This... I... what? I don't even...
Okay, some background. For almost 11 years Australian gamers fought for a change in the classification system to allow 18+ games (the equivalent to 17+ on the ESRB system) to be released in Australia. Prior to the eventual introduction of the R18+ rating games where either refused classification (could not be sold), edited for release in Australia (to much outrage), or most commonly shoe-horned into the in-appropriate MA15+ category.
Essentially there was no category for video games intended for adults, and the long painful process and the screams of protesting conservatives yelling "think of the children" wrapped up to cheers of campaigning responsible adults, who wanted nothing more than a clear designation to help less informed parents know what was and wasn't appropriate for little Johnny, when it was announced that Aussie would finally an R18+ classification starting 1 January 2013. I know exactly how it felt since I had been one of those campaigners right from the start.
So, upon seeing the above headline I immediately investigated further, wondering what exactly it took to push Saints Row 4 beyond the category of R18+. It has been refused due to "interactive, visual depictions of implied sexual violence which are not justified by context". Okay, sounds nasty, however exactly how visual can implied content be? Considering Saints Row 3, which I just happen to have recently started replaying, had a scene early on where a guy could be seen pushing a woman's head down towards his crotch. Number 3 also has a lovely mission called "The Ho Boat" where you get to stop a container boat full of women being sent off into sex slavery by shooting anything in your path, including any of the ladies who get caught up in the crossfire. At the end, well you can put them to work as prostitutes for your character's benefit. These are scenarios that I find distasteful, yet I know there is much worse sitting in my local video store.... Human Centipede anyone?
Now the above examples are probably the most extreme available in Saints Row 3 and I feel certainly can be described using the classification board's nice and provocative, yet very broad, statement about number 4. The point of this is that Saints Row 3 was released in Australia, completely uncut, under the MA15+ banner.
This decision appears that, in essence, the rather flexible rules for the old MA15+ have been tweaked, tightened up a bit and applied wholesale to the new R18+ guidelines. We were promised that wouldn't be the case however, to date, the only games to get the fabled new rating are the ones that would have been MA15+ under the old system anyway.
Now, if this implied content is really that bad, if it is a scenario that can easily be seen to exceed any interpretation of the R18+ classification then I am happy to abide by that decision and have some of my faith restored in the classification board. I still however find it incredibly unlikely that a game designed by adults, for adults, in such a well established game franchise with experienced, commercial game developers at the helm would include anything that would push those bounds.
Adult entertainment (and I don't mean porn, that is a whole different discussion) needs to have the scope to push reactions, push buttons and be set up so that adults experiencing it can make there own decisions on the content, regardless of the medium. To sum up I will make the point that I made in numerous submissions to local members, state MPs, Attorney Generals and even the Prime Minister...
R18+ for any content needs to be same for ALL content, be it games, film, television or print. Only then can we have a true adult rating that meets the criteria for all Australian adults.
No comments:
Post a Comment