[Source Game Politics]

R18+ Discussion Paper Finally Released

Australia’s government has finally released the long-awaited Discussion Paper designed to foster public debate on whether or not an R18+ classification should be added for videogames.

Why release the Discussion Paper now? The government cited Interactive Games and Entertainment Association (IGEA) research as indicating that adults are ”increasingly” consumer of videogames, while noting that discussion about adding an R18+ rating category has been ongoing for “some time.” This is the first time the public can weigh in on the topic with their feelings.

If an R18+ rating category was to be enacted, the paper notes that a change to classification categories would require amendments to the Commonwealth Act, the Code and the Guidelines, as well as State and Territory enforcement legislation. Of course, amendments can only be undertaken with the agreement of all Censorship Ministers, which South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson, typically identified as the lone holdout in such matters previously, would certainly maintain his stance on.

The paper lists the pros of adding an R18+ classification:

• The R 18+ classification category sends a clear, unambiguous message to parents that the game material is unsuitable for minors.
• Consistent classification categories for films and computer games are easier to understand.
• A new classification will supplement technological controls on minors’ access to age inappropriate computer games.
• Adults should not be prevented from playing R 18+ level computer games simply because they are unsuitable for minors.
• Comparable international classification systems have an adult rating for computer games - international parity is desirable.
• Consumers access games which would be R 18+ illegally – it would be better if they were legally available with appropriate restrictions.

And the cons:

• Computer games should be treated differently from films given the specific, negative effects of interactivity on players, particularly their participation in violent and aggressive content.
• It would be difficult for parents to enforce age restrictions for computer games.
• Minors would be more likely to be exposed to computer games that are unsuitable for them.
• An R 18+ for computer games would exacerbate problems associated with access to  high level material in Indigenous communities and by other non-English speaking people.
• There is no demonstrated need to change existing restrictions.

Even the Discussion Paper couldn’t be released without a mention of Rapelay, as it was noted that even if an R18+ rating was approved and introduced, “the RC category would still exist for games with, for example, gratuitous or exploitative depictions of sexual violence, such as the sexual assault simulation game Rapelay."

Submissions are due by February 28, 2010. A PDF that outlines how to make a submission and also contains a questionnaire is available here.

Looking at the pros it almost feels promising but then you see the same old crap from the cons.

• Games should be treated differently -- while I don't necessarily support that idea, I can see the reasoning and if that's what they want to do with, whatever, but that still shouldn't stop adults from buying it.
• It would be difficult for parents to enforce it -- OMG!  Parents have to take an active role in their childs lives!? 
• Minors still would be exposed -- true, but that holds true for everything rated.  Kids still see rated R movies, get alcohol, and cigerettes.  Again, parents should do a better job.
• R18+ gives a bad image -- I can see where this one comes from and is actually understandable, though I wouldn't base not having the catagory entirely because of thos
• There's ne need to change restrictions -- what?  How about adults not being able to get the games they want and the only alternatives is to import or pirate.

i'm not from australia so i guess i'm not really affected in any way but i really hope the R18 classification gets created. the stigma that video games are only for children really annoys me, and as an adult if i want to play a game with adult themes i should be allowed to.

Same here, not from Australia but it's just sad that one man is stopping this because he just absolutely refuses to budge.

anecdot :

I was in France, Paris, retailer :

2 guys are playing on 360 to AC2 : I m not sure they were +10 years old lol ...

That's just the retailer being stupid. o.O

Don't the cons look like a good reason to have an R18+ category?

Aren't MA15+ games already unsuitable for 8-year olds? How is it suddenly more difficult to restrict kids' access to inappropriate games just because there is an R18 category?

Let's look at the moral and social fabric of Australia and compare it to the moral and social fabric of culturally similar countries with an 18+ (or equivalent) rating for video games? Australia is no better, and in some cases probably slightly worse, than all of those countries. So I don't think Australia has benefitted by having this particular restriction on freedom, if a restriction on freedom has had no obvious benefit then the automatic response is to let freedom reign.

Also, isn't it odd that a decision that has been made by a democratic process (i.e. voting in the federal houses of parliament and senate) can be overturned by a distinctly undemocratic process: a single censorship minister from one state disagreeing with the majority and effectively wielding the power of veto over the whole nation? The Attorney General of South Australia gets to tell the people of Queensland what they can and can't have, when Queensland's own A-G (and presumably its state govt) holds the opposite view. Very odd indeed.

In other news: emmigration from Australia to New Zealand is at its highest level in decades (true story).

It's good to see them being upfront about it, at least. The problem is that its likely to be such a minor issue in terms of voting that no personnel (like this Atkinson guy) who would need to be removed from office to get this to work would be removed, because ultimately the issue will fail to rise to the forefront of political discourse.