Sony Calls For Aussie Game Rating Changes

Sony Calls For Aussie Game Rating Changes

Michael Ephraim, boss of Sony Computer Entertainment Australia, has spoken out against the country’s continued lack of an adults-only rating for video games.

“Gaming has moved on, the choice of content has moved on and I think it is time Australia gets in step with the rest of the world and has an R rating classification,” he told the Associated Press earlier today in Sydney.

“I think it is just giving people choice. You give people choice for movies, books, whatever. Why aren’t you giving them choice for gaming?

“The Government needs to move on, to stop thinking that gaming is for kids, gaming has grown up. Eight to 88 (year olds) play games now … the average age of a gamer is something like 24 years old.”

It’s a moot point at the moment, of course. Public submissions on a change to Australia’s outdated classification system, which when implemented never thought an adults-only ratings would be needed for video games, are already before the government, who are waiting on submissions from non-gamers before proceeding.

Sony boss supports R rating for games [News]


  • Just shows how BS the government is. It did its public consultation, but the result was too overwhelming. SO now they need to keep searching for more feedbakc until the answer comes out how they want. They got tens of thousands of submissions, so why keep doing public consultation? End the cherade and treat us like adults.

    • It’s more that the overwhelming majority of feedback was from the gaming community. No matter how you look at it, that isn’t an accurate representation of the community at large. As such, I can understand their desire for more submissions from the non-gamers. However, they don’t seem to realise that most non-gamers don’t care enough about the ratings to actually make a submission.

      • I suppose the real problem here is that there is a little bit of a double standard.

        Lobby Groups are designed by default to be a loud voice that represents those who care about a cause. They are a normal and VERY vocal part of politics and they pressure the government into making changes all the time.

        So, when the results of the meeting were released, the answer we got was something a long the lines of “The submissions were skewed because whole lot of lobby groups got involved and we can’t have that. It means that only people with a vested interest were heard.”

        On the surface, this is fine. If there is a change that will affect many people, more than just those with vested and biased interests should be consulted. However, people without vested interest often just don’t care enough, or they too would use the lobby groups designed for this specific purpose. On top of that, the strength of Lobby groups and how representative they are of the populace as a whole is rarely, if ever brought up publicly, nor is an overwhelming response from a group commonly used as an argument against placating them. When a Lobby group puts pressure on the government, they listen. Or, at the very least, they pretend to listen. Here, they have publicly stated that they dislike this Lobby group and won’t listen to the concerns raised by said group.

        TLDR: Strong lobbying is usually given serious consideration, but because this is about video games, we have been told that we don’t matter and should be quiet.

        • The thing is, apart from individual gamers submissions (including those contained within the EB Games submission) there WAS a very even balance between the other lobby groups (17 for, 15 against from memory).

  • I need a catchup. What happened at the last att gen meeting?? Did any discussion between them take place??

    • No. I think their conclusion as mentioned above was that there were heaps of submissions, but they were one sided (d’uh). Instead of interpreting this as overwhelming suport for the change, they said they would look for more submissions from ‘the wider’ community.

      In the write up I read about it, They indicated that perhaps this was the wider audience given that most households have some form of gaming device.

      Anyway, they sound like they are going to seek more submissions from non gaming groups and organisations. They were concerned that only about 35 firms raised objections to the change??? Does this not just mean that it is a good idea and progress with the change???

      Watch this space.

  • Why are they even still talking about this?

    The public consultation has been done. The debate has been had, and the pro-R18 side won. It’s finished. Nothing left to do but change the damn law.

    • It is a real cover! “Mann” it’s a promotional postcard sent out by Valve to the special few who sent in the Mann Co. ordering slip from the hidden promotional pages for the major Team Fortress 2 class/less updates (God I’m a fanboy…).

Log in to comment on this story!