Andy Chalk said:
The name Greg Smith may not be as instantly recognizable as, say, Michael Atkinson, but that might be about to change. Despite making hopeful noises about Australia's slow but seemingly inexorable march toward an R18+ videogame rating, Smith, the Attorney General for New South Wales, now says that games like Grand Theft Auto should be banned outright.
Goddamnit. Out of the frying pan and into another equally annoying, if lesser known, frying pan.
Andy Chalk said:
"I think they should be banned," Smith said in a televised report on Australia's 7 News. "It involves a prostitute giving sexual favors for money to a man in a car, and then when she gets out, he comes out with a semi-automatic rifle and shoots her dead. Now what good does that do anybody?"
Well, the guy, for one thing. He just got laid, and then he got his money back.
More seriously, does he think that this is a valid argument? He describes it like it's something that happens, as a semi-scripted event, in every game, without exception.
Andy Chalk said:
MA15+:
THEMES:
The treatment of strong themes should be justified by the context.
..."Themes"? They want to regulate
themes?
Okay, this isn't just a petty, unjustified fear of simulated violence leading to real-world violence. This is outright censorship, and not the sort that deals with actual graphic content.
Andy Chalk said:
SEX:
Sexual activity may be implied.
Sexual activity must not be related to incentives or rewards.
So no games where you ever date anyone, I guess.
Andy Chalk said:
DRUG USE:
Drug use should be justified by the context.
Drug use related to incentives or rewards is not permitted.
Interactive illicit or prescribed drug use is not permitted.
Looks like they're going to crack down on Mario and his mushroom abuse.
Andy Chalk said:
R18+:
THEMES:
There are virtually no restrictions on the treatment of themes.
"Virtually"? If the previous times I've seen "there are virtually no restrictions on X" used, it's because there
are restrictions on X.
Andy Chalk said:
VIOLENCE:
Violence is permitted. High impact violence that is, in context, frequently gratuitous, exploitative and offensive to a reasonable adult will not be permitted.
Sexual violence may be implied, if non-interactive and justified by context.
Ah. So even in games intended explicitly for an audience 18 or older...no character can ever get raped unless the developers are super coy about it.
Andy Chalk said:
SEX:
Sexual activity may be realistically simulated. The general rule is "simulation, yes-the real thing, no".
Wait, what? Does that just mean that you're not allowed to splice actual porn into the game, but as long as it doesn't depict flesh-and-blood people, you're fine?
Andy Chalk said:
LANGUAGE:
There are virtually no restrictions on language.
Same as theme, really, at least on the "virtually" point. Moving on.
Andy Chalk said:
DRUG USE:
Drug use is permitted
Drug use related to incentives and rewards is not permitted.
So the Saints Row drug trafficking side missions are out? And the bonuses you get for drinking/smoking?
Andy Chalk said:
NUDITY:
Nudity is permitted.
See? It doesn't say "virtually no restrictions" here. That's a red flag for the other two.
Andy Chalk said:
"Any game with sexual violence will be refused classification. [Smith] need not worry, sexual violence is refused classification now, and it will be refused classification once R18+ passes," O'Connor said. And while some concerns have been expressed that the new rating could still be years away, he said that he expected things to happen fairly quickly once the legislation is introduced in Parliament in early 2012.
Wait...so does that mean he considers "sexual violence" to be violence that follows shortly after sexual content?