News

Drug Use The Reason For Crimecraft Banning

Flag
4:00PM November 30, 2009 | David Wildgoose

crimecraft picThe Classification Board has stated that “drug use related to incentives or rewards” is the reason why gangster-themed MMO Crimecraft has been refused classification in Australia.

According to the Board’s report obtained by Kotaku this afternoon, Crimecraft “contains the option to manufacture, trade and self-administer legal “medicines” and illegal “boosts”… Boosts are sometimes referred to as “drugs” both in the game and in the Applicant’s submissions to the Board.”

One type of boost is called Anabolics, which the Board notes “is named after a class of proscribed drugs and that the Applicant describes boosts as “like real-life steroids”. In addition, the names of boosts mimic the chemical and colloquial names of proscribed drugs.”

The Board’s report mentions a character class called a Bio-Forger, who crafts customisable illegal boosts from “real-world items such as base chemicals, nucleotides, hormones and enzymes as well as tools and objects associated with the production or use of drugs including syringes, disposable rubber tubes and silkscreen filters.”

Interestingly, the report notes that drug use has both positive and negative effects for the player’s character, but determines that “Boosts are intended to be used to gain short-term rewards or benefits in various scenarios within the game where the negative effects are mitigated by the positive effects.”

The Board concludes that Crimecraft warrants an RC rating in accordance with item 1a) of the National Classification code, which states that games that “depict, express or otherwise deal with… drug misuse or addiction… in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults… will be Refused Classification.”

Comments

  • Daniel

    November 30, 2009 at 4:09 PM

    Was the drug use by the Board? That’s all I want to know

  • Jason

    November 30, 2009 at 4:12 PM

    Yawn, same old story. The R rating is really starting to become a desperate issue

    • Doug Sherry

      November 30, 2009 at 5:53 PM

      Even if we had an R18+ rating this game would still have gotten RC, because of the classification code

  • formulated

    November 30, 2009 at 4:24 PM

    Considering they didn’t have to apply for classification (being available for download and being an MMO), I suspect they knew this would happen and it is part of a small publicity stunt to get the game some attention where it would’ve got none before.

    • James

      November 30, 2009 at 7:09 PM

      Online games have always required classification in order to be sold in Australia. It is just that the classification board and government only got round to telling everyone a couple of months ago.

      • Martin

        December 1, 2009 at 8:25 AM

        James: This game is not being sold it is a FREE TO PLAY mmo, the only time you spend money on the game is using actual money to buy in game items.

  • Michael Cohen

    November 30, 2009 at 4:33 PM

    I can sort of understand this one how it simulates drug making down to using actual tools and so on.

    Definitely not M15+ rating at all.

    18+ vs Ban? Definitely debatable on that one.

  • Pauline Hill

    November 30, 2009 at 4:34 PM

    I’m curious as to whether the drug use was enough that it would have been classified RC even if we did have an R18+ rating… Anyone have any ideas?

  • Joshy206

    November 30, 2009 at 4:36 PM

    I don’t know, this actually seems like a very reasonable argument from the board. That’s like making a game and letting you become a drug lord by creating drugs.

  • Satyr

    November 30, 2009 at 4:36 PM

    Here we go again…

  • Aaron

    November 30, 2009 at 4:47 PM

    Sounds just like potions with buff effects given a real world interpretation to me.

    If they called it potions instead of drugs and alchemy instead of dealing they would have gotten approved.

    • Trjn

      November 30, 2009 at 5:56 PM

      That’s something I’ve never understood about any classification board/censorship.

      Change something real to something fake, but otherwise keep it entirely the same and all of a sudden it’s okay?

      When someone says “frick” they obviously mean “fuck” and everyone knows it, so why is it any different seeing as it’s the meaning of the word and not the word itself that should be the problem.

      When you think about it “strong” and “profane” language isn’t really an issue, but “abusive” and “derogatory” language is something I would make sure kids stay clear of.

      Same goes for violence, change blood to sparks (or candy and rainbows) and suddenly chainsawing a dude in half is more acceptable? The violent action is the thing that needs to be addressed, not just the gory consequences.

      It’s something I think that seems to be completely wrong about these systems, they’re looking at the wrong things when deciding what is and isn’t appropriate.

      The fact that what would have pushed this over the line is that real life materials and drugs were used instead of fake ones (based on what happened with Fallout 3), just emphasises that the entire classification system is broken.

      You could differentiate between fictional and non-fictional drug use, but it’s still drug use, and the question to be asked should be “does it glorify/encourage drug use?” not “is there a reward for drug use?” Because there can be a temporary reward for drug use but a long term negative effect (short term buff, permanent stat reduction), which would actually discourage real life drug use if my logic applies to the real world (it doesn’t, but sometimes I wish it did).

      Have I gone off on a ranty little tangent that barely applies to the comment I’m replying to again? Dang sarnit.

  • Michael Pannunzio

    November 30, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    Well I guess they will have a revised version with the names changed.

  • Ben Scott

    November 30, 2009 at 4:59 PM

    ‘who crafts customisable illegal boosts from “real-world items such as base chemicals, nucleotides, hormones and enzymes’

    I found this really funny and i can’t articulate why.

  • jim

    November 30, 2009 at 5:03 PM

    I find it hard to reconcile this with a classification of GTA: Chinatown Wars on DS and PSP, where drug dealing is an integral part of the game.

  • Ayrton Coll

    November 30, 2009 at 5:09 PM

    There was quite a bit of drug trading in GTA: Chinatown wars without any pretension of the drugs being fictional, but I guess according to the guidelines it’s only bad if the drugs are used by the player.

  • Foxbane

    November 30, 2009 at 5:22 PM

    i wana see what atkinson says about this thinks we can get games where we can rape but drugs BANHAMMER ATTACK!!!!!!

  • Michael Cohen

    November 30, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Drug Dealing =/= Drug use + Drug creation

    There is a difference. Stop using GTA: CTW as an example when it’s like comparing selling knives with stabbing people.

    • Ayrton Coll

      November 30, 2009 at 6:45 PM

      Or comparing selling knifes to chopping vegtables. I understand the difference in the guidelines but I’m still not sure whether one is worse than the other, although both should be rated R18.

  • Michael O'Regan

    November 30, 2009 at 6:35 PM

    “depict, express or otherwise deal with… drug misuse or addiction… in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults… will be Refused Classification.”

    fair cop on the dealing with drug addition, but what exactly is offensive about it?

  • Australian Bushman

    November 30, 2009 at 9:06 PM

    At least the board are doing their job for this one.

  • Shane

    December 1, 2009 at 7:52 AM

    I’d be far more interested to hear what the board has to say about Max Payne 3 when it arrives. Same realistic graphics, and a serious painkiller addiction, which (at least in the other games) has only positive benefits for the player (i.e. health recovery).

  • Adam

    December 1, 2009 at 12:03 PM

    “n such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults… will be Refused Classification.”

    Hmmmm.. i am pretty sure i am a reasonable adult, i hate ppl who do drugs, but i don’t find the game offensive. Its like we’re living in Cuba. Being told what we can and cannot do. This country is becoming more and more pathetic completely due to the politicians ‘running’ the classification board.

  • Bennie

    December 1, 2009 at 1:25 PM

    I don’t understand… does this..

    “National Classification code, which states that games that “depict, express or otherwise deal with… drug misuse or addiction… in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults…”

    relate to movies also?

  • I

    February 24, 2010 at 6:05 PM

    W00t N00b! R18+ rules

Post Your Comments