Games Censorship Database Information |
INTRODUCTION |
Computer game censorship was introduced into Australia on April 11th 1994 when the ACT government amended their legislation. Other State and Territory governments soon followed. Despite a large percentage of game players being over 18, no provision was made for an R18+. The highest rating that a game could receive was, and still is MA15+. It is this lack of an Adult rating that is behind virtually all the Game Censorship in Australia. Nearly every single title that has been modified or banned since 1994 would probably have been passed with an R18+ (equivalent to the Film Classification Guidelines). Likewise, the games submitted by the police that contain hardcore content should be easily accommodated in an X18+ category. The guidelines were reviewed in 2002 and there was great hope that this would see the introduction of an R18+ rating. Unfortunately this was not the case. The new guidelines were introduced on March 30th 2003 with the top classification remaining at MA15+.
|
The new and old MA15+ Guidelines
are reproduced below. You will notice that the standards for sex and
nudity seem to have been relaxed. Anthony Larme questioned the Director of
the OFLC about this point on May 19th 2003. The full text of the correspondence
can be found here. |
|
MA15+ NOTE: Material classified MA/ MA( 15+) is considered unsuitable for persons under 15 years of age. It is a legally restricted category. Classifiable
Elements MA15+ Material which falls into this category would contain elements likely to disturb, harm or offend those under 15 years to the extent that it should be restricted to those 15 years and over. Elements which might warrant this category would include: . depictions of realistic violence of medium intensity (eg. impactful punches, kicks, blows and blood-shed to realistic animated characters or real-life images); . graphic or impactful supernatural or horror scenarios; . strong sexual references; . use of frequent crude language, but not if excessive, unduly assaultative or sexually explicit; or . nudity, including genital detail, but only if there is a 'bona fide' educational, medical or community health purpose.
|
|
The new and old Refused Classification Guidelines are as
follows. |
|
REFUSED CLASSIFICATION Films and computer games will be refused classification if they include or contain any of the following: Crime or Violence Sex Drug Use REFUSED CLASSIFICATION Violence: Sex: Language: Other:
|
What the Database does contain. |
| Seventy titles
are covered in all. These can be broken down into three groups. The first is a series of twenty three games that were submitted by the NSW and Victorian Police in 1996 and 1997. Evidently it was a slow year for real crime in these States as many of the titles offer nothing more than pictures of naked women as rewards. Some, if not all of these were obtained by the Police during raids on Adult Stores. The second group of forty seven games are those that were submitted by legitimate distributors. Around half of these were either Refused Classification or Modified. The other half are included as they represent the high end of MA15+, attracted controversy, or were on the border of RC. The third contains two titles. SPECIAL FORCE was the subject of some controversy in Federal Parliament regarding its rumoured availability in Australia. Following negative publicity, RULE OF ROSE was dropped by the distributor before it could be rated. At the moment I have
only one report of Customs confiscating a game, though I would suspect
there would be many more. The database is jointly maintained with the |
What the Database does Not contain. |
| Titles such as HARVESTER
that no distributor dare touch due to our ridiculous censorship laws.
It's impossible to know what other games have been passed by due to this
kind of self-censorship.
|
Back to Games Censorship Database