Maybe Atkinson is right about R18+ games

Mike Bantick
Monday, 16 March 2009 15:47

Opinion and Analysis

South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson is a fan of keeping the ban on violent video games.  He is the most vocal of the Attorneys-General in attempting to maintain the lack of an R18+ classification for interactive entertainment in Australia.  Perhaps he has a point.

This debate has been going on for a long time now; the lack of an R18+ classification for video games has seen increasing numbers of games either banned from sale, modified for the Australian market or forced to go through an appeal process in order to get release in what amounts to a relatively small market for the companies involved.

In Australia, a game that cannot be rated by the Classification Board into the top MA15+ category is essentially unclassified (UC).  Anything that is UC cannot be legally sold in the country.

It is rare, but there have been some games not make it to Australian retail shelves, many more have made it only after some editing.  In recent times the following games have either been banned or modified:  Grand Theft Auto IV, Dark Sector, Fallout 3, Silent Hill:  Homecoming, and Dead Space.

As far back as March 2008, the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General decided to release a discussion paper on the situation.  Much of the drive to talk about the issues stemming from Victorian Attorney-General, Robert Hulls.

The R18+ classification proponents point to a lack of consistency between international rating systems, current local Film and Television classifications and freedom of access to an increasingly aging gaming population as reasons to introduce the mature rating scheme.

Since March, nothing much has happened.  As late as October last year, the release of the discussion paper was yet again stalled by Atkinson.

And recently, he responded to the rising tide of criticism against his stand.  A letter today posted on gaming site Kotaku gives an insight into how he feels about the issue.

“It confuses and baffles me why I am being harangued, threatened and abused by people who want the right to play a handful of games.”  Atkinson said.  “It confuses my why so many gamers are arguing that they should have the right to play games that enable them on-screen to bash, torture, slay, slaughter, rape and take drugs. I am concerned about the state of mind of an individual who thinks he should have the right to do this in a computer game and then wants to tell me about it. Add to that the threats to me and I feel more certain about my stance that I should do what I can to minimise the number of these games in Australian homes.”

“My main concern is that these games will become available to children and vulnerable adults.”  Atkinson continues.  “I watch my own children play violent and aggressive games that are legally available - legally available because they have been classified as MA15+. As my youngest boy blew away one humanoid after another with an automatic rifle recently, I ribbed him "Do you think any of these have aunties or cousins?"”

CONTINUED on Page 2