Australia Bans Dead or Alive: Dimensions After All

[Trogdor1138]

I know that this post will not stop the knee-jerk reactions so many on this site always have to anything they read about Australia and video games. But this game is not "banned" and it will surely be submitted for reclassification. The whole issue is there is content in the game that wasn't suitable for a PG that they overlooked. I see no problem here and I'm actually for once in support of the ratings board for being able to go back and act quickly from concerns people have about the content. No I am not for censorship, but I am completely for appropriate ratings.

But hey, just blindly hate it when you have no idea what you're talking about. This seems to be what some of you do best in the comments. Thanks for generalizing a whole country without knowing our situation.

 

[BloodRed Pixel]

I dunno. I think if Brendan O'Connor and the rest of the Aussie classification board are concerned about panty-shots, they should forbid Australians from ever visiting Japan. Their heads might explode the moment they got off the plane.

If such a fate is appropriate for those who create such a ludicrous game rating system, then I will help pay for their ticket myself.

It would at least open their minds a little.

how nicely put.

 

[remedyX]

Meanwhile they have no problem having 13 year olds reading and performing Shakespeare.

Haha, what?

Shakespeare was one dirty bastard. As an example, Romeo & Juliet is about two horny 14 year olds who want to get married, then do get married, then shit happens. Marriage in Elizabethan drama = sex. It's a comedy about that until Mercutio dies, then it becomes a tragedy. Also interestingly, Juliet's nurse advises her to just marry the guy her mother wants her to and sleep with Romeo on the side. There's plenty more examples of this, (Midsummer Night's Dream contains bestiality ffs) yet we apparently have no problem having this taught in school because it's Shakespeare.

I was attempting to say that if you want to ban fictional representations of persons under the age of consent engaging in sexual activity, you'd have to ban a lot of stuff you didn't intend to. A lot of Shakespeare for instance.

I guess I could have made the point a bit better, but in my defence, it made sense in my head

I disagree with you for several reasons.
Firstly - in the context of the times the arbitrary age at which society deemed sex as reasonable was lower. Secondly the play can be interpreted and re-told in many different ways to keep it within societies boundaries. If Romeo and [edit]Juliet[/edit] were told by actually having two 14 year old actors have sex on stage it would be banned. So all we do nowadays is tell the story differently.

All this game has to do is remove the ability to look up underage girls skirts.

The other reason I disagree with you is because a play doesn't 'become a tragedy when X happens' the play was always tragic, it is tragic because of X. This is like saying that Saving Private Ryan is all about gratuitous violence until the story happens.

Finally I hardly find panty shots comparable to Shakespearian works in terms of their cultural value. I do take your point, though.

 

[John Funk]

I dunno. I think if Brendan O'Connor and the rest of the Aussie classification board are concerned about panty-shots, they should forbid Australians from ever visiting Japan. Their heads might explode the moment they got off the plane.

(GameSpot [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6318966/dead-or-alive-dimensions-aussie-rating-revoked])

(I fixed your tags edit-Wait no I didn't. This site has some weird b/code. Apologies)

So you're supportive of under-age virtual 'pantyshots' then?

You'll see a whole lot worse in Japan, is my point.

 

[remedyX]

I dunno. I think if Brendan O'Connor and the rest of the Aussie classification board are concerned about panty-shots, they should forbid Australians from ever visiting Japan. Their heads might explode the moment they got off the plane.

(GameSpot [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6318966/dead-or-alive-dimensions-aussie-rating-revoked])

(I fixed your tags edit-Wait no I didn't. This site has some weird b/code. Apologies)

So you're supportive of under-age virtual 'pantyshots' then?

You'll see a whole lot worse in Japan, is my point.

No, that was your statement, seeing as its tangential to the topic at hand what was the implication of it?

So what if there's 'immoral' stuff in Japan? You included this for a reason and I hardly think we can point and shout "BUT LOOK THEY DO IT!"

They can always simply remove it from the game. I bet none of the fans will mind. They all buy it for the awesome gameplay!.
(I refuse to write my sarcasm in pink)

 

[Forum_Name]

I'm starting to think Australia's policy of banning games is a conspiracy by the Australian Tourism Bureau.

I can't speak for anyone else but I find such wanton use of censorship to be disturbing. I'd feel more comfortable skipping Australia in favour of New Zealand for tourism. Comparisons to other countries under heavy censorship do not a comfortable tourist make.

 

[John Funk]

I dunno. I think if Brendan O'Connor and the rest of the Aussie classification board are concerned about panty-shots, they should forbid Australians from ever visiting Japan. Their heads might explode the moment they got off the plane.

(GameSpot [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6318966/dead-or-alive-dimensions-aussie-rating-revoked])

(I fixed your tags edit-Wait no I didn't. This site has some weird b/code. Apologies)

So you're supportive of under-age virtual 'pantyshots' then?

