According to a poll done by Bond University, 90% of Australians want to create an “R18+” rating for video games.
Yes, video games.
Okay, so this isn’t exactly Australian cinema, but one can argue that video games, especially in recent years, are essentially interactive movies, with powerful stories, relatable characters, and incredible visuals. One thing common to both films and video games are the rating guidelines that help dictate which games are appropriate for what demographic. In the United States, we have the MPAA and the ESRB (Electronic Software Ratings Board), both of which are “self-regulatory” bodies that analyze and assign a rating to their respective media. However, both of these organizations are not government controlled, and both have come under fire regarding their rating practices (especially the MPAA, see here).
In Australia, the system works a little differently. Still somewhat of an independent body, the Classification Board deals with all media, including film, video games, music, and even magazines. However, their ratings criteria are set out in the National Classification Code, which was developed by the government and the individual states and territories. This organization also has the full support of the Attorney General’s office, providing support for the Board’s decisions.
What does this all mean? Well, because it deals with both medias, the Classification Board’s ratings are the same for films and video games. Whereas in the US we have the G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17, Australia has the G, PG, M, MA15+, R18+, and X18+. However, the game ratings there only include up to the MA15+ rating, which has caused some issues in the past. To anyone who has frequented gaming websites, Australia (among some others) has a history of either banning games or forcing publishers to censor content in order to grant them a rating to be sold on their shores. As a result of this, games available in Australia can only be as “mature” as the MA15+ guidelines allow. In more familiar terms, the highest rating a game can get is roughly equivalent to the ESRB’s “T” rating for ages 13 and up. The ESRB also has “M” (17 and up) and “AO” (Adults Only) ratings to cover more mature content.
Games like “Silent Hill: Homecoming”, which is rated M in America, was refused a rating in Australia. The “Grand Theft Auto” series has only been available there in a censored form (again, rated M in the US). According to Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia’s CEO Ron Curry, the average gamer age is around 30, so limiting these older gamers to play content deemed suitable for a 15 year old is really tearing a big hole in the industry. Imagine if there were no R-rated movies. That could put a damper on things, now wouldn’t it?
Ratings systems dictate a lot about how we will do our work in the future. Different ratings will attract a different audience and may even prevent the work from ever being seen. Looking at it from this perspective, what does this say about ratings in general? Are the systems in place even worth it? Any thoughts?
ESRB
MPAA
Australian Classification Board
The Age Article that started this all
Wikipedia list of banned games in Australia
1 comment:
I am a pretty avid player of video games. As such, I am always trying to keep on the latest developments. When following high profile games, particularly as of late, I have noticed the rather stringent requirements of the Australian ratings. You mention GTA IV coming under fire, but that's not really a surprise as Rock Star's games are constantly being attacked. However, Australia was the only country in the world that required the game to be edited.
Restrictive ratings attack the creativity of an artist. Asking video games to edit out content for a rating is the same as asking a filmmaker to do so. The difference is it a lot harder for video game makers to do so. The main point is this censorship effects the integrity of the work.
Take the example of Fallout 3. This game went through a lengthy battle to get a release in Austalia. At first the game was banned. The word banned was never officially used, rather Fallout 3 was refused a rating and games without rating cannot be sold. It's passive-aggressive censorship. (Read more here: http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/07/09/fallout-3-banned-down-under/)
The gamemakers then worked to fix the problems in the game while not changing the game as a whole. Bethesda, the creator of the game, wanted to deliver the same game to every country in the world. Like most game developers, they don't want consumers in one region of the world to feel as if they are receiving an inferior product in comparison. And for a while they thought they had succeeded by removing the name Morphine from the game. (http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/09/11/bethesda-australian-fallout-3-same-as-us-and-uk-versions/)
However, Bethesda's edits were not satisfactory enough for the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) and the developer was forced to go back in and change more to meet their demands. Unfortunately, the Aussie gamers will now have to, once again, deal with a different version than the rest of the world. (http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/08/13/edited-version-of-fallout-3-headed-to-australia/)
So I support the decision to create a higher rating than MA15+ because then Aussie gaming can be as daring as Aussie Cinema which is unafraid to confront any issue.
Post a Comment