is however this isnt what we really wanted. The push was for a complete overhaul of the classification system (as the current system doesnt work for games) and instead we're getting a disjointed effort from individual states who are ultimatly doing this on their own terms. Nonetheless, as the classification system is currently under review, great change may be ahead.


And I would like to repeat that the NSW AG is a bastard.

Is he actually going to try and make possession of AO games illegal if this ends up going ahead? or is he just not letting them be sold in shops in NSW?
User avatar
Kat Lehmann
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:24 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:32 am

While it doesn't effect me directly since I'm not in Australia and don't plan on going there any time soon, it does seem like good news for Australian gamers, as it should logically mean that they won't need to worry about missing out on certain games because the ratings board isn't willing to give them... whatever their previous maximum rating was.

MA15+

I've heard Australia was about as strict as Germany when it came to violent video games. While I can understand Germany's reasoning, Australia seemed kind of odd. Glad to see Aussies catching a break :P. I wonder how Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw will feel about this?

Germany is actually worse; there have been various games where blood had to be made a different colour, human enemies replaced with robots, etc.

Here the problem was simply that we had no rating higher than 15+ and since there are games you just can't squeeze into that, various games were refused classification.
User avatar
Minako
 
Posts: 3379
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:50 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:41 am

Germany is actually worse; there have been various games where blood had to be made a different colour, human enemies replaced with robots, etc.

Australian copies of game were often the same version that was released in Germany, Left 4 Dead 2 for example.

I remember when GTA4 was released, Australia got a censored version, and Rockstar just released that here in NZ as well, even though we have an R18 rating. So some guy started importing copies from the US and Europe and selling them, and I think he actually managed to outsell the real distributor in some places :P
User avatar
Rudi Carter
 
Posts: 3365
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:09 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 8:59 am

If it stops them from banning games or censoring stuff in them, then yeah it's a good thing.
User avatar
Pixie
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:50 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:27 am

Australian copies of game were often the same version that was released in Germany, Left 4 Dead 2 for example.

I remember when GTA4 was released, Australia got a censored version, and Rockstar just released that here in NZ as well, even though we have an R18 rating. So some guy started importing copies from the US and Europe and selling them, and I think he actually managed to outsell the real distributor in some places :P

That's probably because publishers are cheap bastards :P.

My point was that the censorship demands in Germany at their worst are sillier than the censorship demands in Australia at their worst.
User avatar
Tiffany Castillo
 
Posts: 3429
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:09 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:38 am

Is he actually going to try and make possession of AO games illegal if this ends up going ahead? or is he just not letting them be sold in shops in NSW?


Most likely the law will remain as it is. As I understand it (though I am not from NSW), you are not permitted to own unclassified games with the intention of distributing it, nor are you permitted to import them from overseas. Of course, it's difficult to prove intent, so - I guess I need to be careful here about discussing illegal activity - you might ask whether one would face punishment unless the authorities knew that one was selling the game. Furthermore, the other aspect of the law does rely upon customs checking parcels (which they do not always do with maximum rigor).
User avatar
leni
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:58 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:46 am

If it stops them from banning games or censoring stuff in them, then yeah it's a good thing.


Of course, if it ends up like the US "AO" rating (effectively translates to "your game isn't going to be stocked/sold by anyone")...... :shrug:
User avatar
Karine laverre
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 7:50 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:14 pm

Of course, if it ends up like the US "AO" rating (effectively translates to "your game isn't going to be stocked/sold by anyone")...... :shrug:

Then hope it's like the UK's saner system, where an 18 rating translates to "can be bought by anyone in a TESCO".
User avatar
Laura Shipley
 
Posts: 3564
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 4:47 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:16 am

Of course, if it ends up like the US "AO" rating (effectively translates to "your game isn't going to be stocked/sold by anyone")...... :shrug:

Not unless they convince people/stores that it's just like the US Mature rating but one year older.
User avatar
Kerri Lee
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:37 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:05 am

Totally pointless... Nobody makes AO games since none of the corporate chains will retail them. They outta go the route that film has and come up with an "Unrated" rating. That's how places like Walmart and Kmart retail ultra-violent content like 'Saw' and 'I Spit on Your Grave' while rejecting video games that portray 'boobies'.
User avatar
Misty lt
 