You'll see a whole lot worse in Japan, is my point.

No, that was your statement, seeing as its tangential to the topic at hand what was the implication of it?

So what if there's 'immoral' stuff in Japan? You included this for a reason and I hardly think we can point and shout "BUT LOOK THEY DO IT!"

They can always simply remove it from the game. I bet none of the fans will mind. They all buy it for the awesome gameplay!.
(I refuse to write my sarcasm in pink)

Well, if you want to get technical, my point was that it was a game developed in Japan where they obviously have different social mores and consider different things to be acceptable and unacceptable.

And yes, I do find it a bit silly to be demonizing a free-camera mode that allows you to take upskirt shots of virtual girls who are ostensibly 17 but who sure as hell don't look it (oh, anime). I mean, what's next - calling the Coppertone girl [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppertone_girl] child porn?

 

[remedyX]

I dunno. I think if Brendan O'Connor and the rest of the Aussie classification board are concerned about panty-shots, they should forbid Australians from ever visiting Japan. Their heads might explode the moment they got off the plane.

(GameSpot [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6318966/dead-or-alive-dimensions-aussie-rating-revoked])

(I fixed your tags edit-Wait no I didn't. This site has some weird b/code. Apologies)

So you're supportive of under-age virtual 'pantyshots' then?

You'll see a whole lot worse in Japan, is my point.

No, that was your statement, seeing as its tangential to the topic at hand what was the implication of it?

So what if there's 'immoral' stuff in Japan? You included this for a reason and I hardly think we can point and shout "BUT LOOK THEY DO IT!"

They can always simply remove it from the game. I bet none of the fans will mind. They all buy it for the awesome gameplay!.
(I refuse to write my sarcasm in pink)

Well, if you want to get technical, my point was that it was a game developed in Japan where they obviously have different social mores and consider different things to be acceptable and unacceptable.

And yes, I do find it a bit silly to be demonizing a free-camera mode that allows you to take upskirt shots of virtual girls who are ostensibly 17 but who sure as hell don't look it (oh, anime). I mean, what's next - calling the Coppertone girl [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppertone_girl] child porn?

There is a difference between that picture, which did seem a bit off, and people looking up skirts.

What artistic, game-play, or storyline purpose does looking up skirts serve exactly?

There's is a difference between things that are obviously pornographic and those which aren't.

Finally, what do you mean they look older than 18? How can you tell?

-edit - Why am I bothering, you have a Gundam avatar.

 

[John Funk]

I dunno. I think if Brendan O'Connor and the rest of the Aussie classification board are concerned about panty-shots, they should forbid Australians from ever visiting Japan. Their heads might explode the moment they got off the plane.

(GameSpot [http://www.gamespot.com/news/6318966/dead-or-alive-dimensions-aussie-rating-revoked])

(I fixed your tags edit-Wait no I didn't. This site has some weird b/code. Apologies)

So you're supportive of under-age virtual 'pantyshots' then?

You'll see a whole lot worse in Japan, is my point.

No, that was your statement, seeing as its tangential to the topic at hand what was the implication of it?

So what if there's 'immoral' stuff in Japan? You included this for a reason and I hardly think we can point and shout "BUT LOOK THEY DO IT!"

They can always simply remove it from the game. I bet none of the fans will mind. They all buy it for the awesome gameplay!.
(I refuse to write my sarcasm in pink)

Well, if you want to get technical, my point was that it was a game developed in Japan where they obviously have different social mores and consider different things to be acceptable and unacceptable.

And yes, I do find it a bit silly to be demonizing a free-camera mode that allows you to take upskirt shots of virtual girls who are ostensibly 17 but who sure as hell don't look it (oh, anime). I mean, what's next - calling the Coppertone girl [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppertone_girl] child porn?

There is a difference between that picture, which did seem a bit off, and people looking up skirts.

What artistic, game-play, or storyline purpose does looking up skirts serve exactly?

There's is a difference between things that are obviously pornographic and those which aren't.

Finally, what do you mean they look older than 18? How can you tell?

-edit - Why am I bothering, you have a Gundam avatar.

It's a free camera mode. Plenty of games have them. That DOA, which has always sold at least partly on its fanservice (see also: "She kicks high" commercial) would include a 'check out our hot babes in 3D!' mode in its latest release is hardly surprising. No, it has no artistic, gameplay, or storyline purpose, but does that mean it shouldn't exist?

Should they have prevented the camera from going lower than it needed? Should they just not have modeled the underskirt view? I'm genuinely not seeing your point here - how is giving the player the option, in one mode of the game, to position the camera JUST RIGHT so they can see a view of *underwear* - nothing more, just underwear - even remotely pornographic? There's worse than that in PG-13 movies.

