Games L-R | Refused-Classification.com

Lady Killer

1993 / Japan

Submitted by the Victorian Police, it was rated RC on August 9th 1996.

This looks to be another puzzle game, with naked pictures offered as a reward.

Left 4 Dead

Prod Valve / 2009 / USA

This was passed with an MA15+ (Strong Violence) rating by the Classification Board in September 2008. It was released by Electronic Arts in November 2008.

Thanks to Bjorn for sending in the Classification Board report which reveals that a minority wanted to give it an RC-rating.

Board Report T08/4034

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995

CLASSIFICATION BOARD

DETAILS OF THE COMPUTER GAME:
FILE No T08/4034

Title: LEFT 4 DEAD
Version: ORIGINAL
Format: Nintendo DS
Duration: VARIABLE
Publisher: VALVE
Programmer: VALVE
Production Co: VALVE
Country Of Origin: USA
Language: ENGLISH
Application Type: Comp Game Assessed Level 1
Applicant: ELECTRONIC ARTS

PROCEDURE;
The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Classification Guidelines are followed when classifying films, computer games and publications

Written submissions: NO
Oral submissions: NO

MATERIAL CONSIDERED:
In classifying this item regard was had to the following:
(i) The Application YES
(ii) A written synopsis of the item YES
(iii) The Item YES
(iv) Other NO

DECISION
(1) Classification: MA 15+
(2) Consumer Advice: Strong violence
(3) Key:

SYNOPSIS:
This zombie style first person shooter game pits the player, a "survivor" and one of a team of five against numerous "infected" beings. The player can also assume the perspective of one of five "Boss" infected characters.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION;

In making this decision, the Classification Board has applied the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Classification Act), including the matters set out in sections 9A and 11 of the Classification Act, the National Classification Code (the Code) and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005 (the Guidelines).

In the Board's view this computer game warrants an MA 15+ classification as, in accordance with Item 2 of the Computer Games Table of the National Classification Code, it is unsuitable for viewing or playing by persons under 15.

Pursuant to the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games, this computer game is classified MA 15+ as the impact of the classifiable elements is strong. Material classified MA 15+ is considered unsuitable for persons under 15 years of age. It is a legally restricted category.

The classifiable element is violence that is strong in playing impact.

VIOLENCE

The game contains violence that is strong in impact and justified by context.

The violence can be by way of shooting, being hit with a variety of missiles, immolation, or in hand to hand combat. The violence is accompanied by copious blood spray, blood pooling and occasional dismemberment and atomising of victims. The wound and site of dismemberment contains little detail other than the blood depictions and there is no detail of viscera, bone and cleft marks associated with the violence. The soundtrack contains sound effects associated with violence including moderate coarse language, pleas of victims and the guttural moans and roars of the creatures. The scenario is typical of this genre and the storyline is fanciful, acting to lower impact.

A minority of the Board is of the opinion that the continual and unremitting acts of violence with substantial blood detail is high in impact. In the absence of a classification at the R18+ level for computer games, this game in the minority view is therefore assessed at RC in accordance with item 1(d) of the computer games table of the National Classification Code..

DECISION

This computer game is classified MA 15+ with consumer advice of strong violence.

The classification decision is based on section 21A of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 which states that if the Board is of the opinion that a classified computer game contains contentious material (whether activated through use of a code or otherwise) that was not brought to the Board's attention in accordance with subsection 14(4) or 17(2) before the classification was made and if the Board had been aware of the material before the classification was made, it would have given the game a different classification, the Board must revoke the classification.

Left 4 Dead 2

Prod Valve / 2009 / USA

The sequel to 2008's first person shooter was banned by the Classification Board on September 15th 2009. This followed NECROVISION, SEXY POKER, and RISEN, to become the fourth Refused Classification game of the year.

Thanks to Scott for this report.

Australian Government
Classification Board

File No: T09/4697

Decision Report

Classification decisions are made in accordance with the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Act), the National Classification Code and the Classification Guidelines.

Production Details:
Title: LEFT 4 DEAD 2
Alternate titles:
Publisher: VALVE
Programmer: VALVE
Production Company: VALVE
Year of Production: 2009
Duration: Version: ORIGINAL
Format: Country/ies of origin: USA
Language/s: ENGLISH
Application type: CG4
Applicant: ELECTRONIC ARTS

Dates:
Date application received by the Classification Board: 08 September 2009
Date of decision: 15 September 2009

Decision:
Classification: RC
Consumer advice:

Synopsis:
A 1st person action/shooting game where you can play as one of four human characters through a campaign to reach a safe house after fighting through hordes of infected humans or play as an infected human with the aim of trying to prevent the human survivors reaching the safe house.

The game also has several other multiplayer modes.

Reasons for the Decision:
In making this decision, the Classification Board has applied the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Classification Act), the National Classification Code (the Code) and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005 (the Guidelines).

In the Board's view this game warrants an 'RC' classification in accordance with item l(d) of the computer games table of the National Classification Code:

"1. Computer games that:

(d) are unsuitable for a minor to see or play;" will be Refused Classification.

The game contains violence that is high in impact and is therefore unsuitable for persons aged under 18 years to play.

The game contains realistic, frenetic and unrelenting violence which is inflicted upon "the Infected" who are living humans infected with a rabies-like virus that causes them to act violently. The player can choose from a variety of weapons including pistols, shotguns, machine guns and sniper rifles. However, it is the use of the "melee" weapons such as the crowbar, axe, chainsaw and Samurai sword which inflict the most damage. These close in attacks cause copious amounts of blood spray and splatter, decapitations and limb dismemberment as well as locational damage where contact is made to the enemy which may reveal skeletal bits and gore. Projectile shots to infected humans can cause abdominal wounds which can reveal innards or even cause intestines to spill from the wounds.

The Infected attack the player In an unrelenting fashion, with numerous foe attacking the player at one time. The use of the "melee" weapons can wipe out several Infected in one blow which cause the above mentioned blood and gore effects. The player kills a very large amount of enemy characters to proceed through the game. Whilst no post mortem damage can be inflicted, piles of bodies lay about the environment.

The interactive nature of the game increases the overall impact of the frequent and intense depictions of violence. This coupled with the graphic depictions of blood and gore combine to create a playing impact which is high.

A minority of the Board is of the opinion that the violence is strong in playing impact and therefore warrants an MA 15+ classification with the consumer advice of strong violence.

Decision: This game is Refused Classification.

***

Valve Appeals against RC-rating

Australian Government
Classification Review Board

6 October 2009 MEDIA RELEASE

Classification review announced for the computer game Left 4 Dead 2

The Classification Review Board has received an application to review the classification of the computer game Left 4 Dead 2.

Left 4 Dead 2 was classified RC (Refused Classification) by the Classification Board on 15 September 2009.

The Classification Review Board will meet on 22 October 2009 to consider the application. The decision and reasons will later be published on www.classification.gov.au.

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. The Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board.

***

MA15+ censored version

Just in case the Review Board appeal failed, Valve prepared a censored version. This was passed with an MA15+ (Strong bloody violence) rating on October 7th 2009.

***

Censored MA15+ vs. Review Board Appeal

Gabe Newell from Valve spoke in Sydney on the same day that the censored version was passed with an MA15+. He explained that it was done so that should the appeal fail then the November 17th release would not be missed.

Left 4 Dead 2 classified down under
October 8, 2009, au.gamespot.com

Newell told GameSpot AU yesterday that the publisher had resubmitted two versions of Left 4 Dead 2 to the Australian Classification Board following the Board’s decision earlier this month to refuse the game classification; the two versions are the original, unaltered version as well as one with some modifications.

"Right now we're pursuing two tracks: the first track is to release the product that we've created as is in Australia,” Newell said yesterday. “This is our very strong preference and what we're working with the [Classification Board] to see if we can achieve--so we have an appeal of their decision. The issue there is that that process is fairly slow and that the next step on that isn't going to occur until October 22.

“At the same time we've also submitted an Australia-specific version of the game which we think is fully compliant with the [Classification Board's] guidelines for content. We may actually hear about that version today. So the goal is to guarantee that something will be available on November 17 in Australia while at the same time pushing to get approval for that to be the full version of the game.”

The Board has provided GameSpot AU with a copy of today's Left 4 Dead 2 ruling, which states that the modified version of the game recently resubmitted "no longer contains depictions of decapitations, dismemberment, wound detail, or piles of bodies lying about the environment".

"It is the Board's view that the element of violence in the game has been sufficiently modified and is now able to be accommodated within the MA15+ classification," the report stated.

***

Classification Board Report for MA15+ version

Thanks again to Scott for this report.

Australian Government
Classification Board\

Decision Report
Classification decisions are made in accordance with the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Act), the National Classification Code and the Classification Guidelines.

Production Details:
Title: LEFT 4 DEAD 2
Alternate titles:
Publisher: VALVE
Programmer: VALVE
Production Company: VALVE
Year of Production: 2007
Duration: VARIABLE
Version: MODIFIED
Format: MULTI PLATFORM
Country/ies of origin: USA
Language/s: ENGLISH
Application type: CG4
Applicant: ELECTRONIC ARTS

Dates:
Date application received by the Classification Board: 25 September 2009
Date of decision: 07 October 2009

Decision:
Classification: MA 15+
Consumer advice: Strong bloody violence

A senior panellist has confirmed that the application considered was valid under the Act and that this Decision Report accurately reflects the Board's decision and any minority opinions.

Synopsis:
A revised version of computer game Left 4 Dead 2, which is a 1st person action/shooting game where you can play as one of four human characters through a campaign to reach a safe house after fighting through hordes of infected humans, or play as an infected human with the aim of trying to prevent the human survivors from reaching the safe house.

