I sorta like the idea and his reasoning behind it but I still feel that the "T/Australian MA" rating is necessary. The reason why is because if someone wants to have fighting, shooting and blood, even if it's the level that most T rated games have they're going to have to jump to the adult age bracket. I would have been pissed if when I was growing up I couldn't play the Lord of the Rings console games because there's swordplay and I think some blood that bumps it up to 18+. It really comes down to a question of what's appropriate for what ages and what is not. Now, I want all you parents out there to listen to me very closely: do you want your government telling you what's appropriate for your children? Personally, I think games should not have a rating and just keep the description of how much questionable content (violence, smoking, drugs, sex, language, etc.) is in it. That way YOU are the one to rate it. Since that's not likely to happen, just go with whether or not you think the game is okay for your kids and if it's 18+ but you don't think it's really not that bad then go buy it for them anyways.
Aussie Minister Proposes Ditching MA15+ Game Ratings
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
that's kinda my point tho, oblivion is rated 15 here, and it's not even particularly violent. But to put a blanket system that says "if it's inappropriate for a 12 year old you must be 18 to play" seems a little silly to me.cocoro67 said:In my country Oblivion is still rated M 15+......Funny how in america they made a big fuss.Sgt. Dante said:
My thoughts on this are as follows:
There needs to be a lot more distinction between the terms "kiddie" and "adults". If the intention is to prevent kids from getting violent games, then there needs to be more structure in that rating system to begin with. The ESRB and the PEGI are good examples of well-structured rating systems, but it creates an interesting contrast with the current system of the MA15+ rating for games like GTAIV, when the same game gets an M rating an 18 rating.Andy Chalk said:
I agree that it's dysfunctional. Fine. It's confusing to actually discern what's right for children with the current system in place, but if they do intend to change the rating system completely, they should change that rating system so that it becomes easier to actually tell what game is appropriate or not without resorting to censoring the ever-loving shit out of it (ahem, L4D2). It should be the responsibility of both the parents to understand and discern the difference between what is and what isn't appropriate for their kids and that of the retailers to enforce that rule. Until then, removing the MA15 rating is just a bad idea.
This is a terrible idea. Going into an Australian games retailer and merely glancing at the shelves will reveal that almost all games of this generation have been classified as MA15+. Many of these games are not fitted for an R18+ rating. For instance, Halo 2 and the Uncharted games are rated MA15+ due to the fact that enemies bleed when shot and Nate snaps the odd neck here and there. If this plan were put into practice what would become of games such as these? It's ridiculous to think of Uncharted recieving an R18+, yet if it were moved down to an M rating, the OFLC would be criticised for giving it a lower rating than it would normally recive, so it may instead end up being refused classification and effectively banned from Australia.
Let's review the main arguments FOR an R18+ rating:
1. It is inconsistent for games to lack the rating when all other forms of rated media have it or it's equivalent. The rating should be allowed, so that it may create consistency.
2. There are some games, such as GTA 4 and Fallout 3 that would probably be given a higher rating were such ratings avaiable. Such ratings should be allowed, so that games can be properly classified and the risk of a younger audience playing an inappropriate game can be decreased.
This proposal is simply moving the problem. The removal of an MA15+ would have people making the first argument, complaining about the rating's absence as being inconsistent with other forms of media and the event of certain games that would usually be classified as MA15+ instead being classified as M15+ would cause people to make the second argument.
Furthermore, the idea that the games industry will be forced to adhere with this proposal is a naive one anyway. America has the largest population in the market, ergo America is their target audience. Games are made for America. The games industry may lose some sleep over the potential millions they can no longer earn if they lose the Australian audience, but they won't do anything that would upset the American audience that could potentially earn them billions.
Bringing us back to the argument for consistency, if its necessary to isolate kid and adult audiences, then surely the same must be done for films and televison and books and music. Of course, you wouldn't ever imagine the MA15+ rating be removed from film's classification system. Even if it's to separate what's made for kids and what's made for adults? Of course not. That's what the ratings are for. The entire point of the classification system is to determine what is and what is not appropriate for each age group. To remove one of the possible ratings would not aid this purpose, but hinder it. It'd be much more effective to maintain a system that allows a broad range of classification ratings, so as to meet the needs of all necessary ages, rather than to strip it down and create a false dichotomy of what is kids and what is for adults.
