Ban On R18+ Games Under Consideration In Western Australia

We can all agree that classification is a complex issue and despite an R18+ rating for video games getting the go-ahead early last year, its existence and application will continue to be discussed (and potentially legislated) for years to come. Western Australia is the latest state to reconsider the ramifications of the rating, with a recent report suggesting games classified as R18+ should be banned outright from sale in the state.

Before you get too worked up, it's important to note that the context in which the recommendation is made is not solely focused on exiling R18+ video games for their violent (or otherwise questionable) content. It covers the broader topic of the sexualisation of children in all forms of media, of which games are just one aspect.

The recommendation appears in a report, published this month, from the Joint Standing Committee on the Commissioner for Children and Young People. The report itself has been through a few revisions, the first incarnation delivered back in early 2013. Due to the WA state election in March last year, consideration of its findings was delayed until recently.

As of today, it's in the hands of WA's Attorney General Michael Mischin, who the report explains is "best placed to conduct further research and progress any necessary legislative changes". This includes banning R18+ classified games from sale.

The specific suggestion is outlined in the report's fifth proposal:

Proposal 5: Amendments to the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1996 (WA) Further consideration be given to possible amendments to the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1996 (WA) • To prohibit the sale, supply, demonstration, possession or advertisement of a R18+ computer game in Western Australia; or • To provide that it is an offence for any person to supply a R18+ computer game to a minor; and/or • To provide that it is an offence for any person to supply a R18+ film to a minor; and/or • To provide that it is an offence for any person to supply a Category 1 Restricted publication to a minor.

This point is expanded upon on page 63, however, it doesn't steadfastly stand by the opinion that R18+ should be done away with in the state, in fact, it provides another option where it would be flat-out illegal to sell an R18+ game to a minor, even if a guardian or parent is present (which seems like an ideal compromise):

It is possible to amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1996 (WA) and either ban outright the possession, distribution, sale or supply of R18+ computer games in Western Australia. Alternatively, the Act could be amended to make it an offence to sell or supply a R18+ computer game to a minor even if the person selling or supplying the computer game is a parent or guardian of the minor. This would result in R18+ computer games being treated in the same manner as RC films and RC computer games.

It goes on to mention that such a decision should be accompanied by an "education campaign to ensue that parents and guardians understood their obligations and took steps to ensure that R18+ computer games were not accessible by children and young people". I'd argue this should be done regardless.

Interestingly, the report also advocates doing away with separate classification schemes — instead, a "Classification of Media Content Act" would replace the multi-headed approach currently employed:

Platform-neutral regulation: The ALRC recommended that there should be a new 'Classification of Media Content Act dealing with all classification obligations including publications, films and computer games currently dealt with under the Classification Act; state and territory classification enforcement legislation ... In this regard, it was recommended that the classification categories G, PG, M, MA15+, R18+, X18+ and Prohibited be applied uniformly for all media content and, therefore, the different classification categories that currently apply to publications and some television broadcasters would be abolished.

You can read the entire report on the Parliament of Western Australia website. Forewarning — it's a healthy 103-pages long.

The Commissioner for Children and Young People's 2013 report on the Sexualisation of Children [Parliament of Western Australia, via Polygon]

Image: Classification Board


Comments

    Yeah, that'll work...

    Until people start downloading games digitally, which isn't controlled state by state.

      There will be SO many ways to get around this. Unlike country bans, state bans can be very hard to police.

        Absolutely. You can't really enforce a state ban. It will be a ban in name only and on a shop level only. The only people actually hurt by this will be shop front retailers. (Well, those shops that don't send interstate to order in their R games ;) )

          Why are attempts to ban/restrict adult video games, hidden behind lies about protecting children?

            To appeal to the idiot uninformed masses, generally the older voting public who have no clue. Examples would include your A Current Affair audiences who believe shit that's shovelled to them by the tabloid media without digging underneath to find out any semblance of truth potentially not being presented to them.

        Which makes it especially stupid given they can't even enforce nationwide bans... Even before digital sales I remember walking into my local game hire store and renting Phantasmagoria when I was about 13.. If they couldn't manage a national ban of a game that *had* too be imported (no one was going too download a game that filled 7 CD's on a 14.4kbps internet connection) It's amazing they think they'll manage to successfully ban anything now :/

        Yey for token efforts? ;)

    lolololololololololol

    War, war never changes.

