Here's How Many Games Were Classified (Or Refused) In Australia This Year

Throughout the year it's inevitable that a couple of games will run afoul of the Australian Classification Board, but rarely do we see the true scope of what goes through their doors. Here's a little look at a year's worth of games for the good ol' classification board.

The data comes from the AusVGClassifications, an unofficial Twitter account that tweets out all the games that are classified during the year. Here's the breakdown:

You probably don't remember seeing 34,4567 games get released this year. Unsurprisingly they're mostly mobile games, and AusVGClassifications has credited the jump in numbers to IGEA for helping reduce costs for mobile devs looking to get classified.

If you're curious, you can find a list of all the R18+ games here, which range from Yakuza 6 with "Sexual activity related to incentives and rewards" to a game called Mermaid Princess Love Story 3D which is apparently full of high impact violence.

The list of games that were refused classifcation can be found on the classification board's website too, though most of those listings don't mention what about the game caused it to be refused classification. With names like "virtual Marijuana" and "Camper Van Meth Lab: Breaking Bad RV Truck Driving" it's not too hard to guess, but you have to wonder what was wrong with the game innocently titled "golf".


Comments

    Disgusting that the government can ban video games like this, whether they're mobile games or not. They're harmless video games with most studies indicating as such, yet the govt wastes tax payers money on mandating a government run censorship ministry.

    You can murder, just don't smoke a joint while doing it! That's the Australian way. Banning anything to do with drugs is such a weird obsession and fetish of governments in this country. Maybe they should but out of our lives and stop dictating everything to us. So many laws in this country are based on unscientific assumptions without absolutely nothing to back it up. Even real weed is harmless for crying out loud!

      "Even real weed is harmless for crying out loud!" yeah not exactly, I have personally seen three friends waste their life. Losing job after job, losing their family and just all around become 'uselss' in a day to day situation. So while it isnt what some screaming conservatives would have us think, like any form dependency, it has an impact beyond the drug itself.

        Sorry to say they were probably useless prior to the weed.

        That's the person not the drug. Alcohol even just on weekends does much more permanent damage. No one loses their family because they smoke weed. Its not harmless but its better than drinking. A lot of successful wealthy business owners smoke weed daily. Try being a better friend.

          With that sort of rational, bet you also think gambling is harmless. Ridiculous and thoroughly, laughably flawed. If you cant see how someone could lose a family to a drug, or any addictive behaviour maybe you need to grow up a little and understand or see when such a thing goes wrong.

          PS where did I say that werent still my friend? despite their self destructive behaviour and its effects of those around them. so spare me your 'try being a better friend' rubbish

            Well with your logic we shouldn't have games with alcohol in them either. Its far worse and has a huge impact compared to marijuana. People die from alcohol, a LOT of people for different reasons. I dont even smoke anymore and I dont believe its HARMLESS but its fucking hilarious to read an adult having a cry about his 3 friends that "ruined" their lives with weed yet you continue to be their friend.
            Alcohol ruins lives and ends them. Pot dulls lives. Just because you can't handle smoking weed doesn't make it some terrible substance.

              watching friends smoke their lives away with weed is as real and heartbreaking as watching someone drink themselves to death. You have no right to diminish and ridicule someone who points this out.
              Really heavy weed smokers, in my experience (and I was one for a long time) have a range of issues. Explosive tempers when they can’t find any, completely skewed logic, General apathy towards the outside world, paranoia, zero motivation beyond getting more weed. The list goes on.
              Any kind of recreational drug, legal or otherwise can do A LOT of harm when used in excess.

                Its sad. Its not horrifying. Watching someone with the shakes as their organs fail is way worse than someone who is stuck in a cycle of getting baked, eating and lazing around. I don't know anyone who had an explosive temper regarding long time use. Again, its not for everyone. People can handle long term use of weed a lot better than alcoholism. I dont even smoke weed anymore but I will defend it.

      Even real weed is harmless for crying out loud!

      After around the age of 25, this is sort of true, sort of. There's a lot of factors though that you have to take into account. Prior to the age of 25, your brain is still developing and weed can have an impact on that. It pays to know your stuff before making blatant generalisations like you did.

        Its around 18-20 that weed will have little to no effect on your brain development, although your brain does continue to develop till 25. It depends on how often its used too. Once every few weeks or even once a week is going to do nothing.

          It's very hard to say, I think the people I've been around who smoked weed regularly (one a day maybe) were childhood users and they all had some level of paranoia or explosive personalities such as getting ultra angry over small things.

          Do adult smokers exist who have not smoked allot as a child? I think it would be HARD to find in some places due to the culture, for example in New Zealand it seems pot/weed are as common as cornflakes for kids for many places. LOL

          Last edited 29/12/17 5:00 pm

            My friends that still smoke didnt start till they were 18 but the ones that started earlier have actually all stopped. It's not harmless but compared to alcohol its fucking hilarious to think someone can sit there and say aw i lost mi frens 2 weed.

