In the first statement since the re-rating of Outlast 2 by the classification board, the game’s publisher has provided some information potentially explaining why the game was originally banned.
In a statement provided to media, the game’s PR told Kotaku Australia this morning that Outlast 2 was originally submitted to the Classification Board with a copy of the final game “and a video file for reference taken from an alpha version of the game”. “This video file should not have been sent along with the game code, as its content was not representative of the final game,” the statement added.
When the game was submitted the second time around, the same game code was provided “with a video file reflecting the final game content”. The game’s distributor and PR did not explain what the difference was between the content in the first video file or the second, and they also did not comment on the Classification Board’s remarks about the implied sexual content that saw the game refused classification in the first place.
[referenced url=”https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/03/heres-why-outlast-2-was-refused-classification-in-australia/” thumb=”https://www.kotaku.com.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/03/outlast-2-410×231.jpg” title=”Here’s Why Outlast 2 Was Refused Classification In Australia” excerpt=”Kotaku Australia has learned that Outlast 2 has been refused classification in Australia, predominately for the depiction of implied sexual violence.”]
Before either statement was released, Kotaku Australia was told that the Classification Board was awaiting “further information from the applicant” about Outlast 2, and that it would publish its report into the game once that had been done. That report is yet to be published.
I asked the game’s publisher and developer what the difference in content was between the two submissions, as well as a comment regarding what information the Classification Board had sought. If I hear back on either front, I’ll let you know.
Update: A representative for the game has told Kotaku Australia that the difference in the video clip first shown to the Classification Board contained “unfinished animations, camera movements and character placement, all of which contribute to how a given scene is understood by the viewer”.
Comments
18 responses to “The Wrong Video Of Outlast 2 Was Sent To The Classification Board”
What a magnificent way to get all of us interested in a game.
Also a colossal fuck-up the likes of which we haven’t seen for some time over something so straight-forward but important but still…..
Who’s the distributor I wonder?
Any publicity is good publicity as they say
Doesn’t seem like a fuck up at all when this game is one of many that want to ride the controversy wave for publicity. “Banned in Australia” gets a lot of attention from the audience they’re trying to sell this game to.
Exactly my thoughts (from one of the many other posts 😀 )
Given the ban would have been plastered across several hundred gaming sites, its a simple way to advertise cheaply. “Game Banned Because Australia is a Nanny State” – saw it (or words to that effect) several times just swiping through the news on my phone at lunch.
Its becoming a tactic to use these sorts of negative events to your advantage, and not just in gaming.
So yeah, not convinced it was a fvck up either. Even if it was, they got it sorted fast enough.
Can’t be as bad as eOne (national distributor for John Wick 2).
So was there meant to be demon orgy rape or not? I am curious as to whether this type of content enhances the story or atmosphere or if it is simply there to be “edgy”.
The implication here is that the content isn’t actually in the game at all, but something that was removed from an alpha build of the game (but accidentally submitted to the Classification Board). I’m trying to clear that up, though.
The Classification Board is important, necessary and does not deserve the absolute crap that people were hanging on it last week.
For reasonable, intelligent adults who say they can think for themselves that’s a point they seem to have missed.
It appears that inconsistency breeds contempt… but yes, it is important.
Agreed. This is attacking people for doing the exact job they’re employed to do and that we rely on them doing correctly. If people want to be angry, be angry at the guidelines creators, not the people who enforce them.
(INB4 some idiot makes an unreasonable Nuremberg defense comparison)
agreed. the guidelines need tweaking. direct your anger to the right people folks.
The last paragraph implies that the scene still exists but they’ve changed how it’s shown thus lessening the impact?
¿Porque no los dos?
So it sounds like the rape scene was cut from the alpha version of the game, but a video of said scene was included in the file they submitted to the ACB which helps highlight particular classifiable content for the board.
Hmmm
Publicity stunt?
That’s what I was thinking
Just on the update, surely that could warrant a new post?
We’ve obviously been had here, although the end result would mean further playing into drumming up publicity and chatter about the game before release, how many games are going to keep doing this?
The Board and its role are always the bad guy when it comes to this, yet we still don’t fully understand how they operate.