Victorian MP Takes A Swing At Australia's Classification System

Image: YouTube (Cannabis Australia)

It's not often that state politicians get uppity about games being banned, but the situation around DayZ saw one MP vent his frustrations about our classification guidelines in the Victorian legislature.

Tim Quilty, a member of the Liberal Democrats — the same minor party former senator David Leyonhjelm led until he left recently — had a rant in the Victorian upper house about DayZ's ban recently. PC Gamer first reported about the MP's question to the state's Attorney General, which was really just an opportunity to call Australia the "laughing stock of the whole world" and an our classification system as an "embarrassment".

"Refusal of classification should be reserved for illegal materials, things like child pornography and snuff films that should have never have been created in the first place. It should not be used for zombie survival video games," Quilty said.

Quilty pushed the state Attorney General to allow games that contain "adult themes including drug use" to be sold in Australia. It's a bit of a pointless request, mind you: even if Victoria wanted to allow the sale of those games, Australia's classification system would need to create a separate classification to allow the sale of those games, since state legislation doesn't permit the sale of most games (or films and literature) until it's been classified — and anything classified RC can't be sold in Australia, period.

That's how our weird system works, and if Quilty wants it changed, then he might want to start lobbying other, more conservative states that have just as much sway on what games Victorians can play as Victoria does.

Don't Blame The Classification Board For DayZ, Blame The Government

Games don't get banned all that often, and every time it happens there's a surge of interest in Australia's archaic classification system. That's generally followed by a torrent of abuse against the Classification Board, occasionally Australia itself, and more recently, a bit of public vitriol directly against the members of the board.

Read more

DayZ is still for sale on Steam, but it's been pulled from the respective console stores. I can't imagine Steam got some kind of special dispensation to leave the game up, and I'll keep an eye on how that situation unfolds throughout the week.


Comments

    Might I suggest:
    That's how our weird system works fails...

      I've never heard of Quilty before, but that Youtube thumbnail gives me the impression of a man who likes a bit of weed with in his video games.

    He seemed really nervous for some reason. He had legit points, but I felt like the delivery of them kind of made his argument a little less impactful.

    I've seen a few of the Lib Dem policies discussed and I must say I like them more than the Libs or ALP. That said, I haven't seen *all* their policies, so they may be mad as cut snakes in most of them but have a few good ones.

      the same minor party former senator David Leyonhjelm led until he left recently

      This line should tell you enough.

      Alan jones might occasionally say good things on Q&A, But he is still a shitty person who says shitty things. Same logic applies to the liberal democrats.

        Somehow I'd erased Leyonhjelm from my memory when he retired. Dude's a hardcore libertarian, to the exclusion of all else, common sense included. He and Latham are fine examples of what you'd end up with if speech was totally unhindered.

        Yeah, frankly even people I think are borderline crazy (Pauline Hansen, Trump, etc) still come up with good policies at times. It's just a case of "do their crazy ideas outweigh their good ones"?

          Case in point John Howard and our gun laws.

      From what I've seen, it generally goes along these lines:

      "Stop regulating what people do in the privacy of their homes! Homosexuality should be free from regulation!"

      Yaay!

      "Also, stop regulating guns. Guns should be free from regulation!"

      Err.... wait, no that's not--

      "Also, stop regulating massively polluting and exploitative corporations. All businesses should be free from regulation! If consumers don't like exploitation, they should combine their purchasing power to punish it! The invisible hand of the market is wise and infallible!"

      oh no. nonono

      Libertarianism is an offshoot of anarchism.

      Basically, the policy is that there's too many rules. This sounds great initially until you realise that many of the rules that they want to remove are for your protection. Honestly, if you have an in-depth conversation with one of these guys (I have) they turn out to be absolute nutters!

        I probably like some of their policies because I have libertarian leanings (I suspect most of us do to some extent). I definitely feel like there is too much nanny-state BS going on and that the government should be making less laws rather than more. I'd much prefer to see laws that protect the children but remember that adults are adults and should be able to think for themselves.

          The problem is that what people define as "protecting the children" changes depending on which side of the political spectrum you fall on.

            Well in this context I mean restrict kids access but allow adults open slather. 18+ rating is adults only so there is no "protect the kids" agenda that should apply. That negates the majority of the "risk" (assuming there even is any risk). I think that it's then the parents responsibility to make sure their kids don't play Mum or Dad's 18+ games not the Governments.

            And if a game gets bumped from G to PG or M then *shrugs* that's not such a big deal. It's still available to buy. Might suck to not be able to buy a 3d shooter because you're 14 and it's rated M15+ but it's still possible to talk your parents into getting it for you.

            I've never had a problem with classification, only censorship.

    While I sometimes disagree with how they classify games to the same measuring stick since the introduction of the R rating. Its a federal matter.

    If you want to tackle a state gaming matter... try legislating Victoria's Gamvling Authority to include loot boxes into their jurisdiction cause they refuse to respond to it cause they claim its a classification matter.

      No, because of how our system works, its a State matter. Theres just a Federal base of coordinating the State choices. To change things you need unanimous agreement from every states Attorney General.

      Its why it took so long to get an R18 rating in the first place. South Australia's AG decided his personal viewpoint was more correct than the rest of the country and wouldnt change SA's position so the national view could change. Every other state was happy with an R18 rating for years before but Michael Atkinson repeatedly abused his position to block the change.

      Its why the article mentions that this politician would be better served convincing the other states. It needs them all to change/agree, not just Victoria. It goes both ways as well so once they agree to a national standard you need unanimous agreement to change it back.

    I think this was all a subtle push to decriminalised it. Which they should do.
    Legalise i, set the legal age to 21, and give it a 0.03 blood alcohol equivalency when driving. It solves all issues and fits with the stats of the effects while driving and discourages youth from using when it effects brain development. Just do it Australia.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now