The game also has several other multiplayer modes.

The classifiable element is violence that is strong in playing Impact.

VIOLENCE
The game contains violence that is strong in impact and justified by context.

The game contains frenetic depictions of violence as the player fights his way through hordes of "the infected", who are humans infected with a rabies-like virus that causes them to act violently. Weapons used include projectiles such as pistols, shotguns and assault rifles or melee weapons, which include swords, axes, crowbars or chainsaws. During the player's attacks on the infected, large and frequent blood splatters are seen as the infected fall to the ground. No wound detail is shown and the implicitly dead bodies and blood splatter disappear as they touch the ground. The associated sound effects accompanying the acts of violence contribute to the strong impact of this game. It is the Board's view that the interactive nature of the game and amount of bloody violence results in a strong impact, thus warranting an MA15+ classification.

The Board notes that the game no longer contains depictions of decapitation, dismemberment, wound detail or piles of dead bodies lying about the environment,

OTHER MATTERS CONSIDERED OR NOTED
The Board notes that section 21A of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 states that if the Board is of the opinion that a classified computer game contains contentious material (whether activated through use of a code or otherwise) that was not brought to the Board's attention in accordance with subsection 14(4) or 17(2) before the classification was made and if the Board had been aware of the material before the classification was made, it would have given the game a different classification, the Board must revoke the classification.

The Board notes that Left 4 Dead 2 was previously refused classification on 16/09/2009.

It is the Board's view that the element of violence in the game has been sufficiently modified and is now able to be accommodated within the MA15+ classification.

Decision:
This computer game is classified MA 15+ with consumer advice Strong bloody violence.

***

Appeal against RC-rating fails

Australian Government
Classification Review Board
22 October 2009

MEDIA RELEASE

Left 4 Dead 2 classified RC upon review

A three-member panel of the Classification Review Board (the Review Board) has unanimously determined that the computer game Left 4 Dead 2 is classified RC (Refused Classification).

In the Review Board's opinion, Left 4 Dead 2 could not be accommodated within the MA 15+ classification. The computer game contains a level of violence which is high in impact, prolonged, repeated frequently and realistic within the context of the game.

In addition, it was the Review Board's opinion that there was insufficient delineation between the depiction of general zombie figures and the human figures, as opposed to the clearly fictional 'infected' characters. This was a major consideration of the Review Board in determining the impact of this game on minors.

Computer games classified RC cannot be sold, hired, advertised or demonstrated in Australia.

The Classification Review Board convened today in response to an application from the distributor of the computer game, Electronic Arts, to review the decision made by the Classification Board on 15 September 2009 to classify Left 4 Dead 2 RC.

In reviewing the classification, the Classification Review Board worked within the framework of the National Classification Scheme, applying the provisions of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games. This is the same framework used by the Classification Board.

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. This Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board.

The Classification Review Board's reasons for this decision will appear on the Classification website when finalised.

Statement authorised by Victoria Rubensohn, Convenor, Classification Review Board

***

Full Review Board Report

Australian Government
Classification review Board
Review Date: 22 October 2009
23-33 MARY STREET
SURRY HILLS, NSW

MEMBERS: Ms Victoria Rubensohn (Convenor)
The Hon Trevor Griffin (Deputy Convenor)
Ms Ann Stark

APPLICANT Electronic Arts Pty Ltd
INTERESTED
PARTIES None, but one letter from a member of the public was received and noted.

BUSINESS To review the Classification Board's decision to classify the computer game Left 4 Dead 2 RC (Refused Classification).

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Decision
The Classification Review Board (the Review Board) classified the computer game RC.

2. Legislative provisions

The Classification (Publications, Film and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Classification Act) governs the classification of computer games and the review of classification decisions. Section 9 provides that computer games are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code (the Code) and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games (the Guidelines)

Relevantly, the Code, under the heading 'Computer Games', provides that computer games that:

(a) depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified; or

(b) describe or depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18 (whether the person is engaged in sexual activity or not); or

(d) are unsuitable for a minor to see or play

are to be classified RC.

The Code also provides that:

Computer games (except RC computer games) that depict, express or otherwise deal with sex, violence or coarse language in such a manner as to be unsuitable for viewing or playing by persons under 15

are to be classified MA 15+(Mature Accompanied).

Section 11 of the Classification Act requires that the matters to be taken into account in making a decision on the classification of a computer game include:

(a) the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults; and
(b) the literary, artistic or educational merit (if any) of the computer game; and
(c) the general character of the computer game, including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character; and
(d) the persons or class of persons to or amongst whom it is published or is intended or likely to be published.
Three essential principles underlie the use of the Guidelines, determined under
section 12 of the Classification Act:

* the importance of context
* the assessment of impact, and
* the six classifiable elements - themes, violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity.

3. Procedure

A three member panel of the Review Board met on 22 October 2009 in response to the receipt of an application from the original applicant on 23 September 2009 to review the RC classification of the computer game, determined by the Classification Board. Those three members had previously determined that the application was a valid application.

The Review Board was assured that the computer game, the subject of the review application, was the same game as had been classified by the Classification Board.

The Applicant provided a written submission and recorded gameplay of the computer game before the hearing. The Review Board viewed the recorded gameplay and a demonstration of the game on 22 October 2009.

The Review board heard an oral submission from Mr Paul Hellmrich representing the Applicant and he demonstrated the game.

The Review Board then considered the matter.

4. Evidence and other material taken into account

In reaching its decision the Review Board had regard to the following:

(i) The application for review
(ii) Electronic Arts' written and oral submissions
(iii) the computer game, Left 4 Dead 2
(iv) the relevant provisions in the Classification Act, the Code and the Guidelines, and
(v) the Classification Board's report.

5. Synopsis

A 1st person action/shooting game where a person can play as one of four human characters through a campaign to reach a safe-house after fighting through hordes of infected humans, or can play as an infected human with the aim of trying to prevent the human survivors reaching the safe-house.

The game also has several other multiplayer modes. In addition, it should be noted that Mr Hellmrich indicated that the computer game was intended to be played on-line but that that could not be demonstrated because the servers were not yet live.

6. Findings on material questions of fact

The Review Board found that the computer game contains aspects or scenes of importance under various classifiable elements:

(a) Themes -
Mr Hellmrich submitted that the game 'was all about self-preservation and working as a team'. The Review Board does not contradict that submission and concludes that the classifiable element of 'Themes' could be accommodated in a classification lower than RC.

(b) Violence -
Weapons used in the computer game included a pistol, axe, shotgun, chainsaw, rifle, machinegun, acid/bile, cricket bat, saucepan and Molotov cocktail.

The game contains humans, 'zombies' and grotesque fictional 'infected' characters.

Mr Hellmrich made a submission in which he analysed the provisions of the National Classification Code as it describes the circumstances in which a computer game would be classified RC. That submission, in essence, relied very much on his assertions that:

- the game includes zombies who were not and never had been human;

- zombies were fictional characters and that zombie killing was an ancillary component to the central objective of the game being played on-line and multiplayer;

- 15 year olds would know that the zombies were fictional characters and could distinguish them from humans and that therefore lessened the impact, (but in any event it was not unlawful to kill zombies which meant that no crime had been committed); and

- there was no moral issue involved in killing fictional characters.

Mr Hellmrich also submitted that all figures (apart from the four humans) were stylized and not real, and that this lessened the impact.

Mr Hellmrich submitted that 'the game is a high MA15+ but due to the unrealistic nature of the violence still feel that this game should be within the MA15+ band'.

The following scenes and acts (not an exhaustive list) were noted by the Review Board:

* in the early stages, a body on the ground was shot at repeatedly, a body disintegrated leaving a head on the ground with copious amounts of blood;

* a fire left a visibly charred body;

* a body was lying face down on a bathroom floor with a trail of blood - screaming and moaning accentuated the impact;

* copious blood including repeated instances of blood splatter on camera lens;

* in a store with buses and trucks, blood splatters, a body on the ground having been dragged leaving a trail of blood;

* a person hanging by fingertips from a beam with fingers being stamped on, another person with arm shot off;

* swords used to behead and dismember with blood everywhere;

* in a swamp, with an aircraft crashed, persons being attacked, as they run towards camera some are shot with blood everywhere and fleeting glimpses of stomach entrails spilling out;

* a group between several buses shot at, copious blood including on camera lens, and several heads blown off;

* chainsaws used on attackers, heads cut off and lots of blood; and

* exclamations and coarse language from time to time accentuating the impact of acts of violence.

The Review Board concludes that the level of violence is high in impact, prolonged, repeated frequently and realistic in the context of the game.

It is also of the view that there is insufficient delineation between the depiction of the general zombie figures and the human figures as opposed to the clearly fictional 'infected' characters. This means that the objects of the violence could not easily be distinguished as human or unreal or fictional creatures. However, the Review Board is of the view that the question whether the objects of the violence were fictional or real, and whether a 15 year old could discern the difference, is largely irrelevant where the game displays the level of realism this one does.

(c) Language -
There are several instances of coarse language but it is infrequent and can be accommodated in a classification lower than RC.

(d) Sex -
There is no sex in the computer game.

(e)Drug Use -
There is no drug use in the game.

(f) Nudity -
There is no nudity in the game.

7. Reasons for the decision

The Review Board is of the view that the violence in the computer game is the principal classifiable element upon which the Review Board should make and has made its decision.

The Review Board is unanimous in its view that the game is not suitable for playing by minors because of the level of violence and its high impact.