      Laugh out loud, out loud, out loud, out loud, out loud, out loud, out loud, out loud, out loud, out loud?

    Just 10 more years, then the old farts'll be out and people who grew up with technology more advanced than a typewriter will cut this bullshit.

    Just 10 more years...

      Yep we're seeing the grassroots movement right now, soon those grassroots will grow and a forest will form. Like you said, 10 years...

        10 years.... Little bit optimistic there... 30-40 is a bit more realistic.

          Normally I'd agree, but we're heading into a generation that actually grew up with games soon. Right now you've got the generation Joe Hockey/Bill Shorten grew up with, the late 70s, early 80s. In 10 years time you'll hit that 1990s gap where Consoles really took off and became a mainstay in most households. At that point we'll see people in there who have a more informed, more realistic opinion.

            You're forgetting the fact that those informed, realistic people will be very unlikely to enter a career in politics.

      We said 10 years ago...

    I'm perfectly okay with it being an offence to sell 18+ rated media to minors. The problem is this compromise is unlikely to happen. They'll just try to ban them outright sooner or later.

    The current underlying issue is the large number of new games hit with this R18+ rating. Atelier and the Fable HD remake are just some of the victims. What I find even more amusing is the reasoning given for the classification. Implied sexual interactions between characters. Yet the actual classification has Sex listed as "Mild Impact" (2/5) yet Violence listed as "High Impact" (5/5) in the case of Atelier.

      Atelier was R18+? I've never played an Atelier game but they really don't look that bad from the box art.

        If it's Atelier Rorona Plus (Or even Totori Plus) The original game was actually rated PG, but because of a certain scene you can unlock through a roundabout series of choices and actions that has a negative sexual reference it falls under R18+. To be honest, it should really be MA15+ for that one scene because the game is otherwise harmless.

      But that's the problem. R-18+ is a restricted media category. It's already an offence to sell or supply it to minors... so why are they even mentioning it? The document clearly shows that those that wrote it have no idea.

    So what's really happening is that they want to make it illegal (or more illegal? I thought it already was?) for R18+_ content to be sold to minors.

    "Ban them altogether" seems to be the bullshit option to make the real option more palatable.

      It is, but it's not illegal for an adult to buy R18+ material for a child.

        I assumed it was the same as alcohol cigarettes where you're supposed to deny service if you even think the product is intended for a minor.

        I was pretty annoyed when I was at EB one day and a ten year old kid handed The Last of Us to his mum in front of the sales associate, she looked at the rating and said "is this ok, it's for him?" and the sales associate said "yeah, it's fine".

          Pretty certain that not only is that sales associate an imbecile giving gamers a bad name but he should also be fired.

          That is terrible.
          I don't understand why parents who wouldn't buy their children alcohol, smokes or porn suddenly ignore the R18+ rating when it comes to games and movies.
          The paraent would be dragged through coals for buying the others but no one blinks when it comes to games until after the fact.
          Learn to say no to your kids and do a little research when they ask for something geez.

          Speaks volumes about the kind of practices going on as well. Companies who should support the ratings willing to ignore them to make sales

            Maybe, like cigarettes, they should put screens of the most violent scenes on the box art. Do you think parents/ cool uncles (or who ever) would listen then?

            My cousin when he was 10 had GTA IV, CoD Black opps and Assassins Creed 3. He told his mother he could make the games a lower rating by turning off gore. She was then disgusted when I let him play infamous 2 and she saw how Nix was dressed...

            I think that parents etc who do this just aren't informed and the kids want it because the games are so over marketed to be cool.

              You can place as much warnings as your want

              It's all irrelevant if someone doesn't care or pay attention to them.

                Are you saying the ban is warranted if more sensible measure won't be enforced?

                  I'm sure he isn't. I personally think that perhaps a more 'in your face' method should be tried to help parents make more informed decisions. As I said this can be done by, for example, putting the most violent screens on the cover etc.

                  But you know what... If the parents still buy the games, perhaps the government should stop babying people. Or, heres a thought, put in some effort into finding more effective measures. Getting rid of the games will not work (As stated above, you will still be able to find them) and will not help anything any way. it's a very lazy half arsed 'solution' that will yield results that correspond to the lack of effort they put into thinking up more effective 'counter measures'.

                  @outatime I could see the 'most violent parts on the box art' idea backfiring. People will be all "Look how terrible this game is! We should ban all video games"

                  Last edited 29/06/14 10:17 pm

          Why were you annoyed? The Last of Us is a game about a girl, made for girls. It's not going to negatively affect a young boy.

