Around three weeks ago, the Australian Classification Board refused classification for the videogame Left 4 Dead 2. In their report clarifying the reasons behind the ban, the Classification Board stated that the high-impact violence made the game unsuitable for persons aged under eighteen to play. The implication of this particular section of the Board’s report would appear to suggest the game would have been suitable for adult gamers to experience – but, frustratingly, they could not actually exercise such liberty because there is currently no adult classification for videogames in Australia.

The highest classification available at present for videogames in Australia is the MA15+ rating. If the Classification Board finds that a game exceeds the criterion for this maximum rating, the game will then be refused classification. Games which have been refused classification are banned from release… while the mature content which typically results in the banning of a game remains available for adults to view in R18+ classified movies. The National Classification Code states that adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want – but when it comes to videogames the lack of an R18+ category denies adults this freedom of choice.

The Attorney-General’s Department, which is responsible for the Classification Board’s guidelines, is aware of research into game-playing trends which found the average age of Australian gamers to be significantly higher than eighteen – yet they have still failed to introduce a new classification scheme providing for adult videogames. Last year, the Standing Committee of Attorneys General began to develop a discussion paper in order to seek community views on the issue of an R18+ classification for videogames. Of course, as is generally the case in the world of politics, the parties involved could not reach a unanimous decision even when it came to developing a discussion paper for public release. The task of releasing this much-needed paper has instead been taken up by the office of the Commonwealth Minister of Home Affairs, but a cabinet reshuffle appears to have left the entire matter in political limbo. You could write to the Minister’s office asking when the paper will be released, but you’ll likely receive only this standard response: “The content of the paper and the timing of its release are under consideration by the Australian Government.”

In other words: “Don’t hold your breath.”

Many gamers have blamed the original delay on the South Australian Attorney-General, Michael Atkinson, a staunch opponent to the introduction of an R18+ classification for videogames. For adult gamers, Atkinson has become a political roadblock to progress. To implement change, the Commonwealth requires the unanimous agreement of State and Territory Censorship Ministers – and so far Atkinson doesn’t seem willing to budge. Now, he may not be the only Attorney-General opposed to an R18+ classification for games, but he’s definitely the most vocal, which makes him a reviled figure by many in the Australian gaming community. Atkinson believes that a restriction of adult choice is actually justifiable for the sake of the more vulnerable members of our society, referring to the Classification Code’s statement that minors should be protected from material that is likely to harm or disturb them. Of course, the purpose of an R18+ classification would be to restrict minors from accessing unsuitable material, but Atkinson has publicly admitted that he doesn’t even trust the Classification Board to apply the correct guidelines as they stand, anyway. He believes the limits of the MA15+ category are already being stretched to accommodate more extreme material…

…and he’s right.

Games that are typically restricted to adults in other countries are instead made available in Australia under the MA15+ category. Admittedly, the local versions have often been censored to accommodate our MA15+ requirements, but game developers can only tone down the onscreen impact of the material – they can’t drastically alter the overall tone of a product without producing an entirely different game. So the content gets watered-down to meet our guidelines… while the mature themes remain largely intact.

Atkinson claims that he doesn’t agree with this system, but his opposition to a category that would restrict such material to adults can only be seen as support for a system that currently provides it to fifteen year-olds. He may want to protect the children, but his refusal to support a new system with better regulations is instead giving children access to the very material he opposes. It obviously makes perfect sense to oppose an R18+ classification for videogames when fifteen year-olds can pick up a copy of Prototype and leave a trail of mutilated corpses in their wake as they literally carve their way through crowded metropolitan streets, doesn’t it?

Two days ago, the Australian Classification Board approved a modified version of Left 4 Dead 2 by giving it an MA15+ rating, but the decision only further highlights inconsistencies in the board’s approach. The board were satisfied “that the game no longer contains depictions of decapitation, dismemberment, wound detail or piles of dead bodies lying about the environment.”

The board reports that, in this edited version, dead bodies and blood spatter quickly disappear – but this was certainly not the case in the original Left 4 Dead, which the board approved with an MA15+ classification despite the piles of bodies players could leave behind.

But I’m not the first person to point out the board’s inconsistencies, and the question we should really be asking is: how do these edits make the game any more suitable for minors to experience? The core nature of the gameplay hasn’t changed – it’s still a relentless killing spree, only now the impact and consequences have been toned down. A dead body and the blood spatter disappearing will not change the fact that a fifteen year-old just shot somebody in the face.

Inconsistencies and providing minors with access to mature content aside, there’s another issue that should be factored into the R18+ games classification debate. You see, when games are refused classification they cannot be legally imported, sold or advertised in Australia – which damages the retail gaming industry. Left 4 Dead 2 is anticipated as being one of the highest-selling games of 2009. A modified version may have been approved for sale here, but that’s not going to satisfy a significant portion of the gaming community who expressed no problem with resorting to illegal avenues during the three weeks in which they were denied a lawful opportunity to access the game. There will be imports and there will be piracy – because some people have already ordered copies from compatible regions that did approve the game, while others simply won’t accept a watered-down version when they can access an unedited one.

The people in charge of the R18+ decision can’t just think of the children – they need to consider our economy by thinking of the retailers, too. Right now, there are people in this country with copies of other banned games obtained through illegal means. They have chosen to either rip off the game developers entirely or send their money overseas (because Customs officials aren’t renowned for checking items like videogames). These are people who believe that petitions, letter-writing campaigns and blogs won’t make a difference.

And maybe they’re right. Maybe nobody is listening.

Maybe nobody else cares.

For those of us determined to implement change, we can only continue along this well-trod path. We can only express our arguments to those who supposedly represent our best interests. We can only say:

“Part of the National Classification Code addresses the need to take account of community concerns about the depiction of material which condones or incites violence. As a member of the community, I do not feel the interactive nature of violence depicted in videogames makes their content any more unacceptable than material I can readily access through watching an R18+ classified film. However, I do feel that my freedom of choice as a responsible and mature Australian citizen is being restricted by unfair regulations. I would like to see the introduction of better regulations and an R18+ classification for videogames so that I can exercise my freedom to access material the present classification scheme denies me from choosing. I would like to feel the pride of living in a country that does not unfairly restrict my liberties. I would like to know that a better system is in place. Please, give adult gamers their freedom of choice while helping to reduce illegal activity and further restricting the unsuitable material that minors currently have access to.”

But, sadly, so long as people like Michael Atkinson remain in office, we’ll probably be repeating ourselves for a very long time.

This entry was posted on Friday, October 9th, 2009 at 10:30 pm and is filed under In the News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.