To be classified MA 15+ as sought by the Applicant, the Guidelines will allow violence justified by context but with an impact no higher than strong. Having regard to those Guidelines and the constant and recurring acts of violence in the computer game, the Review Board unanimously determines that the computer game cannot be classified MA 15+ and falls into the RC classification for computer games.

8. Summary

The Review Board determined that the computer game Left 4 Dead2 is classified RC as a game where the impact of the violence is high and, therefore, not suitable for playing by minors.

***

Uncut vs. Censored Version

The censored MA15+ version was released in late October 2009 and it did not take long for the games community to identify the missing footage.

The Australian Version Thread
forums.steampowered.com
October 28, 2009

So you may think the only content removed was the visual content you are WRONG!

Visual Content Removed: Blood Spatter (greatly minimised) Bodies Disappear NO GORE AT ALL

Now for something that CHANGES GAMEPLAY:
Uncommon Infected (UCI) completely removed (Riot Cop i.e Bulletproof Zombie) If Someone with an uncut version joins a game with Australians with the cut version Uncommon Infected will NOT spawn

Now lets see what conflicts here:

Visual effects: Bodies Disappear: Now this DID NOT happen in Left 4 Dead 1 and it gained the MA15+ Rating why the hell was this removed? and why are prop corpses present if corpses disappear Gore and Blood: This has been drastically tuned down compared to Left 4 Dead 1(MA15+) and even removed decapitation which was present in Left 4 Dead 1.

Gameplay: UCI's (UnCommon Infected) were removed which is a new key gameplay mechanic which allows L4D2 to be just that more Different to L4D1 The Riot Cop will not Spawn on Australian Cut versions why is this? Shooting Cops is not allowed? Lets see what games do this that are classified: CS 1.6 CSS Prototype Resident Evils GTA Series Give me a valid reason the Riot Cop was removed ALSO the fact they were Security and not the law enforcement conflicts the reason for removal.

Left 4 Dead 2 - Censor Comparison L4D2
youtube.com
October 29, 2009

Video Comparison Between The Uncut version of Left4Dead2 and the Australian "Low Violence" version

L4D2 Intro: Normal vs Censored Split Screen
youtube.com
November 1, 2009

Showing the censored (Australian and German) and the normal (rest of the world) version of the Left 4 Dead 2 demo intro in a split screen style. You can compare easily what exactly has been censored.

***

LEFT 4 DEAD 1 (MA15+) VS. LEFT DEAD 2 (RC)

Here is Bjorn's comparison between the Classification Board reports for part one and part two.

Point 1

Left 4 Dead:
“The wound and site of dismemberment contains little detail other than the blood depictions, and there is no detail of viscera, bone and cleft marks associated with the violence.”

Left 4 Dead 2:
“These [melee] close in attacks cause copious amounts of blood spray and splatter, decapitations and limb dismemberment as well as locational damage where contact is made to the enemy which may reveal skeletal bits and gore.

Bjorn: The improved damage model appears to be the key factor in the Board’s decision. The Board specifically noted the lack of detail in wounds and sites of dismemberment in Left 4 Dead, so the new, more detailed melee damage model attracted particular attention and specific mention in the decision report for the sequel.

Point 2

Left 4 Dead:
“The scenario is typical of this genre and the storyline is fanciful, acting to lower impact.”

Left 4 Dead 2:
“The interactive nature of the game increases the overall impact of the frequent and intense depictions of violence. This coupled with the graphic depictions of blood and gore combine to create a playing impact which is high.”

Bjorn: Context and interactivity are dealt with inconsistently by the Board, as these elements would seem to have changed little from the original game, yet are assessed quite differently. Interactivity is a strong contextual factor in game classification, however when read one after the other, it is hard to understand how it is a key factor in Left 4 Dead 2 and not the original. This is yet another example of the inconsistency with which the Classification Board applies the Classification Guidelines.

Point 3

Left 4 Dead:
A minority of the Board is of the opinion that the continual and unremitting acts of violence with substantial blood detail is high in impact [and recommend RC].

Left 4 Dead 2:
A minority of the Board is of the opinion that the violence is strong in playing impact and therefore warrants an MA 15+ classification.

Bjorn: Both games were split decisions for the Board. The Board has 5 new members since Left 4 Dead was classified, although of course there is no way of knowing which members classified either game.

Left 4 Dead 2 has been the subject of controversy for a reason other than classification in Australia recently. Fans believed it to be no more than an expansion for the original game, for which they would be unfairly charged, rather than receiving it as a free update to the original game. From this background, it is interesting to compare Review Board decisions for these two very similar games, and discover the very fine line that separates the game able to be sold to 15 year olds, and the one deemed unable to be legally sold to anyone at all in Australia.

***

LEFT 4 DEAD 2 in Senate Estimates

During the February 2010 Senate Estimates hearings the subject of LEFT 4 DEAD 2 was touched on when Senator Guy Barnett questioned if this was the type of game that would receive an R18+.

The speakers are:

Senator Guy Barnett Liberal Senator for Tasmania
Senator the Hon Penny Wong Labor Senator for South Australia

Legal Services
Sub Program 1.2.2—Classification and Copyright
Ms Helen Daniels, Assistant Secretary, Copyright and Classification Policy Branch

Attorney-General’s Department
Management and Accountability
Mr Roger Wilkins AO, Secretary

Classification Board
Mr Donald McDonald AC, Director

Database Estimates Committees
Date 08-02-2010
Source Senate
Committee Name LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Place Canberra
Department Attorney-General’s Department

Senator BARNETT —I am advised that in the US the unmodified version of the game Left 4 Dead 2 was given a ‘mature’ rating—so, suitable for persons aged 17 and older—but was classified ‘refused classification’ in Australia. ‘Mature’ games in the US may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and strong language. What is the minister’s intent in wanting to open the possibility of these extremely violent and sexually explicit interactive games being made available in Australia? That is a question for the minister. I am happy for you to take it on notice, Minister.

Mr Wilkins —That is one for the Classification Board.

Senator BARNETT —I am happy for the board to respond.

Mr D McDonald —Senator, I can give you the history of the classification of that game in Australia—this is Left 4 Dead 2. On 15 September 2009, the Classification Board classified an original, unedited version of Left 4 Dead 2 as RC—that is to say it was refused classification. In the board’s view, the game was unsuitable for a minor and contained violence that was more than strong in impact. The interactive nature of the game increased the overall impact of the frequent and intense depictions of violence. This, coupled with the graphic depictions of blood and gore, combined to create a playing impact that was considered high. The distributor applied for a review of this decision and, on 22 October 2009, the Classification Review Board met and also classified the game ‘RC’—in other words, they refused classification. A modified version of the game was later submitted to the Classification Board and was classified MA15+, with consumer advice of ‘strong, bloody violence’.

Senator BARNETT —All right. Thank you for that. Did the minister want to respond to that question as to why the minister or the government would want to make such a video game legal?

Senator Wong—I am not sure I have got any instructions or advice from the minister about the view on that specific game. I would have to take that on notice. I am not sure I can agree with the assertion you have just made either.

Senator BARNETT —I am happy for you to take it on notice.

Mr Wilkins —Can I just comment on that, Senator. The Classification Board classifies according to the existing law. The discussion paper is out there precisely because the government is trying to elicit what the public view is and it will then make some policy decisions on the basis of that. So that is the position. The government has not got a concluded view on this issue.

Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude

Prod Sierra / 2004 / USA / IMDb

Vivendi Universal Games had this title Refused Classification on September 9th 2004.

In an article published on the Atomic MPC website they have quoted the OFLC report as giving the following reasons for the ban

Leisure Suit Larry is based around the bumbling journeys of a suit-clad character Larry Lovage who takes part in "extra curricular" activities at college. Larry attempts to woo and have sex with or play sexualised games with a series of female characters, an OFLC report said.

The report said the computer game contains "obscured and/or implied sexual activity and obscured and partial nudity involving stylised, animated characters."

These depictions occur in "full-motion video sequences" and include instances such as Larry receiving below-screen fellatio from Koko. "Sucking sounds are heard," said the OFLC.

An OFLC spokesperson confirmed that the title had been banned and could not be imported, hired or sold to the public.

***

Whilst Futuregamez managed to get this admission from Vivendi Universal Games

".....the version they submitted to the OFLC was the same cut-down version that America is getting, and not the uncut version which Europe is getting. They will not be releasing it here in Australia."

***

From Issue 48 of Atomic MPC magazine.

This is a quote from the article titled Give us an 'R'.

Vivendi Universal Games ANZ Marketing Director Colin Brown says Vivendi has no plans to edit and resubmit Leisure Suit Larry: MCL because the sheer amount of editing that would be required would have compromised the game play experience.

"Sexual themes are woven into the very fabric of what the Leisure Suit Larry brand is about," he says. "VUG feels that, by removing a significant part of the sexual content, the game would be less fun to play."

***

The games conundrum. CRN 23.02.05

However, some games stores that ship internationally may provide a loophole for Australian buyers. Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude was also recently banned in Australia, but the online store for its publishers, Vivendi Universal, has shipping options to Australia.

The website www.larryuncut.com advertises 'full nudity and sex scene footage not seen in the original version' to purchasers over 18 years of age. The online order form, which converts the currency into Australian dollars, is hosted by the Vivendi Universal Games store.

Vivendi Universal was unable to provide clarification on its policy about shipping the Leisure Suit Larry game to Australian buyers by the time CRN went to press.