          I work in games retail and this is something I struggle with. Its actually against consumer law for us to refuse a sale to someone over 18, even if we know its for a child. I usually explain the content to the parent but its mostly met with 'Yeah but its fine'. Its so disappointing, but not the clerk's fault in this case.

          I would LOVE to see it illegal to sell if its intended for minors. All for it,

            Actually, last time I checked you're under no obligation to sell anything to *anyone*.

              They can claim discrimination, which can get all kinds of messy.

                Just tell them you didn't want to sell them the product because you're having a bad day and wanted to share the feeling :P

        It is illegal. It is an offence to sell or supply restricted material to a minor, no matter who it is.

          This is simply not true. The law only states you cannot sell it to a child:

          http://www.ors.act.gov.au/community/r18_computer_games

          Refusing sales to an adult, regardless of their intention, is against consumer law.

            It prevents the sale of computer games classified under this category to children and young people under the age of 18. The Act protects children from inappropriate content and makes the content of computer games clear to adults who are considering purchasing them.

            It also states further down that it is an offence to sell or deliver R18+ content to a child. Which means that a parent who purchases for and supplies Chivalry: Medieval Warfare to their 15 year-old is committing an offence.

            So how then, is it not true?

            Also I'm not sure about the whole refusing sales to an adult, but as far as I'm aware, any seller is empowered to make that decision if they believe a person is purchasing a restricted product for a minor, be it alcohol, cigarettes or video games. However, I'm not an expert on it so don't quote me.

              Sadly while that seems like the logical jump to make it isn't- refusing a sale is classed as discrimination. At the moment the law prohibits direct sale of a restricted game/video to a child- consumers can work around this by asking for a sale as an adult.

              There are no stipulations in the classification laws that an adult cannot show restricted content to a minor- more info here: http://www.classification.gov.au/Guidelines/Pages/R18+.aspx

              It's all above board, but IMO it shouldn't be.

                Well, I stand corrected. Wow yeah that really sucks. So I can walk in to EB and say, "Hi I'd like to buy R18 game 'X' for my 13 year old daughter. But I'm buying it for me as an adult." ...and they have to sell it me???? I gotta try it...

      The education option is the best bet, unfortunately it's not seen as 'enough' so they implement things like bans and point too it as a solution.

      Even banning sales too minors regardless of an adults consent only goes so far if parents are misinformed/don't care. If an adult is planning too get the kid the game anyway banning it's sale simply while the kid is there does basically nothing.

      For the best example of how effective it would be look at cigarettes... Even with something that every parent would agree is harmful too their kids the ban isn't effective, between getting older kids too just get it for you or circumventing the sales person entirely (my personal choice as a teenage smoker...just go into hotels/restaurants that had cigarette machines) or sales people not caring (first pack of cigarettes I bought at 13 I got literally across the road from the children's hospital I was a day patient at...People are scum when it comes too money) there's no difficulty in bypassing the ban if you are inclined and this is ignoring the digital factor entirely...

        The main problem I have with this logic is that while cigarettes and alcohol are proven to be dangerous to minors, video games affect different people in different ways, but most people are sensible to realize that the games aren't real. One news story about GTA IV was that a 10 year old child in America shot his grandmum after playing GTA IV. The media had a field day with that, and my question was "WHAT PERSON LEAVES A LOADED GUN AVAILABLE TO THEIR CHILD?" The problem is stupidity, not the game.

    Then again that's exactly the reasoning we used for gun control. Fewer R18+ games out there mean fewer R18+ games in the hands of minors.

      So what you're saying is that a ban would be a great success and deliver results?

      You accidentally derped right in front of everyone! The ban is on guns for people who cant show a valid cause to own one. You need to have a license and then its entirely possible to own one.

      Also I know this is hard to believe but video games don't have the firepower to gun down a large group of people with minimal effort. You probably couldn't even kill a small bird with a copy of the new South Park game.

        I dunno, if you broke the disk into shards you might be able to stab one.

        PS: Nice Avatar

    I have no issue with the idea that it should be illegal to sell R18+ material to a minor regardless of the presence of their guardian or parent during the sale. But apply it to all classified media, not just games. If R18+ material is harmful to children, then all R18+ material should be considered equally harmful; games should not be singled out.

