| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (34)

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:08AM John Z said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It's a bit confusing that the Australian M will be analogous to the North American T. Then again, it's not like there could ever really be a universal ratings standard anyway (not sarcasm-- different regions are right to prioritize different things, IMO, and it's really only a detriment when, as in Australia's case, the lack of an applicable rating scuttles/censors the work from being shown at all), so any step forward is preferable to the current situation.

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:34AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@John Z

M would do better if it was say 14+.

It means that companies could still aim their games at a teen who is a bit older, without having to force their game up to an 18+, but not having to lower it down to a PG standard.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:55AM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@This Little Man Says His Name Is

Uhhh, is either the M or the 4 there a typo? I don't think you're saying what you want to.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 10:55AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Acosta02

Neither of those is a typo. The M rating talking about in the article is PG(13) so parental guidance for those under 13.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 11:28AM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@This Little Man Says His Name Is

Oh durrrrrrrrrr. My bad.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:10AM super saiyan goku said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
as an australian let me be the first to say bloody oath this is taking too long i just wanna play mortal kombat but i guess a copy of ebay will be easy enough to get

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:30AM Deekman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@super saiyan goku may want to rethink that since it's been put on a ban list anyone found importing mortal kombat will face a $200,000 fine
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:36AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Deekman

I would very much like to see someone actually get that fine.

Appart from anyone importing a large quantity of the game at once, the chance of someone actually getting caught and fined is very low.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:38AM Apsac D said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Deekman

Goku was never the smartest of the Z-Fighters... I bet Tien didn't import it. He flew to America to play it, then came back.

Sure, you can beat him in a fight, but he didn't get a small fine.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:57AM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@super saiyan goku

eBay's easy to get, but the enemies are super cheap and there's no story to speak of.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 1:34PM AntiVillian said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@super saiyan goku

throw it on the barbay mate I played ebay once before, not worth the knifey spoony
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:14AM PrinceWitherdick said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
FINISH IT!

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:31AM brett43 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@PrinceWitherdick FINISH HIM!
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:14AM TachiFoxy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Now I just would hope that Germany adds a "21+" rating so all the senseless censorship is gone from there as well...

Not even 18+ is enough for the USK to justify releasing uncensored games.

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:27AM LPHeadstrong said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That is a pretty big gap! Could be wrong but a game like Smackdown Vs. Raw would then be 18+?

However it happens, an 18 rating is long overdue! That video of Left 4 Dead 2 in Australia's just hilarious!

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 11:02AM Demaar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@LPHeadstrong
Nah, it'd probably be M. Sure it's violent, but not horrifically so. I reckon this would just mean shooters would become R18+ games by default instead of this "15+".

Honestly, who the hell cares? If a game is designed for adults, and it gets an 18+ rating, I'm not gonna give a shit. Just release it here.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:27AM R Planteer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Perfect example as to why the U.S. shouldn't ever let video game (or any media) ratings be controlled by the government.

Politicians suck at just about everything, but they suck extra hard at making ANY DECISION EVER.

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:35AM Apsac D said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@R Planteer

I live in Australia and this is actually a good idea. The more ratings we have between G and R18+, the higher the chances of idiotic parents realising that maybe a game rated R ain't so good for little Billy... or Sheila.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:37AM Apsac D said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Apsac D

And yay for double-posts and typos!

See if you can spot it.

I bet you can't spot the double-post, 'stiqers!
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:39AM R Planteer said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Apsac D


You couldn't have missed my point more if you tried. My point is things like these should be done by non-government organizations, like they are in America (ESRB for video games, MPAA for movies).

No where did I state or imply that having more levels of rating for video games was a bad idea.
Reply

Posted: Apr 29th 2011 4:43AM Apsac D said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@R Planteer

I saw your point. You said "Politicians suck at just about everything, but they suck extra hard at making ANY DECISION EVER."

To which I replied "I live in Australia and this is actually a good idea."

We both said other things, but the main point was addressed.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:30AM borgdronez said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Can someone explain this to me? In the US, AGs prosecute lawbreakers. So why are they deciding the law in Australia? Seems to me that the people who prosecute crimes shouldn't be deciding what the laws are. Its a clear cut conflict of interest. So why do they allow this over there?

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 10:10AM Dashx747 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@borgdronez

In Australia it's a different legal system. While US, Europe (except UK) and South America use the Roman law system, they use the commom law system, and because of that some things work diferently.