***

Classification Board & Classification Review Board
Annual Report 2004-2005

Page 40
Classification Board
Computer Games

The Classification Board classified the computer games Singles Flirt Up Your Life and Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude RC for sexual activity related to an incentive or reward. Additionally, in regard to the computer game Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude the classification reflected the player’s ability to access stylised and realistic nudity, obscured and/or simulated sexual activity and sexual references increasing the impact above strong.

***

Classification Board & Classification Review Board
Annual Report 2004-2005

Page 41
Classification Board
Computer games – complaints

The OFLC received 298 complaints about computer games including 153 complaints about the absence of an R18+ classification for computer games. Another 72 complaints related to concerns that Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas was edited by the distributor to obtain an MA15+ classification, while 16 complaints related to concerns that Half Life 2 (MA15+) would be classified RC. A further 16 complaints protested the RC decision for the computer game Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude. There is some overlap between the figures quoted above as some people raised several of these issues in the one item of correspondence.

***

Atari Australia had LEISURE SUIT LARRY: BOX OFFICE BUST rated MA15+ (Frequent sexual references and coarse language) on February 17th 2009.

Miss World 96

Prod Comad / 1996 / Japan

Submitted by the Victorian Police, it was rated RC on August 9th 1996.

Narc

Prod Midway / 2004 / USA / IMDb

This title received quite a bit of press comment before its submission to the OFLC. It was first mentioned in two articles that appeared in The SMH and The Age

Activists urge classification review. SMH 21.03.05

This is another article that looks at the absence of an R18+ rating for games in Australia.

"....the expected release later this year of Narc, a game in which players shoot rivals and take drugs such as crack cocaine and speed. The pace and ambience of the gameplay changes to reflect the effects of the drugs."

"The OFLC will not comment on Narc until it receives a request for its classification, expected later in the year."

New game smacks of grim culture. The Age 21.03.05

The Office of Film and Literature Classification, which rates or bans computer games in Australia, has not yet seen the latest drug culture productions.

A spokesman for Sony defended the game, saying it was "a classic good-versus-evil game" that showed the destructive power of drugs.

John Fitzgerald, of the University of Melbourne's school of population health, believed most game players had no difficulty in separating reality and fantasy, and that the likelihood of being turned into junkies was less than many expect.

"Gamers are more interested in fantasy, not usually into drug-taking, and they deal with drug-taking in fantasy differently than in reality," he said.

"They would see drug-taking as a fantasy behaviour rather than one that affected real life behaviour."

***

Two days later, on March 23rd the game was referred to in the Victorian House of Assembly during debate of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) (Enforcement) (Amendment) Bill.

The speaker was Jude Perera of the Labor Party.

"A video game supposedly coming into the USA market shortly will involve the taking of drugs, showing how drugs can create blackouts, drug addiction, job loss and, finally, overdose and death. These types of games glamorise drug addiction and could be triggers for psychotic behaviour."

What is this man talking about? He says that:

"showing how drugs can create blackouts, drug addiction, job loss and, finally, overdose and death."

....and then goes to claim that that the game can "glamorise drug addiction". Well it doesn't sound very glamorous to me! It looks like it's more a warning of the dangers of drugs.

***

The Australian distributor Red Ant Enterprises submitted the game for classification soon after. The OFLC gave it a Refused Classification rating on April 8th 2005. The full Classification Board report is as follows.

Reasons for decision:

This computer game contains frequent drug use. Throughout this game the player can choose to take illegal drugs to help achieve the aim of being an effective drug-squad officer fighting a major drug cartel. These drugs include, heroin, methamphetamine (speed), LSD, marijuana, ecstasy and Quaaludes. The effects of these drugs are varied but provide the player with some benefits in progressing through the game. For example, when a player takes ecstasy tablet opponents will stop attacking and allow the player's character to escape. Similarly, taking speed allows the player's character to run faster and catch bad guys.

The board was told by the applicant that these drugs also have a detrimental effect on the player in that they affect his/her "badge rating", meaning that other characters lose their respect for the player's character's police status making the player more vulnerable to attack.

Drug taking can slow make the player's character become addicted, blackout-which ends the game-or be thrown off the force.

However, the board also heard the badge rating can be restored if the player chooses to stop taking drugs and return and return to being a legitimate laws enforcer/ Similarly, the plater can also go into drug rehabilitation, which restores their status. The board was told told by the applicant that a player who takes drugs can also access better weapons & can achieve their objectives faster/

Information is also provided such details how many times a player can use a specific drug before they become addicted. For example, in the case of ecstasy it is 12 uses and for speed it is 7 uses. The the board was told that the player who used strategy in which they alternated between being a good cop and bad cop would progress faster than a cop who simply played by the rules and did not use drugs.

In the board's majority view, in which drugs are used as a reward or incentive, has an impact that is higher then strong and/or exceeds the general rule "except in material restricted to adults, nudity and sexual activity must not be related to incentives or rewards and material that contains drug use and sexual violence related to incentives or rewards is refused classification.

-Other matters considered-

This computer game contains violence and language that could be accommodated at a lower classification.

-Minority view-

In the boards minority view the impact of this game is no higher then strong and is justified in context of a game based on busting drug dealers. This view holds that drug use as an incentive is equal to, if not outweighed, by such disincentives as losing a badge rating or becoming addicted. This view also holds that an exception can be made to the general rule, allowing this game to be accommodated at the MA15+ classification.

-Decision-

In the boards majority view this game warrants an RC classification.

***

Once again thanks to Mick for writing to the OFLC and obtaining the above report. He makes some valid criticisms of the OFLC reasons for the ban.

This is extremely stupid, SHELLSHOCK NAM 67, PLAYBOY: THE MANSION, GTA SAN ANDREAS, GOD OF WAR etc, all use sex and nudity as a reward. SHELLSHOCK NAM 67 even uses drugs as a reward. It's so inconsistent! Also why is it not ok to use drugs and sex as a reward, but it is ok to use extreme violence as a reward?

***

Red Ant Enterprises issued the following press release on April 12th. Thanks to the Future Gamez for passing this on.

Sydney, April 12th 2005 - The Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) have refused classification (RC) on Midway Games’ NARC.

NARC is an in-depth, 3rd-person action/shooter video game set against a stylised modern-day backdrop of the War on Drugs. Playing in the elite NARC squad, players must rid the world of the powerful international K.R.A.K. drug cartel. Using deadly firepower and police authority, players will make the choice to play it straight or use and abuse narcotics to get that extra edge and quick cash. Players decide whether to play as a good or bad cop as they face the mean streets and criminal underworld that rules it.

The OFLC classified NARC with an RC in accordance with Part 1(d) of the computer games table of the national classification code, which states, in part, that “1. Computer games that; (d) are unsuitable for a minor to see or play”*.

A seven-member panel of the Classification Board determined, in a majority 6 to I decision that Narc be refused classification.

The minority view of the board believes the impact of the game is justified in the context of a game based on busting drug dealers. Unfortunately the majority of the board did not agree that NARC was justified within the current highest classification rating of MA15+.

There is no R classification for computer games. MA15+ is the highest possible rating given to a game. Those games, which are unsuitable for a minor to see or play, are refused.

Classification decisions are to be given effect on a list of principles from the National Classification Code, including:
- Adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want. * and
- Minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them

An Adult, means a person who is 18 or older. The Restricted (R) rating does not exist in the world of gaming. Because of this, it appears that adults are not able to read, hear and see what they want.

Gaming is fast growing in the entertainment industry. With the average gamer being of an age around 25, the demand is high for a restricted (R) rating to be introduced.

Midway’s upcoming release NARC will not be released in Australia. The line was crossed…

***

Classification Board & Classification Review Board
Annual Report 2004-2005

Page 40
Classification Board
Computer Games

The computer game Narc was classified RC for drug use related to an incentive or reward.

Necrovision

Prod The Farm 51 / 2009 / Poland

This was banned by the Classification Board on April 7th 2009, the first game of the year to be rated RC. 505 Games SRL were the applicant. A censored version was passed with an M (Violence and coarse language) rating on May 14th 2009.

RC-rated Board Report

Thanks to Scott for this report.

Board Report
Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games} Act 1995

DETAILS OF THE COMPUTER GAME;
FILE No T09/750
Title: NECROVISION
Version: ORIGINAL
Format: Multi Platform
Duration: VARIABLE
Publisher: 505 GAMES
Programmer: 1C
Production Co: NOT SHOWN
Country Of Origin: EUROPE
Language: ENGLISH
Application Type: Comp Game Standard Level 2
Applicant: 505 GAMES SRC

PROCEDURE;
The Classification (Publications. Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Classification Guidelines are followed when classifying films, computer games and publications

Written submissions: NO
Oral submissions: NO

MATERIAL CONSIDERED:
In classifying this item regard was had to the following:
(i) The Application YES
(ii) A written synopsis of the item YES
(iii) The Item YES
(iv) Other NO

DECISION
(1) Classification: RC
(2) Consumer Advice:
(3) Key:

SYNOPSIS;
This game is a first person shooter game set in World War II and includes German Soldiers as well as zombies, vampires and other monsters as enemy combatants.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
In making this decision, the Classification Board has applied the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Classification Act), the National Classification Code (the Code) and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005 (the Guidelines).

In the Board's view this game warrants an 'RC' classification in accordance with item 1(d) of the computer games table of the National Classification Code:

" 1. Computer games that:
(d) are unsuitable for a minor to see or play;" will be Refused Classification.

The game contains violence that is high in impact and is therefore unsuitable for persons aged under 18 years to play.

