Following on from SA Attorney-General Michael Atkinson’s reiteration of his opposition to an R18+ rating for videogames, we asked several senior Australian games industry figures for their response. Just, you know, in the interest of balance and all that. And here’s what they said.
Jack
Friday, January 30, 2009 at 11:21 PMThe current system is actually doing what they want to avoid?
Call me an idiot (wont be the first time), but games like GTA IV, The Darkness and many current M15+ games are not really suited for 15/16/17 year old gamers? I’m not saying they can not play them, but the guidelines are there for parents and they are falsely tricked into believing that those games are OK for their kids.
I would not be happy if my kids opened up GTA4 and in the first 10 minutes someone makes mention of “titties” so many times. It was the obvious intent of the developers to make the game 18+ but instead the censorship is now allowing an unintended audience to view this material.
Shaoken
Saturday, January 31, 2009 at 2:18 PMmikezombie777
“Compulsory voting is another example of how much of a joke this countries so called ‘democracy’ really is. Compulsory voting contradicts the entire concept. We’re all forced to vote and provide our preferences but what if I don’t want any of the parties on the ballot paper to run the country? I’m still being FORCED to vote for somebody I DON’T approve of. THIS IS NOT DEMOCRACY! THIS IS THE OPPOSITE OF DEMOCRACY!”
You obviously don’t understand the system. You don’t want to vote for someone on the ballot? All you have to do is show up, get your name marked off then walk off. It’s perfectly legal. All the government asks is that you take the responsibly to acknowledge that you had the chance to vote. You get a choice if you want to vote. So your insistance that the system is undemocratic is uninformed and wrong.
Atkinson, now he’s undemocratic.
Dave
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 3:47 AMYour the fools that voted in KRudd and his cronies. This is just the beginning, wait until this firewall thing is imposed on the public.
StevoTheDevo
Monday, February 2, 2009 at 9:31 AMIf the gamer’s argument is that M.A. is exposing children to violence.. call his bluff, write an opinion piece to the major newspapers, particularly The Advertiser (in SA), perhaps also Today Tonight or ACA, clearly and concisely demonstrating the changes made to a refused classification game that allow it to be sold as a M15 game. Then ask, is removing these components “protecting children” or harming them?
The media will jump on this if they can see they have an angle to attack him.. at the moment, all they can see is an angle to attack games themselves.
TBoneTony
Tuesday, February 3, 2009 at 3:24 AMRemember that Michael Atkinson is ONLY the Attorney General for South Australia
So we should have an R18+ rating for Videogames in Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia, Tasmania and also the ACT and NT.
Only South Australia can’t have the R18+ and have to deal with only the MA15+ being a sticker to slap onto R18+ games.
see how far damaging Mr Atkinson’s claims are?
Jen
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 8:09 PMTom says exactly what my boyfriend and I have been saying. With no R18+ classification, games that would otherwise be R18+ are instead modified just enough to be allowed for sale as MA15+. The terrible thing is that just because you can’t see the blood of a kill in the game doesn’t mean the theme of death and violence is any less present. We need R18+ to assist parents and children in deciding if a game is suitable for them. As for “vulnerable adults” as Atkinson calls them, I think its an insult to adults’ intelligence and rights! We should be able to decide for ourselves if we are able to cope with the adult themes of an R18+ game. Who is he to dictate what adult gamers can handle?