june gloom on 15/12/2009 at 06:14
According to (
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/26504/Australia_Opens_R18_Debate_Invites_Public_Submissions.php) Gamasutra anyway.
Some key points:
Quote:
Users of the site are encouraged to fill in the submission template and either mail, fax or submit it online, and they have until February 28, 2010 to do so.
Atkinson will probably veto the shit out of it either way, but this is at least a foot in the door for you Aussies, especially if Atkinson loses face over this.
EvaUnit02 on 15/12/2009 at 09:06
This was posted on another forum:-
Quote:
The key arguments against are:
* Computer games should be treated differently from films given the specific, negative effects of interactivity on players, particularly their participation in violent and aggressive content.
* It would be difficult for parents to enforce age restrictions for computer games.
* Minors would be more likely to be exposed to computer games that are unsuitable for them.
* An R 18+ for computer games would exacerbate problems associated with access to high level material in Indigenous communities and by other non-English speaking people
* There is no demonstrated need to change existing restrictions.
ROFL at this one:-
Quote:
* An R 18+ for computer games would exacerbate problems associated with access to high level material in Indigenous communities and by other non-English speaking people
Oh noes, those aborigines and dirty foreigners are savage enough already and don't need further encouragement for their violent tendencies.
Aerothorn on 15/12/2009 at 12:09
Wow, that's pretty fucking racist. Yikes.
demagogue on 15/12/2009 at 16:40
For a second I thought we were talking about hentai games until I realized we're talking about "violent" games... It's then you realize how positively medieval this whole debate is.
CCCToad on 15/12/2009 at 16:51
I'm obviously going to take the pro-allowing them side of the debate, simply because of my individualist ideology. I don't really like the government being able to tell people what entertainment they should enjoy. Plus, you have the unique level of retardation that lawmakers seem to have that is demonstrated by the "it will make aborigines" violent argument.
@demagogue: I don't think hentai games should be illegal, just that a "Kill it with fire!" policy should apply to people who play them!
icemann on 15/12/2009 at 17:04
I completely agree with demagogue comment on how truelly medieval this whole thing is.
People deserve the right with all forms of media to be treated as adults in choosing what is right and wrong for them as individuals rather than some South Australian politician + a board that is increasing erratic and not consistent with its decisions.
Take for example its most recent and most publicized banning of the original version of Left4dead 2. It banned it basically for its allowance of bloody killing of "people" and so a heavily censored and not worth playing version was released just for Australia. Then it allows Modern Warfare 2 into the country without any changes required even though it features a mission in which the player is encouraged to shoot innocent living (in the game) people freely. I`m not saying that Modern Warfare 2 should have been banned or censored by any means, but it is a clear inconsistent ruling which for me as an Australian makes no sense to me at all.
One of the big problems I see is in the governments medieval views towards videogames ingeneral and that they still see videogames as essentially Space Invaders with better graphics and not the emerging art form that it has become. Sadly I dont see this stupid issue of the R18+ rating not being allowed being resolved until more of the youth of today step into parliament and the older less evolved retire.
CCCToad on 15/12/2009 at 17:10
Quote:
People deserve the right with all forms of media to be treated as adults in choosing what is right and wrong for them rather than some South Australian politician + a board that is increasing erratic and not consistent with its decisions.
thats a good point. I, for example, follow a stricter code than most in deciding which content I play. However, I don't want that codified into law because the government could just as easily decide that they don't want games that promote religion to be legal in addition to things I want.
In other words, its a good idea to apply the "veil of ignorance" before loudly shouting how you want something banned.
Ostriig on 15/12/2009 at 17:21
Quote Posted by icemann
Sadly I dont see this stupid issue of the R18+ rating not being allowed being resolved until more of the youth of today step into parliament and the older less evolved retire.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Atkinson alone responsible for blocking the R18+ category at this time? If that's the case, it's not a stretch to say that all you need is one exceptional retard ousted from position and replaced with a relatively sensible individual. Now, I understand that Atkinson is appointed to his position, not elected, but even so, at one level or another, the appointing group should be reliant to some extent on public support, no? I figure that if you raise a big enough stink this time around it may decrease their willingness to put this syphilitic baboon forward for Attorney General next term.
demagogue on 15/12/2009 at 21:56
Quote Posted by CCCToad
@demagogue: I don't think hentai games should be illegal, just that a "Kill it with fire!" policy should apply to people who play them!
I didn't explain my thinking all the way, either. I really had in my head they were talking about hentai games and then I read that it would exacerbate problems with the aboriginal and SE Asian populations. I was thinking WTF?! Are they afraid they'll start having more sex, lol? My god, then there will be
more of them! :joke: :tsktsk:
Then I re-read that checklist again and figured out they were mostly talking about violence and then thought the knee-jerk reaction to that sounded just as unreasonable and racist. Do the guys pushing this really realize how this is making them the butt of a joke everywhere else? (Not that the US is immune to such buffoonery; far from it. :/ )
dvrabel on 16/12/2009 at 01:34
In the full discussion paper, that bullet point is followed by this explanatory text.
[INDENT]Classification restrictions are less effective for people who don’t understand classification categories or don’t have information available to them in their languages. The classification system can only be effective if parents and other adults can draw a meaningful distinction between computer games that are restricted to persons aged over 18 years and those available to persons under 18 years. Allowing games with higher level content will increase the risk that minors in certain parts of the community will be exposed to inappropriate content because adults do not understand the classification system.[/indent]
It's a valid, if really weak argument.