The game is a first person shooter game that is set in the trenches of World War II and includes German Soldiers, zombies and vampires as enemy combatants. A number of weapons are available to the player including hand guns, machine guns, barbed wire, explosives and knives. When the player shoots an enemy combatant, a large volume of blood spray results and the enemy may be dismembered or decapitated. Injury detail is high with pieces of flesh seen flying from bodies when shot or a high level of wound detail visible on bodies. Post mortem damage occurs when bodies are shot resulting in blood spray, dismemberment and decapitation.

This level of blood and injury detail occurs frequently and throughout the game and in the Board's view, exceeds a strong playing impact and therefore cannot be accommodated within the MA 15+ classification level.

DECISION
This game is Refused Classification.

***

M-rated Board Report

Thanks again to Scott for this report.

Board Report

Classification (Publications , Films and Computer Games) Act 1995

DETAILS OF THE COMPUTER GAME;
FILE No T09/750
Title: NECROVISION
Version: ORIGINAL
Format: Multi Platform
Duration: VARIABLE
Publisher: 505 GAMES
Programmer: THE FARM 5 1
Production Co: 505 GAMES
Country Of Origin: POLAND
Language: ENGLISH
Application Type: Comp Game Standard Level 2
Applicant: 505 GAMES SRL

PROCEDURE:
The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1 995, the National Classification Code and the Classification Guidelines are followed when classifying films, computer games and publications

Written submissions: NO
Oral submissions: NO

MATERIAL CONSIDERED:
In classifying this item regard was had to the following:
(i) The Application YES
(ii) A written synopsis of the item YES
(iii) The Item YES
(iv) Other gameplay examples

DECISION
(1) Classification: M
(2) Consumer Advice: Violence and coarse language
(3) Key:

SYNOPSIS;
This computer game is a revised version of Necrovision which was originally classified RC on 7 April 2009. This game is a first person shooter game set in World War II and includes German Soldiers as well as zombies, vampires and other monsters as enemy combatants.

In the Board's view this computer game warrants an M classification as, in accordance with item 5 of the computer games table of the National Classification Code, it cannot be recommended for viewing by persons who are under 15.

Pursuant to the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games, this computer game is classified M as the impact of the classifiable elements is moderate. Material classified M is not recommended for persons under 15 years of age. There are no legal restrictions on access.

The classifiable elements are violence and language that are moderate in playing impact.

The Board notes that the original version of this computer game was classified RC on the 7 April 2009.

VIOLENCE
This revised version of the game contains violence that is moderate in playing impact and justified by context.

Players frequently kill zombie enemies with gunfire or by employing dynamite or hand-to-hand, "melee-style" combat. Some of the violence includes shooting with a nailgun, implied stabbing or slashing with bayonets and entrapment using barbed wire.

The Board notes that (as per the applicant's statement regarding modifications to the game's blood detail, wound detail and post-mortem damage) the blood detail appears throughout the game as a grey "dust" effect when enemies are hit. Zombies fly into the air or their bodies jerk when bullets impact. However no further injury or wound detail is visible. These modifications substantially reduce the playing impact of the game and it can therefore be accommodated at M.

LANGUAGE
The game contains use of strong coarse language in the form of "fuck" language which is used occasionally in a non-aggressive tone.

DECISION
This computer game is classified M with consumer advice of violence and coarse language.

The Board notes that section 21A of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 states that if the Board is of the opinion that a classified computer game contains contentious material (whether activated through use of a code or otherwise) that was not brought to the Board's attention in accordance with subsection 14(4) or 17(2) before the classification was made and if the Board had been aware of the material before the classification was made, it would have given the game a different classification, the Board must revoke the classification.

***

The excellent German censorship site schnittberichte.com has a comparison between the German censored version and the United Kingdom uncensored version. It needs to be confirmed if the Australian and German versions are the same. Run the url through Google to obtain an English translation of the page.

necrovision

New Fantasia

Prod Comad / 1994 / Japan

Submitted by the Victorian Police, it was rated RC on August 9th 1996.

Night Trap

Prod Digital Pictures / 1992 / USA / IMDb

The release of this game was instrumental in the introduction of a games classification system in Australia.

The following is taken from the OFLC Annual report 1992-93.

"The Office has also been asked to develop proposals for the regulation of computer games and computer generated images.

Public concern about these games has been kept under review by the Standing Committee of Censorship Ministers.

The Australian Law Reform Commission recommended that these games should be included in the definition of publications in its Report on Censorship Procedure.

Because of this recommendation and widespread public concern about a computer game called Night Trap, Censorship Ministers decided that these games should be regulated and have asked that proposals be brought before them in November 1993. They also have asked that draft instructions for legislation be ready for consideration at their scheduled meeting in February next year.

These games, some of which can take up to three weeks to play are now being replaced, by more sophisticated technology which on some estimates will take up to three months! to play if all of the levels of the game are to be examined.

The principal industry bodies have indicated publicly that they are seeking guidance for classification guidelines so that they can, in the interim, classify material themselves.

While Ministers have ruled out full self regulation, the Office is exploring with the industry, and with community groups, alternatives which will allow for as much self regulation as possible. Such a process would be supervised by a body which will safeguard the community's interests, and regulate the sale and hire of the material in as simple and effective a way as possible.

Industry and community groups are being consulted before the proposals are submitted to Ministers. It is the intention that representatives of these groups will be given every opportunity to comment and make suggestions about the proposals."

Sega Ozisoft eventually had a full version classified on May 10th 1995. Despite the controversy that had surrounded this title, it was passed with a relatively mild M15+ (Medium Level Violence).

Further information on this title can be found at Anthony Larme's Banned Games page, and Games Censorship Collection site.

PC Foreplay / Adult Film Cameraman

Prod Interactive Girls / USA

Submitted by the Victorian Police, it was rated RC on June 17th 1996.

Peepshow 2: The Girlie Game

aka The Girlie Game

Prod Romantics / USA

Submitted by the NSW Police, it was rated RC on 21 April 1997.

Phantasmagoria

Prod Sierra On-Line / 1995 / USA / IMDb

Sega Ozisoft had a Beta Version of this Refused Classification on 9th August 1995. The full commercial version was submitted, on 5th September 1995 and was also rated RC.

The full Censorship Board report from the September 5th refusal is as follows.

VOTING: UNANIMOUS
DECISION: REFUSE

SYNOPSIS: A complete version of that screened and Refused on the 9th Aug 1995.

COMMENT: In the Board's opinion, this complete version CD-ROM game warrants a Refuse under the computer games guidelines for one scene of simulated sexual activity between consenting adults and one scene of simulated sexual activity that contains strong overtones of sexual violence.

Under the Computer Games Classification Guidelines;
"simulated or explicit depictions of sexual acts between consenting adults" and,
"any depiction of sexual violence or sexual activity involving non-consent of any kind" warrants Refuse.

Chapter One of the seven disc game shows a male and a female, earlier identified as man and wife, in bed after the woman awakes from a nightmare. The husband consoles her; this subsequently develops into a short scene of simulated waist up thrusting intercourse, revealing a side view of the woman's bare breast as she lays atop her partner.

In chapter four, a bathroom scene shows the woman in a negligee at a mirror combing her hair. The husband walks up behind her, strokes her hair, and runs his hand over her clothed breast. Angry from a prior scene argument, she brushes his hand away. He continues his advances until they both willingly embrace and kiss. This is shown with soft background music.

The husband lifts her under her armpits, carries her to the bathroom wall, continues kissing her and the camera closes in on his hand lifting her clothes. At this point, the music changes tempo and tone, becoming darker and thumping. The man's face is shown with an evil expression, eyes glaring wide as he holds the woman's hands up above her head on the wall behind her. He is shown to begin a vigorous thrusting motion, simulating intercourse. The woman's face is seen in close up, crying and scared, shaking her head from side to side during what, at that point, begins to look like a sexual attack.

While the narrative structure has by this stage clearly indicated that evil forces are influencing the husband's actions and, that the game play is such that the player's role as the wife is to prevent this from happening to herself and her husband, the above guidelines do not contain anything that allows contextual justification considerations by the Board.

Thus, the unanimous decision of the Board is that the game warrants Refuse under the Computer Games Classification Guidelines.

The 1995-96 OFLC Year in Review also provides an overview of the ban.

One commercial game, Phantasmagoria, was Refused Classification during the last year. In this game one played from the perspective of a wife who had recently moved into an old house possessed by evil spirits.

This seven CD game using actors in full-motion video contained a visual of breast nudity within an implied love-making scene between the wife and her husband and a scene in which the 'possessed' husband's sexual advances turned into a violent sexual attack.

According to the computer games guidelines, nudity in a sexual context, unless there is a bona fide educational, medical or community health purpose, requires refusal, as does any depiction of sexual violence.

Sega Ozisoft were able to sell their stock of the game that they had imported before it was banned. This was due to a delay in States such as Victoria in passing the Computer Games legislation.

No modified version was ever submitted, so the game remains banned in Australia.

Anthony Larme's Memorial to PHANTASMAGORIA contains everything you could possibly want to know about the game. An in-depth look at its Australian Censorship History is also included.

Further information can also be found at his Games Censorship Collection site.

Phantasmagoria 2: A Puzzle of Flesh

Prod Sierra On-Line / 1996 / USA / IMDb

Playcorp had this passed with an MA15+ (High Level Violence, Horror Theme, Sexual References) on February 4th 1997. Despite being listed as the ORIGINAL, this was actually a modified version. It was produced for Conservative US distributors such as Walmart, and for countries such as Australia.

The game took three months to be classified in Australia. The alpha version was initially shown to the OFLC, then the beta, the uncensored, and then the final version. The OFLC were also shown a videotape of all the contentious scenes.