Posts: 3400
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 10:06 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:25 am

Of course, if it ends up like the US "AO" rating (effectively translates to "your game isn't going to be stocked/sold by anyone")...... :shrug:

It won't, though. In the USA, there is only a one year gap between the rating restricted to advlts and the second highest rating. In Australia there will be a three year gap between MA15+ and R18+. This means that there's a lot more content which doesn't fit the former, and will thus be given the latter (unless the publisher/developer wants to go to the expense of changing things, getting it re-rated, then distributing another different version of the game).

Totally pointless... Nobody makes AO games since none of the corporate chains will retail them. They outta go the route that film has and come up with an "Unrated" rating. That's how places like Walmart and Kmart retail ultra-violent content like 'Saw' and 'I Spit on Your Grave' while rejecting video games that portray 'boobies'.

The new rating Australia will get is "R18+", which makes them available to advlts only, but is entirely separate from the USA's "AO" rating. In combination with what I said above, this means that there should be no issues/stigma relating to releasing titles under it.
User avatar
Blessed DIVA
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:09 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:31 pm

Totally pointless... Nobody makes AO games since none of the corporate chains will retail them. They outta go the route that film has and come up with an "Unrated" rating. That's how places like Walmart and Kmart retail ultra-violent content like 'Saw' and 'I Spit on Your Grave' while rejecting video games that portray 'boobies'.


The point of having an AO rating is so that we don't get ridiculous cases like Fallout 3 being initially banned in Australia because of the use of syringes and pills (the gore was ok, however!). The drug references were deemed too strong for a 15+ rating. With an 18+ rating, however, it's likely that Fallout 3 would have been accepted for release without needing any adjustments to its content.
User avatar
Yung Prince
 
Posts: 3373
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:45 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:43 am

The point of having an AO rating is so that we don't get ridiculous cases like Fallout 3 being initially banned in Australia because of the use of syringes and pills (the gore was ok, however!). The drug references were deemed too strong for a 15+ rating. With an 18+ rating, however, it's likely that Fallout 3 would have been accepted for release without needing any adjustments to its content.


yeah, morphine to med-x was a little odd,
User avatar
Maria Garcia
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:59 am

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:21 am

The point of having an AO rating is so that we don't get ridiculous cases like Fallout 3 being initially banned in Australia because of the use of syringes and pills (the gore was ok, however!). The drug references were deemed too strong for a 15+ rating. With an 18+ rating, however, it's likely that Fallout 3 would have been accepted for release without needing any adjustments to its content.


What's more is that they cited "realistic use of drugs via syringes, inhalers, and pills" or something to that effect in their statement when the game was initially refused classification, which goes to show just how much they actually researched the games they ban. Now, I've never done drugs, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't involve booting up a wrist-mounted computer, scrolling to an icon that says "Med-X" and clicking on it. As far as I remember, neither New Vegas nor FO3 actually show drugs being used. Just an inventory icon, a sound effect and stat boosts/penalties.

Which leads me to another point, did GTA4 even have the drug scenes edited out over there? I remember off of the top of my head at least three cutscenes that showed characters doing various drugs, not counting Little Jacob's countless references to pot. As far as I remember, it was only edited for blood.

That whole system is flawed, but thankfully it looks like they're finally starting to wise up and fix it.
User avatar
Kari Depp
 
Posts: 3427
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 3:19 pm

Post » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:34 am

Totally pointless... Nobody makes AO games since none of the corporate chains will retail them. They outta go the route that film has and come up with an "Unrated" rating. That's how places like Walmart and Kmart retail ultra-violent content like 'Saw' and 'I Spit on Your Grave' while rejecting video games that portray 'boobies'.

Completely different cases, you're talking about the US, where there is no government classification board, and no legal requirement for ID checks.
The UK and NZ (amongst others) have an R18 rating, and have been selling R18 games for years, and they get stocked in all major chain stores.
User avatar
brandon frier
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:47 pm

Next

Return to Othor Games