And I'm saying, that Kasumi [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasumi_(Dead_or_Alive)] et al certainly don't look underage - as well as you can tell with anime-esque characters, anyway. The "17" is just a number in a database that has no meaning. You could say she was 18, you could say she was in her 20s and it could still be right. Yes, it's kind of disturbing that they INSIST on making her technically underage, but it's hardly tantamount to child pornography.

Also, what does my avatar have to do with a single thing?

 

[Dys]

Meanwhile they have no problem having 13 year olds reading and performing Shakespeare.

Is there a problem with performing classic drama? I fail to see the reason behind this argument, and I was wondering how you got it.

On topic: Yeah, this seems like censorship taken overboard to me.

Is that a real response? Have you read Shakespeare? I'm not a massive fan and don't claim to have read all of his stuff, but even I know that it sure as all hell isn't G rated. Sure, literary classics and all that, but hardly appropriate for children.

OT: Honestly, who gives a shit what the censorship board do. Ban left 4 dead because you can shoot cops but find no problem with GTA? Dead or alive handheld is out because you can see a girls undies, but every other DOA game is fair? Ban fallout for referencing real drugs (morphine) but half life 2 (with the suits automatic morphine administration) is cool? I'm sorry, I just can't care.

Meanwhile they have no problem having 13 year olds reading and performing Shakespeare.

Haha, what?

Shakespeare was one dirty bastard. As an example, Romeo & Juliet is about two horny 14 year olds who want to get married, then do get married, then shit happens. Marriage in Elizabethan drama = sex. It's a comedy about that until Mercutio dies, then it becomes a tragedy. Also interestingly, Juliet's nurse advises her to just marry the guy her mother wants her to and sleep with Romeo on the side. There's plenty more examples of this, (Midsummer Night's Dream contains bestiality ffs) yet we apparently have no problem having this taught in school because it's Shakespeare.

I was attempting to say that if you want to ban fictional representations of persons under the age of consent engaging in sexual activity, you'd have to ban a lot of stuff you didn't intend to. A lot of Shakespeare for instance.

I guess I could have made the point a bit better, but in my defence, it made sense in my head

Romeo was 18 and Juliet was 13 (notably too young to be married off in the story). More than the sexual innuendos and generally crass conversations (there is one where a 13 year old Juliet is complaining to her housemaid that she has not yet slept with her 18 year old man), the violent nature of romeo and Juliet (romeo and Juliet are basically on opposite families in a gang war) is concerning. There is quite a bit of (sadistic) violence at least spoken about, if I recall correctly. You're point of it being ridiculous to teach romeo and juliet to our children but ban much less extreme content in video games is perfectly valid.

 

[Tiger Sora]

Ohh Australia I thought you were getting along with games now. *Sigh*.

 

[faceless chick]

go australia!
prove you're the most uptight, conservative, hateful and frigid country on the planet!
it will only work wonders for you in the future.

Have you ever been to Australia? Do you know what it?s like here? No so kindly shut up and stop acting like we?re this repressed nanny state because of one article.

if it were the first, maybe.
but it's been what, 3 years of nothing but this from australia.
i don't hate the country, but seriously, why?


if you are from australia/been there, enlighten me. why so uptight about censorship?

 

[Dragunai]

Welcome to Australia, where Freedom of human rights is nothing more than a good idea!
I used to ***** about England in various contexts but you know what?

The weather might suck but at least I can go out and buy a fully explicit copy of an adult game as an adult with an adult ID without being arrested or called a peado.

Rock on Englands "we don't care about you" attitude!

 

[TheAceTheOne]

Meanwhile they have no problem having 13 year olds reading and performing Shakespeare.

Is there a problem with performing classic drama? I fail to see the reason behind this argument, and I was wondering how you got it.

On topic: Yeah, this seems like censorship taken overboard to me.

Is that a real response? Have you read Shakespeare? I'm not a massive fan and don't claim to have read all of his stuff, but even I know that it sure as all hell isn't G rated. Sure, literary classics and all that, but hardly appropriate for children.

OT: Honestly, who gives a shit what the censorship board do. Ban left 4 dead because you can shoot cops but find no problem with GTA? Dead or alive handheld is out because you can see a girls undies, but every other DOA game is fair? Ban fallout for referencing real drugs (morphine) but half life 2 (with the suits automatic morphine administration) is cool? I'm sorry, I just can't care.

Meanwhile they have no problem having 13 year olds reading and performing Shakespeare.

Haha, what?

Shakespeare was one dirty bastard. As an example, Romeo & Juliet is about two horny 14 year olds who want to get married, then do get married, then shit happens. Marriage in Elizabethan drama = sex. It's a comedy about that until Mercutio dies, then it becomes a tragedy. Also interestingly, Juliet's nurse advises her to just marry the guy her mother wants her to and sleep with Romeo on the side. There's plenty more examples of this, (Midsummer Night's Dream contains bestiality ffs) yet we apparently have no problem having this taught in school because it's Shakespeare.