Let's review the main arguments FOR an R18+ rating:
1. It is inconsistent for games to lack the rating when all other forms of rated media have it or it's equivalent. The rating should be allowed, so that it may create consistency.
2. There are some games, such as GTA 4 and Fallout 3 that would probably be given a higher rating were such ratings avaiable. Such ratings should be allowed, so that games can be properly classified and the risk of a younger audience playing an inappropriate game can be decreased.
This proposal is simply moving the problem. The removal of an MA15+ would have people making the first argument, complaining about the rating's absence as being inconsistent with other forms of media and the event of certain games that would usually be classified as MA15+ instead being classified as M15+ would cause people to make the second argument.
Furthermore, the idea that the games industry will be forced to adhere with this proposal is a naive one anyway. America has the largest population in the market, ergo America is their target audience. Games are made for America. The games industry may lose some sleep over the potential millions they can no longer earn if they lose the Australian audience, but they won't do anything that would upset the American audience that could potentially earn them billions.
Bringing us back to the argument for consistency, if its necessary to isolate kid and adult audiences, then surely the same must be done for films and televison and books and music. Of course, you wouldn't ever imagine the MA15+ rating be removed from film's classification system. Even if it's to separate what's made for kids and what's made for adults? Of course not. That's what the ratings are for. The entire point of the classification system is to determine what is and what is not appropriate for each age group. To remove one of the possible ratings would not aid this purpose, but hinder it. It'd be much more effective to maintain a system that allows a broad range of classification ratings, so as to meet the needs of all necessary ages, rather than to strip it down and create a false dichotomy of what is kids and what is for adults.
Also it probably WILL help parents pick for their kids. TO be frank, when it comes to buying games alot of parents seem a bit.....Behind shall we say. A clear R-18 label pretty much says directly to parents "YES! Grand Theft auto has sex, drugs and violence. You do NOT want toThe Bucket said:
buy this for your kids. It is NOT a racing game" (as My dad though with one of the older GTA's)
In other news, Subway to be shut down, in order to force fast food providers to decide between a completely healthy, diet food only place, and a place that serves everything deep fried.
I mean honestly...if you think games are rated as appropriate for kids who are to young...lower the requirements for what constitutes a mature game. I mean, it may be a pointless action, I'm not sure, but at least theirs a logic to it. This is just asinine, and all it does is remove information from the parents view. In fact, I'm betting that many games that are Teen appropriate will end up being rated as appropriate for everyone because its closer to that then M, and then parents will realize that what they thought was an educational, family game turns out to be violent and inappropriate for a very small child, even if it does lack blood and gore. If anything, make MORE rating, filled with MORE nuances. Hes just making it harder to make an informed decision.
I mean honestly...if you think games are rated as appropriate for kids who are to young...lower the requirements for what constitutes a mature game. I mean, it may be a pointless action, I'm not sure, but at least theirs a logic to it. This is just asinine, and all it does is remove information from the parents view. In fact, I'm betting that many games that are Teen appropriate will end up being rated as appropriate for everyone because its closer to that then M, and then parents will realize that what they thought was an educational, family game turns out to be violent and inappropriate for a very small child, even if it does lack blood and gore. If anything, make MORE rating, filled with MORE nuances. Hes just making it harder to make an informed decision.
Current Australian ratings:
G - Everyone
PG - Parental guidance, usually 10+ reccommended.
M - Suggested for those over 15 years (basically everything light action-y in movies
MA - Under 15s must be accompanied by an adult or guardian
R - 18s only.
See, the last thing a parent wants to do is watch their kid play a ridiculous violent video game all day. MA makes sense for movies, but I think I'm in favor of scrapping it for games. Non-Australian commenters, please calm your outrage!
G - Everyone
PG - Parental guidance, usually 10+ reccommended.
M - Suggested for those over 15 years (basically everything light action-y in movies
MA - Under 15s must be accompanied by an adult or guardian
R - 18s only.
See, the last thing a parent wants to do is watch their kid play a ridiculous violent video game all day. MA makes sense for movies, but I think I'm in favor of scrapping it for games. Non-Australian commenters, please calm your outrage!
There needs to be a rating between Between "Suitable for mature kids" and "Shit's Fucking crazy".
