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.
'.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".