      The problem is most people wouldn't let their child watch an R18+ movie, but the ignorant shits see no problems with buying them the latest call of battlefield and letting them shoot people in the face.

      As long as people see games as "toys", we're going to keep seeing this bullshit.

      Last edited 29/06/14 2:43 pm

        I dunno we always watched R18 movies, even the video store didn't raise an eyebrow. I recall watching return of the living dead in primary school etc.

          I always got carded at video stores when I tried to hire R18 movies. But (exhibit A) my dad didn't care and he'd get them for me.

          RotLD was only rated M in Aus, not R. ratings seemed pretty lax in the '80s in Australia though. Look at the old screwball comedies from the 80s that had M ratings, I saw so many boobs back then due to these movies and even the odd bit of hairy 80s bush! ;)

        the ignorant shits see no problems with buying them the latest call of battlefield and letting them shoot people in the face.

        As long as people see games as "toys", we're going to keep seeing this bullshit.

        To be fair as someone who grew up with games I've got a better eye for this than a checklist ratings system. If I had kids honestly I'd be more worried how they play games rather than the specific content of the game. There's a big difference between ratings and whether the game, TV show or movie is something a specific child is mature enough to handle.
        I'm in favour of restricting direct access to minors but at the same time I've always seen ratings themselves as just a reflection of what it's publicly acceptable to be ok with not what's actually ok for people in that age bracket. Mentioning an abortion isn't harmful to kids, at worst it leads to a awkward conversation, but we treat it like hard mature content because we struggle with the concept of actual human abortion.
        South Park: The Stick of Truth for instance isn't any worse than the show. It's dirty, gross and has a few flashes of cartoon nudity which isn't something people are going rush out to defend, and I probably wouldn't buy it for kids if I had them, but it's not going to break a 13 year old anymore than watching Meet the Feebles.
        When it comes to shooting people in the face I seriously don't care unless the kid is struggling to see the difference between games and reality. GI Joe and Transformers were all about shooting others in the face. When I was a kid we would actually play fight and shoot at each other with toy guns and that was way closer to reality than playing Doom.
        Kids are stupid, teenagers are super stupid, but it's not a blanket stupidity. They can tell that cartoons, games and movies aren't real even though they can't quite figure out the whole not walking into traffic thing or have terrible judgement.

        Personally I'd be more worried about them playing Mario Kart than the new Mortal Kombat. In one you see some fake blood in the other you get into actual fights.

        Last edited 30/06/14 3:24 pm

      It's also the same with MA15+ material at least with EB Games, kid under 15 can't buy it themselves, but if a parent is present all is good. I really don't agree with it, but there's fuck all I can do.

    I knew putting R18 on games was a bad idea. No game should be rated above +15

      So.. Are you saying violent games shouldn't exist or that anyone over 15 should be able to play the most violent games?

      There's a time and place for a good violent game, just like films and IMO younger people shouldn't be watching/ playing them.

      *Edited a typo

      Last edited 29/06/14 6:38 pm

        I think anyone above 15 should be able to play any game. The way it was before. It's old enough to know right from wrong.

        Last edited 29/06/14 4:27 pm

          Like it was before? So you want games that are deemed too violent to be banned completely just "like it was before"?

            No I think they should be rated 15+ and released. Games like the last of us are still getting censored with r18 rating anyway.

            Last edited 29/06/14 5:39 pm

              You realise that a lot of games that used to be 15+ here were rated higher in other countries and a lot of them got censored to get here, if they make it over at all.

              As to your point about 15 being old enough, I think that is highly subjective. Most 15 year olds may know right from wrong but that doesn't mean they appreciate mature content the same ways adults do. (And for the most part they play a game above their age restriction because they think it's cool to do/ makes them feel mature if they play it, not because they want to play a good game.) I see it time and time again.

              Given how quickly children seem to grow up now I really don't think we need to speed it up any more. That said, some people do have different views on what is and isn't too explicit for children. People like that are free too (And do) purchase explicit games for their children anyway, regardless of what is on the box.

              Given your rather slanted response I have to assume you are under 18. If you are over 18 and are fighting for your friends/ kids, well, nothing is stopping you from buying the products for them, regardless of whether anyone else approves. There is no need to make those of use who are old enough to appreciate the content, and approve of restricting explicit content from children, play restricted versions just so that they can sell games that, IMHO, are too explicit for children to children.