There, the Attorney-General's Department "provides essential expert support to the Government in the maintenance and improvement of Australia's system of law and justice and its national security and emergency management systems".

They act more like consultants inside the legislative system, while in US and Europe an AG would be in the judiciary system.

If there is any australian here, feel free to correct me, it's been a long time since my international law lessons.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 10:12AM LaughingTarget said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@borgdronez

A bigger question is why does Australia permit total veto power by one individual that can't be overridden as part of the legal process. I can see it making sense if one individual can veto any law increasing restrictions, spending more, or taxing more, but not when it involves stripping political appointees of power.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 10:59AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Dashx747

The Attorney generals are not part of the court system in Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney_general#Australia

@LaughingTarget

The original laws around Entertainment Ratings state that they need to be the same accross all states and teritories and that changes can only be made if the AG of every state agrees to them.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:47AM Tubbernaut said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
BUSINESSES importing multiple copies face 200k. Individual is up to 300. But it's all scare tactics, yet to see a single source on someone fined.
However, worst comes to worst - I'll make some friends in SA :)
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:43AM TCJJ said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The proposed change is the same as in New Zealand except we also have R16+. They should add that too. I always wanted the MA15+ rating though, because films and games either go down to PG13+ or up to R16+ (sometimes up to R18+). Unfortunately, they usually screw it up and give lower ratings to the ones that need higher ratings and vice versa.

Still, I guess this is good for Australia. I reckon having R16+ gives a bit of a middle ground though. I'd hate to be involved in re-classifying everything though. It'd be a nightmare.

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 9:52AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@TCJJ

Things wouldn't get re-classified. Old content would stay the way it is, anything new would be subject to the new classification system.
Reply

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 11:09AM Suichimo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
How does that even make sense? We'll give you this R18 that you've been wanting, but you can't have your M15 anymore! Why wouldn't you just keep both? Would you have games in the M15 rating become R18 games?

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 11:09AM edit said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Clearly this is driven by John Rau's conservatism and personal opinions on 'acceptability', but at least it would be a bloody improvement from what we have now and give adults the right to choose what content they come into contact with rather than having a single person, with the arrogance to believe he knows what's best for everyone else, decide for them.

I honestly don't see what's so hard about all this though, they should simply copy the film ratings system for games. If there is a belief that a violent game is more "dangerous" than a violent film then the game should be rated accordingly. There is no rational need for a new ratings system per medium.

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 2:48PM Dark Mirage said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That really wouldn't be any different a system from the ESRB then.

Maybe not a perfect solution, but it's better than no solution at this point.

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 4:00PM 12thSAGEofGAMING said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I find it to be pretty interesting that a place like Austraila, whos first settlers of the land, was basically a mix of small time to big time criminals and now their rating system is more strict than ESRB or PEGI.

not saying that to say their hypocrites (far from it. that generation died off along time ago) but just an interesting thought.

Posted: Apr 28th 2011 5:19PM Kompstrumpcziwadze said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Jesus Christ just goddamn do it alreeady! Stop messing around and get it done.

Posted: Apr 29th 2011 12:00AM Vemacitrin said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The trouble with this proposed system is that it will cause the very problem that the R rating is meant to solve.

- The "R" rating is a restriction of sales to persons over 18.
- The "MA15+" rating is a restriction of sales to persons over 15.
- The "M" rating is a *recommendation* of content as being potentially unsuitable for persons under 15, with no restrictions implemented.

By removing the in-between MA15+ rating, one widens the gap between what is deemed appropriate and what is not. The potential impact of this is that games which somewhat appropriately fit the MA15+ bill, for example Dead Space (which throughout my gameplay I found an appropriate for for the MA15+ label) would instead be upgraded to an R rating, distorting its actual impact as a form of media. Another example would be Pandorum. Again, quite scary but hardly deserving of an R rating in my opinion.

This move would only cause shoehorning in the other direction; games which are really MA15+ content will end up in the R category. Parents of teenagers will not be able to properly make use of the classification system, as it will not cater to _their_ children. As a society which already seems to shun the turbulent period of everyone's life that we know as adolescence, can we really afford to further marginalise our own children?

Featured Stories

Image

Silver Lining: I Am Alive's unfeeling world

Posted on May 25th 2012 7:30PM

Image

Game Of Thrones and the paradoxes of adaptation

Posted on May 25th 2012 5:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW