Gamespot has revealed that when Left 4 Dead 2’s Australian distributor EA appealed the decision, it tried to argue to the Review Board that because the game’s violence was “unrealistic” and its zombie enemies “fictional”, it should receive an MA15+ rating.

In response, the Board didn’t buy EA’s line, claiming there is “insufficient delineation between the depiction of the general zombie figures and the human figures as opposed to the clearly fictional ‘infected’ characters”.

What comes as a surprise, however, is that ultimately this delineation wouldn’t have mattered. As the Board went on to say, “whether the objects of the violence were fictional or real, and whether a 15 year old could discern the difference, is largely irrelevant where the game displays the level of realism this one does.”

The Gamespot report also lists many examples of the “high impact” violence observed by the Board. It was the accumulation of these aspects, not whether or not violent acts were carried out on human or zombie enemies, that in the eyes of the Board warranted Left 4 Dead 2 being refused classification.

Aussie censor board explains L4D2 banning [Gamespot]

And by views, they mean his “contradiction-filled, strawman-posing, condescending piece of correspondence.”

The full rebuttal can be read on the Gamers 4 Croydon website, but here’s the concluding paragraph:

What Mr Atkinson’s letter demonstrates is little more than that he has a prejudice against violent video games. Much of the ‘evidence’ he provides to support his claim is dubious or patently false, and it shows a much greater interest in distracting people with emotive arguments than thoughtful consideration of available information. While he is of course entitled to dislike violence in video games (and any other media for that matter), his personal distaste is not sufficient reason to curtail the rights of responsible adults, expose minors to adult content, and ignore the opinions of an overwhelming majority of Australians.

He is, after all, supposed to be a representative.

Oh, and remember you can donate to Gamers 4 Croydon on their website as well.

Seems Sega know that the upcoming Aliens vs Predator is so violent, and packed with so much gore, that they’re not even going to bother submitting it to the USK, Germany’s classification board.

Rationale being that the USK, with a reputation for being sticklers for the ol’ killerspiel, would only force sweeping changes to the game, changes Sega didn’t want to part with, so they’re instead just going to save some cash and not bother localising or distributing the game in Germany at all.

Aliens vs. Predator: Too gory for Germany? [PC Games Hardware]

On Friday, David Doe kicked off his campaign against Atkinson at Adelaide’s Rundle Mall, securing the signatures required to officially register his political party. Doe says his aim is “to exert pressure on Atkinson, currently the only Attorney General voting ‘no’ against the introduction of an R18+ classification rating for videogames in Australia.”

Atkinson told News.com.au that he “welcomed Mr Doe’s challenge,” saying:

“The voters of Croydon will now be asked directly whether they want interactive games in which gamers score points by raping a mother and daughter, blowing themselves up, torturing human figures… killing people and taking drugs to improve their sporting prowess.”

Later, Atkinson responded to several readers’ comments on the same article, claiming that neither his nor the ALP’s defeat at the 2010 state election would not benefit the introduction of an R18+ classification.

“Former Liberal Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock supported my opposition to an R 18+ Classification for interactive games at a time when most Labor Attorneys-General wanted to introduce one and he sought the endorsement of Cabinet for his position,” Atkinson wrote. “Should I stop being Attorney-General, the opposition would, I predict, be taken up by the W.A. Attorney-General (Liberal) and at least two other Attorneys-General (Labor). Moreover, many Liberals in the State Parliament and at least one Liberal candidate in the forthcoming State election support my stand.”

Doe told Kotaku that he was “a little saddened” by Atkinson’s response to his challenge. However, he remains undaunted in the face of the Attorney-General’s obvious advantages and has vowed to take his campaign beyond the electorate of Croydon.

“He is hugely popular within his electorate,” says Doe, “and he will have not only superior brand recognition, but also a well-oiled political machine running his campaign.

“Over the weekend it became clear that we will need to run a candidate for the Legislative Council, so that gamers who do not live in the Croydon electorate will also be able to show their support by voting for our candidate in the upper house. And of course, we will be working on our preferences with the other major parties in the coming months, as well as providing some quick links to people’s Federal representatives so they can voice their concern at the requirement of unanimity between Attorneys-General to implement an R18+ classification rating with a view to getting that piece of legislation amended to only require a majority vote of Attorneys-General.

“And in amongst all that,” jokes Doe, “I’m going to try to continue to paint the inside of my house, and try to get my season’s batting average above zero, and my bowling average below sixty.”

Doe grew up in Adelaide and currently lives in Melbourne where he works at games development studio Firemint. He’s a passionate gamer and, perhaps soon, an officially political gamer, too.

As mentioned earlier this morning, Doe will be in Adelaide’s Rundle Mall this evening to collect the 150 membership signatures he requires to officially register Gamers 4 Croydon as a political party.

I spoke with him yesterday to find out why he founded Gamers 4 Croydon and what he hopes to achieve.

Tell me about your reasons for starting this campaign. Was there one particular incident that triggered the idea?
As it happens, it was reading [on Kotaku] that Michael Atkinson had thrown down the gauntlet in a letter to The Advertiser: “I welcome a challenge in my electorate of Croydon at the next general election on this issue.” That initially gave me the seed of an idea to run a candidate against him. But when Left 4 Dead 2 was Refused Classification, I decided that enough was enough. Here, finally, was a game I was just absolutely not prepared to play in a watered-down condition.

Last year we had the same kind of issue with Fallout 3 being initially Refused Classification, although that, laughably, was over the use of the word ‘morphine’, and not the intensely graphic (and inappropriately rated MA15+ in my opinion) violence that Fallout 3 offered players. I’d seen enough “Down with Atkinson” threads over the past few years, typically every time an anticipated game gets the dreaded RC from the Classification Board, but as a community we weren’t getting any traction on the issue.

I’m 30 years old now, and I’m more than a little sick and tired of being moralised at by people that don’t understand, nor want to understand, the culture and community that plays a huge part in my life. I thought it was time to actively DO something, so for better or worse, here I am doing something.

What do you feel is the biggest problem with the current classification scheme?
There is just no consistency. On one hand we have television and film being given a free pass with all types of content being made available (and rightly) to those who want to (and are legally able to) view R18+ (or even x18+) content, but for some reason, the idea that “videogames are just for kids” has stuck around.

The current scheme without an R18+ rating for videogames is fundamentally flawed, as you see all types of content, which by television and film standards would garner a rating of R18+, being literally shoved into the MA15+ rating. As a result, we have content in the MA15+ rating that is inappropriate, and this is a potential source of confusion for parents and caregivers. Let’s just a consistent message across the board for our national Classification guidelines.

What do you hope to achieve – just an R18+ rating or do you feel the system needs a more thorough overhaul?
I think it’s fair to make the argument that the Classification Board’s processes aren’t very transparent. After all, who is making these decisions for the country? Who are the people that work for the Classification Board? What is their background? Why can’t we know more about them?

That said (and I’m not going to be Mr Popular after this), I think that the Classification Board does an outstanding job. I agree with their decision to Refuse Classification for Left 4 Dead 2 on the grounds that it is graphically violent. This isn’t about the board, it’s about the lack of an R18+ rating that effectively hamstrings what the Board can and can’t classify.

If we give them the ability to classify videogame content as R18+, we wouldn’t be having this discussion as they would have rubber-stamped an R18+ on the L4D2 application and it would have saved Valve a bunch of money and dev-time re-tooling the game just for the (small) Australian market, and the rest of us undue heartache and misery. It’s important to remember that the Classification Board is not the enemy, the guidelines it adheres to are.

Why did you feel the need to state your party’s policies on issues beyond videogames classification?
While I, and no doubt many others, feel that the issue of an R18+ rating for videogames is pretty important, it’s not something I think can win, in an election against a 20-year incumbent who is hugely popular within his electorate, as a standalone issue. We’re not going to get 10,000 votes on what is essentially a civil rights issue that many people just don’t care enough about. We might, however, get 10,000 votes for other issues that play a lot closer to home for a lot of South Australians.

Have you had any contact with Michael Atkinson? Do you know if he’s aware of your campaign?
Yes and no. I have sent him an email asking for his thoughts on the matter at hand, and I did receive a reply via email. I’m really looking forward to opening the letter that his office has said they are sending, let me tell you!

I don’t know if he’s aware of the campaign. I have no doubt that in the fullness of time he will become aware of it, but whether or not he decides to take it seriously will of course be entirely up to him. Make no mistake, we’re playing to win.

Mr Atkinson claims an 18+ rating would allow “children and vulnerable adults” access to such material. What’s your response to this argument?
I think it’s completely specious. He is claiming that children, already legally restricted from purchasing content given the MA15+ rating, will somehow have easier access to R18+ rated material. It’s a typical “won’t somebody think of the children” argument, and it does not do well under any scrutiny. To take that kind of argument to its logical end-point, once we have an R18+ rating for videogames, parents will cease being responsible for the welfare of their children, and Michael Atkinson is saving us all from ourselves. The R18+ rating is specifically designed to restrict children’s access to inappropriate content. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

As for “vulnerable adults”, how would we know? We’re all being treated like vulnerable adults at the moment. It’s fair (and completely bloody obvious) to say that the overwhelming majority of adults in this country (and around the world) are not suddenly going to go on wild rampages because they are allowed to play an R-rated game. Given that the rest of the developed world already has the equivalent of an R18+ rating, I don’t seem to recall too many occasions where the fabric of society has completely broken down in those areas after any particular videogame was released. Studies have even shown that as videogame sales go up, violent crime goes down.

His position is not backed by any supporting facts or evidence. He’s either Australia’s best troll, getting a massive rise out of our community in particular, or he just likes being a moral crusader. Either is sad.

What can Kotaku readers do to support your campaign?
A lot of things. They can hit up the site and become a member (s this is a one-man-band at the moment, all new members keep me motivated to keep working on the issue), or they can donate to the cause (anything I don’t use in the campaign will be donated to Child’s Play), they can help me canvass support by linking the site to their friends and family, or by joining the Steam or Facebook groups.

But if they really want to do me a solid, and they’re over 18 and live in South Australia and are enrolled to vote; they can come down to Rundle Mall’s balls on Friday the 6th of November between 5.30pm and 6.30pm, as I’ll be signing people up for the party so we can get the 150 members we require to get officially registered as a political party by the South Australian Electoral Commission. I’m doing a road-trip from Melbourne to get over there and get names on paper for this party to get off the ground. Anybody else they can bring that fits that criteria (over 18, enrolled to vote, lives in SA) and who also wants to see the introduction of an R18+ rating for videogames – friends, sisters, brothers, parents, workmates – make sure to bring them!

Right now you’re just looking at one seat, but do you have plans to take this campaign further and contest other seats in other elections?
At this stage, our primary focus is Croydon. I have had a few requests to run a candidate for the Legislative Council. If we get enough popular support in South Australia, and a forthcoming caucus approves a candidate, it’s definitely something we’ll look into.

I’d like to thank David for taking the time to answer our questions and also wish him well in his campaign. And I’d urge any Kotaku readers able to make it to Rundle Mall today to do so and pledge their support. Hands up who wants to help?

Taking its name from the recently banned Left 4 Dead 2, the Gamers 4 Croydon party and its founder David Doe plan to contest the safe Labor seat of Croydon, held by Atkinson since 1989, at the 2010 state election. Doe says the reason he’s chosen to stand in the election is “to exert pressure on the Attorney General for South Australia, Michael Atkinson, as he is currently the only Attorney General voting ‘no’ against the introduction of an R18+ classification rating for videogames in Australia.”

To register as a political party, Doe needs to sign up 150 Gamers 4 Croydon members who are over 18, enrolled to vote and live in South Australia. Doe is travelling to Adelaide today to secure the signatures. You can go and show your support for his party and an R18+ classification for videogames by heading down to Rundle Mall between 5.30pm and 6.30pm today.

Stay tuned for an exclusive interview with Doe on Kotaku later this morning.

The skippable scene of terrorist atrocities in Modern Warfare 2 first came to light via leaked footage on YouTube early yesterday. News travelled quickly, however, with an AP report dropping yesterday afternoon, distributing the news to just about every news organisation on the planet. Word obviously reached Australia, prompting Australian Council on Children and the Media Jane Roberts to call on the Australian Classification Board to reconsider the MA15+ rating the game received, which is the highest rating given games in the country. Reconsideration would effectively ban the game from release. Roberts claims that even with the MA15+ rating, the game would still be readily available to children.

“The consequences of terrorism are just abhorrent in our community and yet here we are with a product that’s meant to be passed off as a leisure time activity, actually promoting what most world leaders speak out publicly against.”

Do not read on if you wish to avoid Modern Warfare 2 spoilers.

Here’s the report regarding the offending scene filed by the Classification Board that accompanied the MA15+ rating decision.

