iGEA Responds To The New R18+ Guidelines

Today the guidelines for the new R18+ classification were introduced, presenting a whole new set of concerns, specifically with regards to the language used in specific sections. Ron Curry of the iGEA has responded these guidelines, and cautiously welcomed their introduction.

"We, along with many other stakeholders, have worked for many years to have the classification scheme acknowledge that adults play and enjoy video games and are due the respect of a classification category that reflects ‘age appropriate’ content for adults," said Curry. "The new guidelines released today show that they have been crafted to try to balance the concerns of those who have resisted an R18+ classification and adults who want to play video games designed specifically for mature audiences and that are readily available in other developed democracies.

"Given the opposition to the introduction of an R18+ category from a vocal yet unrepresentative section of the community, along with a largely conservative group of Attorneys-General, it is no surprise the new guidelines hold video games to a higher standard across a number of categories compared to film and what originally existed for video games.

"As we have previously stated, we are concerned with the acknowledgment in the guidelines that interactivity has greater impact on players, despite the Federal Attorney-General’s office publishing a literature review in September 2010 that found no evidence to support these claims. There will be continued debate about whether the interactivity of video games has a greater impact than other forms of media, and we will continue to refer to the lack of the evidence to support these claims.

"Ultimately, we will need to wait to see how the Classification Board interpret and administer the new R18+ and revised M and MA15+ categories. We trust that they will reflect the standards of morality, decency and propriety accepted by reasonable adults, not just the vocal ones."

As we mentioned previously, we'll just have to wait and see how these new guidelines are treated by the Classification Board.


Comments

    So what I'm reading is possibly because of poorly worded 'evidence' and unfounded claims in the document, they have to wait and see... then appeal it? So be it if so...

    "There will be continued debate about whether the interactivity of video games has a greater impact than other forms of media, and we will continue to refer to the lack of the evidence to support these claims."

    Ron Curry, you brilliant sonofabitch. :)

      this argument will end up backfiring.
      Probably a good idea to distance ourselves from it.

        I don't mind which way it goes actually, I'm well aware there are good arguments on both sides; all I want to see is that the winning argument is -actually- supported by solid evidence instead of the result of generalisations and half-arsed assumptions without any sourcing or backup that somehow end up being taken as fact.

          I should note that I mean there are -potentially- good arguments on both sides. So far the majority of the better arguments that have actually been supported by evidence have been clearly those standing opposite parties like the ACL that somehow manage to still factor in. -_-

          Psychology studies tend to become a huge circle of conjecture . Whether or not something is peer reviewed there will always be a contrarian view with evidence to support it.
          How do you suppose we adequately test the theory that doesn't encroach on any moral boundary?

            And if you can't test it you're just guessing, and laws shouldn't be made based upon guesses.

        If someone's argument hinges on a claim that has no evidence to support it, calling for evidence is the only reasonable way to counter. Once evidence has been presented, then an actual counter-argument can be formed, if it is necessary.

    THINK OF THE CHILDREN YOU SELFISH [email protected][email protected]!!!!!! Ban fighting fantasy and choose your own adventures! Evil SCUMM.

      Not sure if angry parent or just a troll.

        Well i did just burn my dungeon and dragons white box and my strawberry shortcake colouring in books. Further the ban should include both Zork and all versions of the boardgame OPERATION.

          This reminds me of science vs no dinosaurs. By arguing against a banal and groundless claim you detract from both your own validity and reason. Further you give credence to oppository claim by even entering into a dialogue. Well put!

      Was that a pun on the SCUMM engine in the context of adventure games?
      Clever.

        Yes. Though not as clever as far right censorship lobbying it seems. I was pointing out both the history and irony of this decades old argument. The irony being I was recently attacked by a 4 hit die cleric.

          I can't find the like/+1 button.

            It is located just above and to the right of the "fire the gun containing the cap of heroin into their naked genitals" button.

    Wait, so they even admit that what they think is bullshit but we should be happy that we have to put up with theirs?

    I dont see the validity of the comments about video game interactivity being more influential... as a youngen i was more likely to copy Bruce lee, or GI joe, or MAD max than i was Alexx Kidd.

    Sure punching birds with GIANT boxing gloves was probably more likely to orrcure than me being able to fight 30 other asian dudes with nunchucks, but thats not how i thought as a child, myself and my little brother copped a few black eyes as a kid after watching enter the dragon.

    Yes video games are more violent and more "real" these days, and yes some should not be played by kids, I.e. Manhunt... which i maintain was still a great game, didnt make me want to kill people in brutal ways tho, in fact it probably helped me realise that thats where i'd draw the line.

    these guidelines are a step in the right direction in protecting kids, which is great.
    But again the adult population looks to be getting the shaft.

    You know what would help regarding these guidelines. Another year long study follows by another year to table it to goverment then another year to draw policy from it.

    What am I saying. That would never happen! We've never seen indefinate stalling tactics work on this matter before.....

    "There will be continued debate about whether the interactivity of video games has a greater impact than other forms of media, and we will continue to refer to the lack of the evidence to support these claims."

    Being able to make legislation based on conjecturing is the biggest issues us Australians have to face, Australia is a backwards country and it could take decades to amend.

    I'll continue to import purely because it's cheaper, but it'll be interesting to see if a game like Mortal Kombat 9 would still get banned under this new R Rating.

      It's been stated many times and now confirmed under these new guidelines that it will still be banned

    Keep talking shit and ill just keep importing. LOL

Join the discussion!