Anthony Larme's Memorial to the game has everything you need to know. The Censored Scenes section is of particular interest, and looks at the various versions available around the world. Here you can find that the one approved by the OFLC:

"......automatically censors the three sex scenes but allows the four censorable violent scenes to be optionally censored by the consumer."

Further information can be found at his Games Censorship Collection site.

Playboy: The Mansion

Prod Ubi Soft / 2004 / USA

This title has been included as AN EXAMPLE OF OFLC POLICY. it has not been censored OR BANNED.

After banning LEISURE SUIT LARRY and SINGLES-FLIRT UP YOUR LIFE in 2004 because of sexual content, it was something of a surprise to see this game passed.

It was rated MA15+ (Strong Sexual Content, Nudity, Adult Themes) on October 28th 2004. Ubi Soft Entertainment gave it an Australian release on March 3rd 2005. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this to the first games to carry a warning of 'Strong Sexual Content'. So why exactly did this title make it through, whilst the others were banned?

The article 'Rated D for Dilemma' published in The Sydney Morning Herald on April 9th 2005 goes someway to clarifying the situation.

Sex is increasingly part of video games. Playboy The Mansion with "breast nudity present but not genital" - to quote the classification office - was launched last month. The player takes on the role of Hugh Hefner and can have "sex; with a variety of women.

Not all games get passed the classification office. A version of Manhunt, with examples of torture and plastic-bag asphyxiation was refused classification, as was the sex romp Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude . The office cited "the general rule which prohibits nudity and sexual activity related to incentives or rewards".

Owen Hughs from the games producer Ubisoft says Playboy The Mansion doesn't use sex as a reward and players "can't have sex with drunk people".

***

David Warner offers another reason.

"Apparently, the reason this game passed is that there is no sexual violence against women. For instance in GTA: Vice City the OFLC deemed the ability to have sex with a prostitute and then being able to attack them to get your money back as unacceptable. Likewise in Leisure Suit Larry Magna Cum Laude there were scenes where it was possible to spank women during sex – an act deemed as sexual violence… Playboy the mansion contains no such violence…"

***

Mick McClanahan has played the game and has provided the following run-down.

You can get a variety of girls drunk and have sex with them. The sex is shown, but there is only breast nudity as they are wearing a thong. You chat up the girls then take them to the couch and have sex with them. Depending on what type of couch you're on, there are about three different sexual positions you can do it in.

The more you progress in the game, the more points you get. They allow you to unlock various things such as real photos of fully naked playmates and small cheats to get people instantly drunk and horny etc.

You can smoke cigars with people.

You can make you're employees take off the top half of there clothing and so they walk around fully topless.

***

An expansion pack titled PLAYBOY THE MANSION: PRIVATE PARTY was classified MA15+ (Strong Sexual Content, Nudity, Adult Themes) in October 2005.

Postal

aka Loose Cannon

Prod Running with Scissors - Ripcord / 1997 / USA / IMDb

Sega Ozisoft had a modified version of this game Refused Classification on 28th October 1997. No version has ever been released in Australia.

The Classification Board report is as follows:

The Classification Board (the Board) at the Office of Film and Literature Classification has viewed the computer game Postal and classified the game RC (Refused Classification). This means the game cannot be legally sold, demonstrated, or advertised in Australia.

In the Board's view the game offends against community standards to the extent that it should not be classified.

The game play is based around a central character who uses a variety of weapons to kill armed 'hostiles' and unarmed civilians in a number of different locations. The aim is to kill a pre-determined percentage of the population on each level. Locations for gameplay included suburban city streets and parks. The player can exit the game at any time by committing suicide.

The Board noted that killing opponents, and unarmed civilians, is the basic feature and purpose of gameplay.

In the Board's view, the neighbourhood context in which violence occurs is the source of much of the impact of the game. The Board noted that although the characters in the game are small animated figures, the soundtrack emphasises the fear and suffering of the victims.

The Board noted community concerns about massacres and other acts of random violence in such locations.

Although some of the more extreme material in the full American version of Postal has been removed from the version submitted for classification in Australia, the Board was of the view that Australian community standards preclude the modified version being available for sale in Australia.

In reaching its decision the Board took into account the National Classification Code, a schedule to the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, and the Classification Guidelines for Computer Games.

John Dickie
Director
October 1997

Postal 2: Share the Pain

Prod Running with Scissors / 2003 / UK / IMDb / Official Site

This sequel to POSTAL (see above) took a while to be picked up for distribution in Australia. No doubt the fate of the original game played a part in the delay. This did not stop many people importing the game themselves.

The games conundrum. CRN 23.02.05

One publisher that confirmed it will ship unclassified games to Australia is Running with Scissors, a small US game publisher whose game Postal was banned in Australia in 1997. The sequel, Postal 2, was not picked up by any local publishers and thus it was not submitted for a rating through the OFLC.

Commenting on the copies of Postal 2 that were being sold at retail in Australia, company managing director Vince Desi confirmed Running with Scissors does not have a licensed publishing partner in Australia. 'I'm glad to hear at least one retailer is selling it, even if they are counterfeit copies.

'Yes, we do sell [Postal 2] online and receive many orders from Australia, so we're happy to ship there. It's quite expensive and a real show of support when someone pays more for shipping than the actual cost of the product they're buying.'

***

Zoo Digital Publishing did eventually pick the game up for release in Australia, but were rewarded with an RC rating in October 2005. The Classification Board report is as follows.

Title: POSTAL 2 SHARE THE PAIN

Board Report T05/4947

SYNOPSIS:

First person shooter in which the central male character carries out errands in the fictional town of Paradise, Arizona and engages in violence with the inhabitants using a variety of weapons and behaviours.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION:

When making classification decisions the Classification Board ("the Board") is required to follow the procedure set out in the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 ("the Act"). The Board is required to apply the National Classification Code and the Classification Guidelines, while taking into account the matters set out in Section 11 of the Act.

Majority View:

In the Board’s majority view, the computer game warrants an RC classification as it contains violence that is high in impact and cannot be accommodated at the MA15+ classification.

The player controls a character who must carry out a series of tasks on each day in order to advance through the game. Along the way the character is able to initiate or be drawn into conflict between various groups in the town where he lives.

Weapons include shotguns, handguns, ordinary items like a spade and baton, molotov cocktails and the ability to douse people with petrol and set them alight. The game requires a number of shots to kill a person and the body can be repeatedly shot and kicked around on the ground. The player can also shoot dogs and cats that appear periodically.

Another feature of the game is the character’s ability to urinate on people with a seemingly endless supply of urine. The majority of the gameplay involves combat and killing in a variety of ways as well as degrading other characters. The impact of this is compounded by the main character uttering deadpan, trite statements such as "I bet you didn’t think you were going to die today". It appears the tasks the character is required to carry out are merely a means and a reason for him to travel through the town.

Another feature of the game is the player’s ability to have the central character commit suicide. The game allows the player to take this option "when things get too much". The visuals depict the character taking an object, apparently a grenade, from his pocket and placing it in his mouth. The grenade then detonates blowing his head off with resulting blood spray. The result of this action means the game then returns to the beginning of the level.

In making its’ decision, the Board noted that the game contained very little in the way of a linear storyline, developed characters or missions with a purpose. Unlike other games at the MA15+ classification, there does not appear to be anything to inhibit or deter the player from engaging in violent behaviour against any character, rather the game’s design encourages them to do so.

Minority View:

In the Board’s minority view this game warrants an MA 15+ classification in accordance with Part 2 of the Computer Games Table of the National Classification Code.

A minority of the Board considered that the impact of the game was not unlike that found in other games at the MA 15+ classification and that the violence was mitigated by the black humour accompanying the action.

Decision:

In the Board’s majority view, the game warrants an RC classification as the violence and themes exceed strong and cannot be accommodated at the MA 15+ classification.

***

Unlike Australia, New Zealand has an R18+ rating for video games. This still did not stop the game being banned there in November 2004.

***

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 23, 2005
www.gopostal.com

POSTAL Games Now Available via Download No Country Is Safe Running With Scissors Offers Softwrap's Online Delivery System

Tucson, AZ After dealing with censorship at virtually every level of the game industry for nearly a decade, the world's most blacklisted and banned software company Running With Scissors has discovered the means by which to cure the entire world's need to go POSTAL.

Through a partnership with Softwrap, Running With Scissors is now making available for the first time in many countries it's POSTAL games. Actually because Softwraps service allows you to download these games, there isn't a country or place on earth that can stop you from getting these hard to find game titles. The original cult favorite POSTAL: Classic & Uncut, the sequel POSTAL 2: Share the Pain and the recent all too insane add-on Apocalypse Weekend are currently available from the RWS store.

"Softwrap gives Running With Scissors the ability to deliver POSTAL games to every human being regardless of their state of freedom." explained the company's devious spokesman, potential Bond villain and CEO, Vince Desi. "Governments, customs agents or other traditional barriers to going POSTAL will become irrelevant as the Softwrap system sidesteps distributors, retailers and other would-be gate keepers to deliver the game anywhere and everywhere. From the land Down Under to the mountains of Korea, the world can now go POSTAL in peace and privacy, as God intended."

As for Softwrap, they are of course delighted to use their knee breaking software solutions to elude the wannabe game busters. As Dylan Solomon, Softwrap COO explained: "Softwrap has worked closely with Running With Scissors to provide a customized solution that utilizes Softwrap's leading encryption and ecommerce technology, which has to date successfully been employed to secure more than 21,000 individual software games, utilities and applications." Softwrap employs a system whereby the user can purchase, download, install and play games without having to enter an activation code.