In Britain (which simultaniously has a much better and much worse rating system) We have 12, 15 and 18 as restricted ratings. An example of a typical 12 rated game would be Prince of Persia, A typical 15 would be Halo and a typical 18 would be Gears of War. 12 games generally have violence, but there won't be any blood and it won't be realistic, much of the content would be similar to a PG-13 film (although they tend to be stricter with game ratings). A 15 would entail harsher language and harsher violence, a bit of blood and some gore but nothing too strong. 15 is the mid point, that picks up more violent T rated games (Batman Arkham Asylum) and less violent M games (Halo). Meanwhile, the 18 rating is for all the games like Black Ops, Gears of War and GTA, you know, the ones that are constantly challenged. Sex isn't really an issue for ratings, Mass Effect 1 was a 12 in Britain, and the sex was considered tame. A sex scene that got Farenheight (Indigo Prophecy) an AO in America was included uncut in Britain.
What I am unsucessfully trying to say is that there needs to be a rating between Kids and adults, because not all games clearly fit those definitions.
In Britain (which simultaniously has a much better and much worse rating system) We have 12, 15 and 18 as restricted ratings. An example of a typical 12 rated game would be Prince of Persia, A typical 15 would be Halo and a typical 18 would be Gears of War. 12 games generally have violence, but there won't be any blood and it won't be realistic, much of the content would be similar to a PG-13 film (although they tend to be stricter with game ratings). A 15 would entail harsher language and harsher violence, a bit of blood and some gore but nothing too strong. 15 is the mid point, that picks up more violent T rated games (Batman Arkham Asylum) and less violent M games (Halo). Meanwhile, the 18 rating is for all the games like Black Ops, Gears of War and GTA, you know, the ones that are constantly challenged. Sex isn't really an issue for ratings, Mass Effect 1 was a 12 in Britain, and the sex was considered tame. A sex scene that got Farenheight (Indigo Prophecy) an AO in America was included uncut in Britain.
What I am unsucessfully trying to say is that there needs to be a rating between Kids and adults, because not all games clearly fit those definitions.
Nope. Don't worry if it's confusing,Brainst0rm said:
even national surveys show that most Australians don't know the difference between the M and MA15+ ratings.What this means is that our system would be more like the ESRB since there's no middleground between T and M17. Only difference in our case would be M to R18.
My only real concern is that grey area between games that shouldn't be restricted to adults only, but is a little too intense for an M rating. Australians want to stop our games getting watered down, not encourage it. I'm tempted to write John Rau with my concerns on the issue.
This is an interesting proposal, and the rating before MA15+ is just M, right? That's a 15 year restriction? So I'd say that removing the MA15+ "adult" restriction and replacing it with the "R18+" restriction would be a better idea.
Let's hope this finally gets this whole ordeal done and over with.
Let's hope this finally gets this whole ordeal done and over with.
I can only assume that he also added that that pesky MA15+ rating should also be removed from the film category, in order to make the film makers choose who they really wanted to direct their artistic vision towards.
Because otherwise, doing this is just another special rule for video games that all other artistic mediums don't have to wade through, and that's not really much of an improvement at all.
Because otherwise, doing this is just another special rule for video games that all other artistic mediums don't have to wade through, and that's not really much of an improvement at all.
The main issue I have with this is that I could see something like this happen.
Before: character gets a nose bleed, MA15 rating
After: character gets a nosebleed, R18+ rating
Basically, now instead of the industry having something only slightly exploitable, the government now has something easily exploitable.
Before: character gets a nose bleed, MA15 rating
After: character gets a nosebleed, R18+ rating
Basically, now instead of the industry having something only slightly exploitable, the government now has something easily exploitable.
This actually isn't a terrible idea. I think that maybe an early teen, (sort of like our 13+ "T" rating) and then a mature, 18+ rating, is ideal if games are to be rated at all. Then it isn't such a divide that you either have to market to adults of pre-schoolers, but it makes a clear distinction between adult and non-adult content.
The Australian ratings system has a "mature" rating which is not restricted, and states "These films and computer games contain material that requires a mature perspective, but is still not enough to be deemed too strong for younger viewers." That seems to be about equivalent to the idea of the American "T" rating. As long as they do not ban "mature" as well as MA15+ then it should be worth it to get an 18+ rating.
The Australian ratings system has a "mature" rating which is not restricted, and states "These films and computer games contain material that requires a mature perspective, but is still not enough to be deemed too strong for younger viewers." That seems to be about equivalent to the idea of the American "T" rating. As long as they do not ban "mature" as well as MA15+ then it should be worth it to get an 18+ rating.