              *Edited a typo (I should just post that every time I post, it seems my typing sucks today)

              Last edited 29/06/14 6:40 pm

                I'm 33. You're right, the age limit is subjective but I feel r18 is too extreme and has some sort of stigma attached and now we may have WA throwing a blanket ban on all r18 games. I can understand wanting r18 for the sake of a game being released but I don't think they are the bad influence some make them out to be.

                Last edited 29/06/14 7:40 pm

                  I do not think that they should be banning R18 games, but I also do not believe that they should lower the age rating just because some people are fine with it being lower, with it being subjective and all. As I said, if you are OK with children playing R18 games, you can still buy them for them, regardless of whether anyone else thinks it's right.

                  On a side note, I agree and don't think games are a necessarily a 'bad influence' but can be abused, and can be scarring if you are not ready for some of the more mature titles. I do think R18 games have their place. The ratings are a guideline. Whether or not you agree with them is, unfortunately, not the point of this article. Rather that mature content might be banned, even for people who are old enough, legally, to purchase it.

                  As I said, you can disagree with the ratings given either way and still buy the R18 games for minors if you so choose/ see fit. The point is that the games would at least be on the shelf if there were an R18. Which, as I said before, does have a place to establish guidelines to 'rank' mature/ explicit content before purchasing the title, whether you disagree with the appropriate ages that are on the guidelines or not.

                  Last edited 29/06/14 8:11 pm

            To be fair the games are still banned just like before. Remember Saints Row 4? Banned after R18 was out. So was the South Park game.

    Games are for kids so it makes sense to get rid of games that are R18+... kids can't play them anyway.

    This is beyond stupid, shouldn't they also ban R18+ movies?

    Banning it won't change anything hahahaha
    I'll just download a copy from over seas LOL!

    Yeah, because video games undr an R18+ rating are the only things that have sexualised content and vioence in them. Movies are perfect and NO movie whatsoever has sexualised content in it.

    Also, so much for a free country. Fairly sure this should be a basic right, I mean, you're restricting adults from buying something which they are legally allowed...

      Also, so much for a free country. Fairly sure this should be a basic right, I mean, you're restricting adults from buying something which they are legally allowed...
      Not if you outlaw it.

      The Australian constitution states we have privilege, not freedom. Just because a country is a demockracy, doesn't guarantee it's constitution provides freedom to it's citizens.

    As a parent it is my job to make sure I bring my child up with a decent moral compass. Exposing my children to content which may or may not be be too advanced for them to process based on their current level of development should be based on my judgement, not that of the state.

    Censorship for the many based on the whims or flaws of the few is just plain wrong.

    Last edited 29/06/14 6:57 pm

      Unfortunately, you are one of very few parents who appropriately judge content that is suitable for their child.
      At a retailer perspective, it is so frustrating selling video games to parents who have no idea (or care to inform themselves) of the content of these games.
      I WISH I could deny service to parents.

        You can deny service to anyone you like so long as you don't do it on the basis of race, religion or age. Your boss might not like it though.

    [Meanwhile on Steam]

    Steam: Please verify your ag-

    Me: 1st of Jan 1900

    Steam: Alrighty here you go sir, R18+ material no questions asked.

    Ohmyfuckingchrist.
    That is so retarded. Who the fuck writes these stupid recommendations? Some bullshit do gooder who encourages others to blame external influences for why they are fucktards.
    I like living in WA but each and every year it slowly edges closer to being a communist police state. Freedom? Fuck you. Do as you are told. Pretty soon we will have the USA invading to overthrow our brutal and archaic overlords. If we had oil.

    Yeh, a fair bit of swearing there, not reflective of my age...more of my frustration.
    The government needs to stop catering to the lowest possible denominator and hurting everyone on account of a few.

      The people who claim to be champions of freedom say "no" an awful lot eh? :)

    Considering this is coming from the state of the Shark Cull I'm not surprised. They have a track record of taking a proverbial sledgehammer to issues lately.

      Wait... the Shark Cull actually happened? I thought all the scientists came out to prove how bad an idea that was. They did it anyway? *reads wikipedia*

      Jesus tap-dancing christ. Of all the moronic fuckwittery, this is the most moronic and fuckwitted.
      Why even HAVE experts providing expert advice? Why not let's just all do what we think is intuitively correct? EVERYONE can be a surgeon! EVERYONE can be an electrician! Who the fuck need's training or knowledge when we have GUT INSTINCT?