Gamers anywhere in the world with Internet access simply visit the RWS gift shop and access the link to electronic delivery. This will transport them to a page hosted by Softwrap where they can make their purchases. Following the transaction, a link is provided that allows the user to download, install and activate the game(s).

"We're just glad that at last responsible kids and irresponsible adults the world over can now get their paws on the most blacklisted and banned game of all time!" horned Vince Desi.

For information on POSTAL2: Apocalypse Weekend expansion pack and other cool POSTAL products and gear, visit our new expanded site www.gopostal.com

Running With Scissors develops and publishes outrageous software just for the hell of it. Contact Vince Desi 520 907 1010, vince@gopostal.com or visit http://www.gopostal.com/

POSTAL™ and Running With Scissors? are Trademarks and Service Marks of RWS, Inc.

***

PC World published this informative article by Mitchell Bingemann that looks at the consequences of games such as POSTAL 2 being available for download, free of censorship.

Banned games find unchecked entry into Australia. PC World 13.02.06

OFLC director Des Clark said that the online distribution of Postal does not present a loophole for consumers to bypass illegal distribution and is a matter for the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

However, ACMA's hotline manager of content assessment, Mike Barnard, conceded that preventing distribution was not conclusive and the only fullproof method of stopping people downloading banned content was "if they chose not to".

If prohibited material is hosted in Australia, ACMA can issue take-down notices or inform relevant law enforcement agencies to take action but its powers dramatically wane when faced with overseas hosting, as is the case with Postal.

"With overseas hosting, ACMA can refer the content from the downloadable source to manufacturers of content filters so ISPs can block the offending URLs," Barnard said.

Under the Internet content codes of practice, ISPs are required to offer subscribers filters. However end-user implementation is completely voluntary, which makes the system ineffectual for those who wish to download the software.

ACMA's only other course of action is to notify overseas law enforcement agencies of sufficiently serious material, but this only extends to child pornography or sexually violent scenes, neither of which feature in Postal.

People found in possession of refused classification material or those distributing it can face a variety of penalties as outlined under relevant State and Territory classification enforcement legislation. However as OFLC restrictions act purely as a guideline for consumers and law enforcement and ACMA only regulates the conduct of ISPs, a grey area exists between the two bodies, allowing end users to receive downloadable banned content unchecked.

Although Clark said that the relevant Australian review agencies were aware of the issues presented, no complaints or action had been lodged with either body to address the distribution into Australian states and territories.

Clark would not comment on the possibility of online distribution spreading to all banned games, or the prospect of including an R18+ rating in the classification system for computer games, which could potentially eliminate the need for online downloads.

He said any re-evaluation of the classification system would require state, territory and federal review.

***

Classification Board & Classification Review Board
ANNUAL REPORT 2005–2006

Classification Board
Computer Games

The Classification Board classified the computer game Postal 2 Share the Pain RC because it contains violence and themes that exceed strong impact and therefore cannot be accommodated at the MA 15+ classification. The decision reflected the player’s ability to acquire various weapons, the requirement to repeatedly shoot or kick human and animal victims in order to kill them, to copiously urinate on them and to be able to commit suicide by placing a grenade in their mouth.

***

Classification Board Annual Report
2007-08
Complaints
Computer games

Single complaints were received about other titles. These include that Postal 2:Share the Pain was classified RC, that the computer game

The Classification Board also received 553 complaints that were specifically in regard to an R 18+ classification for computer games. 550 complaints were concerned about the absence of an R 18+ classification for computer games in Australia and called for its introduction. Three complaints did not support the introduction of this classification category for computer games

Private Investigator

Prod Private / USA

Submitted by the Victorian Police, it was rated RC on 11th September 1996, and again on 30th April 1997.

Pro Surf Executive

aka Surf Pro Executive

Prod Spake Productions - MC Board / 1998 / Australia

Electronic Arts had this Refused Classification on 28th October 1998. No modified version has ever been submitted.

The 1998-1999 OFLC Annual Report explains the reasons for the RC rating.

The computer game Surf Pro Executive was classified 'RC (Refused Classification)' by the Board in July 1998. The game uses low quality graphic animation and revolves around the player manoeuvring a surf-board over the face of waves with points awarded for tricks and successful riding. The game includes a depiction of simulated intercourse.

Despite the low graphic quality and lack of detail in the depiction the Board considered .. this scene warranted 'RC' in accordance with the computer games classification guidelines which do not permit "simulated or explicit depictions of sexual acts between consenting adults".

Punisher, The

Prod THQ / 2004 / USA / IMDb

THQ Asia Pacific had this title Refused Classification on November 23rd 2004. A revised version was passed MA15+ (High Level Animated Violence, Medium Level Coarse Language) on December 16th 2004.

This was the also the subject of some controversy in the US when the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) threatened to award the game an AO (Adults Only) rating. The definition of which is:

Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content suitable only for adults. Titles in this category may include graphic depictions of sex and/or violence. Adults Only products are not intended for persons under the age of 18.

Instead, THQ chose to tone down the game by making the "Special Interrogation" scenes in Black and White. This was enough to get the game an M (Mature) rating. The definition of which is:

Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain mature sexual themes, more intense violence and/or strong language.

The game was released in the US in January with the warning "Blood and Gore, Drug Reference, Intense Violence".

***

The Australian release did not take place until March 22nd 2005. As usual the consumer has been kept in the dark. The OFLC have not issued a media release as to why the game was originally banned, and what the difference is between the RC and MA15+ versions.

Mick M took the time to write to the OFLC and ask them exactly what their problem was. Having played the game, and comparing it to what the OFLC objected to, it's his opinion that the game is the same as the world-wide modified version.

The OFLC will send you a report FREE for which ever thing you request, if you contact them obviously by email or phone. I did this and was able to see exactly what they found unsuitable. They list them as:

OFLC unsuitable content:

1) The Punisher is able to literally use guns to blast off victims limbs. Blood, bone & skin fragments are shown.

2) The Punisher can knife people in the face. Some blood is shown.

3) The Punisher holds a mans face on a grinding wheel in a repair shops. Despite the fact, the camera zooms out while the climax of the scene takes place, it is still of high impact.

4) The Punisher dunks a mans head in a bath of acid.

5)The Punisher lowers a drill into a mans eyeball, blood is evident.

6) The Punisher kicks a mans head a dozen times, on a curb until his head explodes.

7)A blow torch is applied to a mans face several times. The victim says "fuck off & die asshole" before he dies.

8) A man is thrown into a tree mulcher screaming & blood spray is evident.

9) A man is placed inside a coffin incinerator, which has glass walls. The player watches the victim burn to death. The victim is on fire & is screaming, trying to escape.

10) A mans head is stomped on 16 times by The Punisher, before a metal crate falls & crushes the victim, creating blood spray.

11) A man is pushed into a ceiling fan, the man resists but then looses his grip. His limbs & head are cut off in a shower of blood when he is pushed into the fan.

In scenarios 1 to 11 listed above, the violence takes place over a prolonged period accompanied by the sound of an accelerated heartbeat & protests of victims. Despite the scenes turning black & white just as the "coupe de grace" is delivered, the impact of the episodes is high.

The two following scenes were removed from the game before its world-wide release.

4) The Punisher dunks a mans head in a bath of acid.

7)A blow torch is applied to a mans face several times. The victim says "fuck off & die asshole" before he dies.

Having played the whole game, I would say that it looks like we have the same edited world-wide version. The removal of the above two scenes were enough for the OFLC to grant it an MA15+.

***

Classification Board & Classification Review Board
Annual Report 2004-2005

Page 40
Classification Board
Computer Games

The Classification Board classified The Punisher RC for violence of a high impact that could not be accommodated within the MA15+ classification. A modified version of The Punisher was subsequently submitted and classified MA15+ with the consumer advice ‘High level animated violence, medium level coarse language’.

***

It is worth noting that 'Unofficial Games Patches' have appeared for the US and UK/Europe releases. These seem to make the world-wide modified version much more graphic.

The following explanation is taken from:

http://www.geocities.com/dravensff/punisher_index.html

The PC Camera Patch corrects the camera positions and stops the camera zooming in on the Punisher during the Environmental Interrogations. It also adds the additional Quick Kills that were cut from the game and makes the nastier Quick Kills happen more frequently. The Camera Patch now enables the censored blood & gore during the Interrogations and also the Quick Kills.

The Latest Camera Patch also now improves a number of camera positions during the Quick Kills and adds a little extra gore to the game. Plus It now enables the Blood Damage effects for the Item Quick Kills, Special Kills and a large number of Environmental Interrogations. The new Patch also corrects the Grinder and Nail Gun Interrogations. Both interrogations now function in the game as they were intended to.

Reservoir Dogs

Prod Eidos / 2006 / UK-USA / IMDb

Atari Australia had this game banned on June 23rd 2006. Five days later, in an unusual move, the Classification Board actually decided to explain their decision.

***

Australian Government
Classification Board
28 June 2006
MEDIA RELEASE
Reservoir Dogs computer game Refused Classification

The Classification Board has classified the computer game Reservoir Dogs Refused Classification (RC).

Refused Classification (RC) means the computer game cannot be made available for sale or hire, or be demonstrated in Australia.

The Classification Board made this decision on the basis that Reservoir Dogs contains frequent depictions of violence that have a high impact. As such, the computer game cannot be accommodated at the MA 15+ classification and must be Refused Classification.

Computer games that exceed the MA 15+ impact test of strong impact must be refused classification.