I was attempting to say that if you want to ban fictional representations of persons under the age of consent engaging in sexual activity, you'd have to ban a lot of stuff you didn't intend to. A lot of Shakespeare for instance.

I guess I could have made the point a bit better, but in my defence, it made sense in my head

Romeo was 18 and Juliet was 13 (notably too young to be married off in the story). More than the sexual innuendos and generally crass conversations (there is one where a 13 year old Juliet is complaining to her housemaid that she has not yet slept with her 18 year old man), the violent nature of romeo and Juliet (romeo and Juliet are basically on opposite families in a gang war) is concerning. There is quite a bit of (sadistic) violence at least spoken about, if I recall correctly. You're point of it being ridiculous to teach romeo and juliet to our children but ban much less extreme content in video games is perfectly valid.

It was a real response. Never said it was G rated anyway. PG-13, maybe, if you go by the US Film rating system. And only if it's trimmed down. Point to you.

The argument for such behavior being common for the time hasn't been made, has it? Back in ol' Shakespeare's day, such things were (apparently) alarmingly common (correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm actually genuinely interested in this argument about Shakespeare in relation to Dead or Alive)

OT: My original opinion holds true. In my opinion, this seems to be censoring overboard, especially if they allowed Grand Theft Auto and the other Dead or Alive games in as claimed above.

Spoiler: Disclaimer

This post is not intended to offend anyone or start a flame war about the censoring. It's meant to give my opinion and a response to some people. Please do not bash me for having my opinion. Thanks.

Also, captcha:

What the heck is the second thing on there? Is that cryllic or some other language than English?

 

[Dys]

It was a real response. Never said it was G rated anyway. PG-13, maybe, if you go by the US Film rating system. And only if it's trimmed down. Point to you.

The argument for such behavior being common for the time hasn't been made, has it? Back in ol' Shakespeare's day, such things were (apparently) alarmingly common (correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm actually genuinely interested in this argument about Shakespeare in relation to Dead or Alive)

Just because it was appropriate at in some places, in some points of time doesn't make it appropriate now. Slaverly, racism, sexism (including pleasantries such as genital mutilation) are or were acceptable somewhere at some point in time, they are not now and modern society wouldn't determine them to be appropriate study content for children. Also, as I mentioned previously, there's a (brutal) gang war happening in romeo and juliet, it was never meant to be for children. The teaching of it to children would be like children studying the exorcist in a few hundred years.

The relation to dead or alive is that it's absurd that a videogame (with a history of games that have been allowed) to be banned because one could look up the skirts of "underage" girls if they so chose (naturally, there would be no explicit or even really sexual content) yet a famously controversial play, that actively deals with forbidden (underage) love is not only acceptable, but encouraged. The comparison was made to show the absurdity of the ban.

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

Because as we all know, only children play video-games.

Hmm?

They are banning this game:
"over concerns that the free-camera mode could allow gamers to look up the skirts of the title's buxom (and underage) girls"

Not that childrens might see it.

Because pixels are underage children and have rights now?

Won't someone please think of the pixels!

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

go australia!
prove you're the most uptight, conservative, hateful and frigid country on the planet!
it will only work wonders for you in the future.

I'm sorry, but when did banning a video game reflect being hateful? Australia's racism (from the early British towards the Aboriginals) ended sooner than any other country's. Would you care too look at any other country and kindly point out how long it took slavery to end? For women to get a vote? For homosexuality to be decriminalized? Or would you rather go on judging a country and thereby its people based off internet video game articles? Your choice.

 

[TheAceTheOne]

It was a real response. Never said it was G rated anyway. PG-13, maybe, if you go by the US Film rating system. And only if it's trimmed down. Point to you.

The argument for such behavior being common for the time hasn't been made, has it? Back in ol' Shakespeare's day, such things were (apparently) alarmingly common (correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm actually genuinely interested in this argument about Shakespeare in relation to Dead or Alive)

Just because it was appropriate at in some places, in some points of time doesn't make it appropriate now. Slaverly, racism, sexism (including pleasantries such as genital mutilation) are or were acceptable somewhere at some point in time, they are not now and modern society wouldn't determine them to be appropriate study content for children. Also, as I mentioned previously, there's a (brutal) gang war happening in romeo and juliet, it was never meant to be for children. The teaching of it to children would be like children studying the exorcist in a few hundred years.

The relation to dead or alive is that it's absurd that a videogame (with a history of games that have been allowed) to be banned because one could look up the skirts of "underage" girls if they so chose (naturally, there would be no explicit or even really sexual content) yet a famously controversial play, that actively deals with forbidden (underage) love is not only acceptable, but encouraged. The comparison was made to show the absurdity of the ban.

Wow. That was an incredibly well-thought out argument. Many points to you. I'm actually going to agree with you entirely.