“Several civilians are shot with blood burst bullet wounds; civilian corpses are strewn across the airport floor, often in stylised pools of blood; injured civilians crawl away with lengthy blood trails behind them.”

The report goes on to mention that you cannot inflict post mortem damage on the civilians, and that all other missions of the game will result in failure if a civilian is shot.

Activision released a statement to Kotaku yesterday regarding the scene, explaining that it was “meant to evoke the atrocities of terrorism”.

Back in Australia the debate rages on, with Nicholas Suzor, spokesman for the lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia, using the situation to call for a R18+ rating for games released in the country, while rejecting the idea that a video game could foster terrorism.

“Films often show the villain’s perspective and, by doing that, they get across the character’s story and the heinous nature of people who carry out atrocities. Games, too, are becoming more expressive, and are telling more involved stories. We may make an argument that these sorts of topics are not suitable for children, but I don’t at all accept that it is unsuitable for adults.”

The Classification Board cannot review its own decisions, so anyone interested in getting the rating reviewed will have to apply directly to the board.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is slated for Australian release on November 10.

Outrage as terrorist game lets players massacre civilians [The Sydney Morning Herald]

Valve’s Zombie shooter was refused classification, which means it can’t be made commercially available in the country. Not quite the same as a banning, but it has the same effect.

As Valve told us earlier, the version of Left 4 Dead 2 rated by the Australian government is “the adjusted version”. Valve’s Gabe Newell told Kotaku Australia that this edited version, Australia-only version is “fully compliant with the guidelines” for a 15-years-old and up rating.

“We think Left 4 Dead 2 is a lot of fun,” Newell said then. “It’s a game for adults. But we’re aware that different countries have different restrictions, and we want to make the choices that make the game the most fun for that country.”

The recent decision reads:

According to the Classification Review Board, the game has been once again refused classification due to violence.

In the Review Board’s opinion, Left 4 Dead 2 could not be accommodated within the MA 15+ classification. The computer game contains a level of violence which is high in impact, prolonged, repeated frequently and realistic within the context of the game.

In addition, it was the Review Board’s opinion that there was insufficient delineation between the depiction of general zombie figures and the human figures, as opposed to the clearly fictional ‘infected’ characters. This was a major consideration of the Review Board in determining the
impact of this game on minors.

Computer games classified RC cannot be sold, hired, advertised or demonstrated in Australia.

The Classification Review Board convened today in response to an application from the distributor of the computer game, Electronic Arts, to review the decision made by the Classification Board on 15 September 2009 to classify Left 4 Dead 2 RC.

Sergei Gourski, developer of the iTunes App Store hit Fieldrunners, said PSP development is “definitely more serious business and not for casual non-developers.” Not only is investment in a dev kit “a must”, you must also set aside money for “getting ratings for your game.

“The costs of ratings such us ESRB is significantly more then we had realised.”

Fieldrunners, notes Gamasutra, is $US2.99 on the App Store where no rating is mandatory. It’s $US6,99 on the PlayStation Store, where its ESRB mark is pending. As Joystiq notes, such ratings can run $US2,500.

That said, Richard Stenson of Solus Games still sees PSP Minis development more for its opportunities than its drawbacks. He’s put out five titles for the App Store and ported one to the PSPgo. “All I know is five to seven years ago the idea of publishing a game I produced completely myself on two multi-million selling platforms and one of them carrying the name ‘PlayStation’ was only a pipe dream,” Solus told Gamasutra.

Devs Size Up PSP Minis Development Vs. App Store Games [Gamsutra via VG247]

Valve told us yesterday that they had submitted an edited version of Left 4 Dead 2 after the game was previously refused classification due to its high impact violence. Gabe Newell declined to say what had been edited out.

That edited version was awarded an MA15+ rating late yesterday. This morning the Classification Board told Gamespot what had been cut:

The report states that the Australian-specific version of Left 4 Dead 2 “no longer contains depictions of decapitations, dismemberment, wound detail, or piles of bodies lying about the environment”.

Valve are also appealing the original classification decision and still hope to release Left 4 Dead 2 in Australia in its original, unedited state. “Our goal is not to ship this second [edited] version,” he said.

Newell told us yesterday that the appeal ruling is expected to be made on October 22.

Left 4 Dead 2 classified down under [Gamespot]