      Maybe they should but out of our lives and stop dictating everything to us.

      Load gun.

      So many laws in this country are based on unscientific assumptions without absolutely nothing to back it up.

      Point at foot.

      Even real weed is harmless for crying out loud!

      Shoot!

      I want to know where all these marijuana facts come from as there have been no long term studies of users conducted.

          The nz study is deeply flawed as there were not monitored from birth to 38 but rather questioned about their health history, so the data is only subjective. The other study is the same. They were not monitored throughout there lives only recently.
          Then they use what data they have now to paste onto their findings.

          You will find dozens of studies like these all with different outcomes and findings and it's due to their flawed data.

          Try looking through the American medical journal or some of it's counterparts where they warn against these subjective findings.

            TThe nz study is deeply flawed as there were not monitored from birth to 38 but rather questioned about their health history, so the data is only subjective. The other study is the same.

            You, sir, are incorrect. The NZ study was a 38-year longitudinal study.

            Participants belonged to a representative birth cohort of 1037 individuals born in Dunedin, New Zealand, in 1972 and 1973 and followed to age 38 years, with 95% retention (the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study)

            The second one followed the participants for a much shorter period (2 years), but the only subjective element of that was the reported frequency and dosage of marijuana usage. The health effects were determined by brain scans, which is definitely not subjective!

            You might actually want to read the articles next time before dismissing them so easily.

      Saying that weed is harmless is ridiculous. It’s a recreational drug, and like all drugs it can be safe in moderation but it depends on the individual.
      Weed can exacerbate depression, cause complete apathy towards life and damage you physically.
      Many people self medicate anxiety and depression with weed and it’s a short term solution at best.

    They will automatically ban a game if it has a hint of incentives for/with drugs in it, even thought people 18+ should be able to decide for themselves how to interrupt such content. And in the end people who use drugs are not going to stop using or thinking about drugs when such a game isn't around. But THE OLD PEOPLE think otherwise...

    Last edited 29/12/17 4:56 pm

      Yeah it’s a well argued point.
      We can have gory head explosions in games but not drugs or sex.
      If the film industry was subject to this kind of regressive censorship, no one would have a bar of it.
      Many of the older people who are in power still hold the antiquated view that video games cause behavioural problems or they are just for kids. Ignoring studies which point towards the opposites in both points.

    In any case, digital drugs being banned is laughable.

    Almost literallly everything is harmful in excess. Weed is one of the least harmful substances on Earth when compared ro alcohol or tobacco. Theres a reason its quickly becoming legalised in several Western nations, including several US states such as Colorado. It has also pretty much elimated the black market and created a booming LEGAL industry.

    Guess what? If you drink water in extreme excess you'll also kill yourself. Not gonna ban it though. Especially in video games LOL.

    I should know, I got addicted to hillbilly heroin a few years back and ended up on Methadone. Trust me, weed is *pretty much* harmless. Legal drugs such as Benzos and Opiates are also harmless in moderation, but as in my case, excessive use is of course a bad thing. But a few stoners wasting their life isnt harming anyone else and therefore a personal choice. Wèed is NOT drug of addiction and to put it in the same legal category as heroin is frankly beyond moronic and ignorant. Look up some studies.

    Video game drugs didn't make me use hillbilly heroin. I chose to and got physically dependant. So I take full responsibility for it. Banning fictional drugs is so laughable that its embarassing.

    If anyone is disappointed at the amount of RC'd stuff - its probably best you save your faux-outrage and have a look at the titles that were RC'd.

    These seem to **almost** all be Google Play mobile phone games and most likely banned due to the ad content as they are all "free" shovelware shit

    Something has sparked my curiousity.
    I was always under the impression that anything relating to incentives or rewards ie: sex, drugs etc is grounds for a game to be refused classification.
    However as plain as day on the classification info for South Park fractured but whole:
    sexual activity related to incentives and rewards.
    Have I been wrong all this time, or were the classification guidelines amended at some point?

      The games guidelines have always stated (and still do) that "drug use related to incentives or rewards" is refused classification. This hasn't changed and will probably never change. It's been in the games guidelines ever since 1994 when the classification system for games was introduced in Australia.

      On the sex issue - "Except in material restricted to adults, nudity and sexual activity must not be related to incentives or rewards." Even before we had R 18+ for games, that's what it said. Which didn't make a whole lot of sense.

      The old guidelines prefaced "As a general rule" to the quote above.

      Ignore guestwhowould's comment. He/she doesn't know what they're talking about. The guidelines have never allowed for "allowances" to be "made at times to parodies". So the Classification Board have never done this.

      My proof:

      Current games guidelines:

      https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2012L01934

      Old (previous) guidelines (combined film/games) :

      https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2008C00126

    To everyone who claims the censorship board is all these old people etc. Why dont you apply? Sure there is certain requirements like any job, but at the end of the day it is just another public service job.

    Last edited 31/12/17 12:21 pm

      Why don't you apply.

      Sorry stuck in moderation hell for edits still.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now