      Well that explains a lot.

        If they were any smarter with anything else, they wouldn't have been politicians. It's mainly businessmen and lawyers. We all know how stupid some laws are, but if you know how to play the game well, who cares. You win. That's how politics work. As for experts. Isn't there a company or something called Nine out of ten experts?

        Nine out of ten experts keep agreeing to a lot of shit. Thanks to politics, experts have just become a label you slap on something you want people to agree with or simply hear about.

          That reminds me of the words of H. L. Mencken:
          "The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods."

          I'm pretty sure that the Gruen Transfer registered the company Nine out of Ten Experts.

    a) I thought it was already illegal to exhibit R18 material to minors (maybe only here in Qld)

    b) what the hell does a violent video game have to do with the 'sexualisation of children'

    I remember my high school had some ridiculous demerit point system in place to encourage good behaviour but it was an overblown scheme to only deal with the small minority of problem cases.

    See this is the problem if children are mistreated we have docs, we have the criminal code but instead of dealing with things the hard way (the honest way) politicians decide they need to legislate for all in order to deal with a small minority of situations.

    This usually doesn't end up solving the original problem and further creates more problems as more and more people are 'criminalised' for exercising what were once 'rights'

    This my friends, is what right wing commentators refer to as 'the nanny state' and dammit we need less of it - not more!

    Last edited 29/06/14 8:35 pm

    Fuck this is fantastic, I now have some meaty reference material for my next Uni assignment. It seems what they are doing is actually really important and comes from a real concern about "sexualisation becoming the wallpaper of children's lives". Overall this is more about reforming the entire media platform, basically making it more consistent but also making it harder to use children and young people in sexual ways and minimise the amount of sexual themes available in media accesible by children and young people. However the 'ban R18+' comes from a bit leftfield, you need to skip through to about page 62-63 before games are mentioned specifically and this is obviously written prior to the release of R18+ games, it basically follows the well worn out line of "r18+ games being available will make it more likely that children will have access to these games... ie. we still think they're kids toys... etc". So they weigh up two options basically ban them outright or make it illegal to give children access to these games, this includes guardians and adults. Its all very adultist in nature. IMHO Ratings advice should be just that, advice.

    typical women on her high horse driven by emotion and not a thought in her head. yeah lets band R+18 games for ADULTS ffs when kids are watching dexter on free to air tv. MORONS!!!!!!

    Sooooooooooooo a bunch of old ladies sit in a room and pretend to be the thought police while crying "think of the children"
    Banning R18 games would not solve anything and seems a bit over the top. Typical knee jerk reaction by politicians and their ilk to a serious topic that could be addressed in a reasonable and adult manner.
    Double plus good. Slow clap.

    So we're going backwards again??? Yes its more a state issue than a nation issue but still it sounds silly

    It is possible to amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1996 (WA) and either ban outright the possession, distribution, sale or supply of R18+ computer games in Western Australia. Alternatively, the Act could be amended to make it an offence to sell or supply a R18+ computer game to a minor even if the person selling or supplying the computer game is a parent or guardian of the minor. This would result in R18+ computer games being treated in the same manner as RC films and RC computer games.

    Easy to say but so hard to enforce...how many games that were banned or modified to get a MA15+ rating back in day was defeated because people were "grey importing" the game from overseas?

    Also what happens that you are over 18 and buying a R18+ game for yourself but somehow your kid starts playing it without you knowing (or under supervision)....

    This propsed changes for WA gamers completely sucks

    Banning R18+ games = Downloading them from thepiratebay.
    Why don't they just make the games come with plain packaging.. Easy.

    This proposed idea is honestly waste of time.

    Apparently Australians over 18 years old can buy alcohol & cigarettes, but aren't responsible or mature enough to buy a video game. Solid logic there Australian Government. A+.

    Just make it illegal to sell the game to anyone under 18 (which I'm sure is already the law) and enforce it. Don't ban it for everyone because of irresponsible parents and/or retailers.

    This fucks me off so much, and I don't even live in Australia... Backwards ass logic. Damn.

    Last edited 30/06/14 4:00 pm

    I live in the same state as these people. :(

      Same state does not equal state of mind (or out of the ever loving gourd in this case).
      Hope this amounts to 'move along here, nothing else to see'.
      Otherwise I can see it becoming a voting issue in a few years time when some young gun comes in on the platform of undoing the fossils damage.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now