Specifically, the instances of violence that the Board considered to have high impact, thereby exceeding the MA 15+ impact test of strong impact, are:

• Players (participants in a bank heist) can literally blow the heads off hostages and police as well as execute hostages at point blank range with a gunshot to the head;

• Using a series of so-called signature torture moves, players can use different means to torture hostages and thereby cause police to lay down their weapons, such as repeated pistol whipping the side of the head with blood spray evident, burning the eyes of a hostage with a cigar until they scream and die, cutting the fingers off a hostage with blood bursts as the victim screams in pain;

• In lieu of taking a hostage the player can opt for a more violent scenario where a slow motion shootout occurs, accentuating the violence.

The Classification Board is an independent statutory body responsible for the classification of films, computer games and some publications. The Board has representatives drawn from communities across Australia.

***

Eidos Statement
28 June 2006

In response to RESERVOIR DOGS being refused classification in Australia, we feel that it is unfortunate that fans of the film will not get the opportunity to play the game in Australia when it is released in the US and Europe later this year, and we will fully comply with the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification's decision.

The game remains faithful to the cult classic film, directed by Quentin Tarantino, and as such, is an ultra-violent third person action game and the OFLC's rating system does not have a suitable age classification for this.

***

Reservoir Dogs game banned. The Age 28.06.06

Quentin Tarantino's breakthrough film is rated R18+ in Australia, but no such category exists for computer games, despite the fact that over 70 percent of Australian game players are adults.

Australian distributor Atari, who also suffered from Mark Ecko's Getting Up being banned earlier this year, will not attempt to submit an edited version of Reservoir Dogs for reclassification.

***

Keeping gore off the screens. Courier Mail 05.07.06

OFLC director Des Clark says this low percentage of violent video games reduces the pressure on lawmakers to some degree, but the issue of an R18+ rating for video games is not a new one.

"It's a decision made by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General who meet from time to time and consider issues in relation to censorship and must come back with a unanimous verdict," he says.

"This was canvassed in a review of the guidelines back in 1999-2000 and at that time they made a decision not to introduce (an R18+ rating), but the issue continues to come back because the demographic of players is getting older."

Clark says a lack of conclusive research into video games is at the heart of the issue, and whether a game's interactive elements have a greater effect on the viewer than a film would.

"The research in relation to violence in video games is inconclusive, so they just choose to take a more conservative approach," he says.

"But it is the interactivity in games and the potential for continuous exposure through that interactivity . . . that is viewed as increasing the impact."

Clark says in the case of Reservoir Dogs, its creators could choose to have the OFLC decision reviewed by the Classification Review Board or could edit its content and resubmit the game for classification.

***

Unlike Australia, New Zealand has an R18+ classification for games. This did not stop them banning the RESERVOIR DOGS game.

New Zealand Office of Film and Literature Classification
Media Release
7 July 2006

Reservoir Dogs computer game classified "objectionable"

The Office of Film and Literature Classification has classified the computer game Reservoir Dogs "objectionable".

The Classification Office made this decision because Reservoir Dogs tends to promote and support the infliction of extreme violence and extreme cruelty by encouraging the player to perform, and then by showcasing in slow motion, the most extreme forms of violence and brutality for the purpose of entertainment.

The player controls the six characters who appear in the 1992 movie of the same name. The player must kill large numbers of police officers. By taking members of the public and police officers hostage, the player is able to force the police to drop their weapons. The player can pistol whip hostages and repeatedly smash their heads onto nearby walls and surfaces. After the police comply, they can be disarmed, or killed in whichever manner the player chooses. The player can also choose to set the hostage free, execute the hostage with a single, point blank shot to the head, or kill the hostage using a "signature move". These signature moves include the ability to burn a hostage’s eyes out with a lit cigar, chop off a hostage’s fingers with a cigar cutter, and hack off a hostage's ear using a scalpel, all while the hostage pleads and screams in pain. Deaths can be replayed in slow motion to show, for example, bullets entering and leaving a person’s body with large sprays of blood as he dies, and decapitation by shotgun blast, leaving a headless body lying on the ground spurting blood. The player is able to repeat this violence and cruelty ad infinitum and without penalty for the purpose of entertainment.

A classification of “objectionable” means that the computer game Reservoir Dogs is banned. It is an offence for anyone to import, possess, copy, supply, advertise, exhibit or distribute the game in New Zealand.

***

Reservoir dogs video game banned. NZ Herald 07.07.06

In Reservoir Dogs -- by Blitz Games -- players control six characters with the aim of killing large numbers of police officers.

By taking public and police officers hostage, the player is able to force the police to drop their weapons.

"Players can pistol whip hostages and repeatedly smash their heads onto nearby walls and surfaces. After the police comply, they can be disarmed, or killed in whichever manner the player chooses," Chief Censor Bill Hastings said.

Mr Hastings said the game was "one of the most violent and callously sadistic" he had ever seen.

Players can also choose to set the hostage free, execute the hostage with a single, point blank shot to the head, or kill the hostage using a "signature move".

Signature moves include the ability to burn hostages' eyes out with a lit cigar, chop off their fingers with a cigar cutter, and hack off their ears using a scalpel, all while they plead for their lives and scream in pain.

"Deaths can be replayed in slow motion to show, for example, bullets entering and leaving a person's body with large sprays of blood as he dies, and decapitation by shotgun blast, leaving a headless body lying on the ground spurting blood."

The player is then able to repeat this violence and cruelty without penalty for the purpose of entertainment, Mr Hastings said.

***

Many thanks to Mick for sending in this excellent review of the RESERVOIR DOGS game, and how it compares to other titles passed by the OFLC.

CHRONICLES OF AUSTRALIAN CENSORSHIP
www.blognow.com.au/iCE654

I have most definitely played games with far worse content than that found in RESERVOIR DOGS. As the Classification Board report states: you're able to take bystanders/cops hostage. You're then able to release, knockout, abuse, executes or use them as a human shield. Executing a hostage merely consists of a generic gunshot to head; it's nothing that hasn't been seen in countless games before. It's very surprising that the OFLC objected to this because in the PS2 game THE GETAWAY (passed MA15+) you're able to perform the very same action (i.e. taking bystanders and cops hostage). You're also able to knock them out or execute them with a gunshot to the head in the same way. The act is almost identical in both games. The only difference being is that in RESERVOIR DOGS you have an adrenaline meter and when it fills up you're able to perform a torture move on the hostage. Depending on what character you're playing as (it differs from level to level) these moves have a small amount of variety.

-Mr. Blonde cuts a hostages ear off
-Mr. White cuts off a hostages finger
-Mr. Blue burns the eye of a hostage with a cigar

There are a few other movies as well that I can't recall. But I do remember that they're quite tame, probably M material in my opinion. One of them consists of Mr. Orange pistol whipping a hostage to death but it's nothing people haven't seen in an M rated game. That being said, the other three I listed are also pretty tame. In comparison to the heart rip move in the First Person Shooter, Xbox360 game THE DARKNESS they're an absolute joke. Definitely nothing out of the ordinary. The graphics and sound FX are so poor that one couldn't possibly find such moves even remotely interesting or disturbing. They consist of a very quick sequence with a comical scream and a very small amount of blood spray, that's it. THE DARKNESS on the other hand contains some of the best and most realistic sound/graphical effects to date. You're able to perform up close execution moves in which are far more disturbing than those found in RESERVOIR DOGS, for example you can walk up to innocent bystanders, literally stick a gun in their face and turn their heads into a bloody mess. In THE DARKNESS you can also walk up from to them from behind, put a gun to the back of their head, execute them and then your character even shoots various parts of the body (groin shots, heart shots, chin shots etc ) afterwards. All are shown in a first person sequence up close and in very great gory detail. Once they're dead you're able to use your demonic powers to literally rip their heart out and eat it. The game was passed MA15+ in its uncut form down under. However it was banned in Singapore and heavily censored in Germany.)

If you choose to abuse a hostage in RESERVOIR DOGS then the cops will usually lay down their weapons and surrender. At which point you're able to force them up against a wall or object by directing them with the mouse/analogue stick. You can then execute them without penalty. You're also able to force bystanders to do the same thing and execute them. The entire game mainly consists of running from point A to point B, shooting cops' non-stop. The rest of the game is just your everyday, very average 3rd person shooter. Nothing too violent or out of the ordinary. More disturbing violence can be found in the GRAND THEFT AUTO games. As I said, RESERVOIR DOGS is just yet another example of the OFLCs ridiculous inconsistency. I honestly can't understand how they can pass games like THE DARKNESS (MA15+ Strong violence and horror themes, Strong coarse language) , GEARS OF WAR (MA15+ Strong violence), DEAD RISING (MA15+ Strong horror violence, Blood and gore) and countless other ultra violent titles, yet ban a mild, comically violent game like RESERVOIR DOGS. It's a joke. There really isn't a whole lot to say about the violence found in RESERVOIR DOGS, I mean it's just rather tame when compared to the ultra graphically detailed games released more recently.

***

Classification Board
ANNUAL REPORT 2005–2006

Classification Board
Computer Games
The computer games Reservoir Dogs and 50 Cent Bulletproof were classified RC by the Classification Board because they contain frequent depictions of violence that have a high impact. As the impact test for MA 15+ is ‘no higher than strong’, the computer games could not be accommodated within the MA 15+ classification.

Computer games – complaints

The OFLC received 261 complaints about computer games. Of the total, 60 complaints were about the absence of an R 18+ classification for computer games. This decision was reviewed by the Classification Review Board which determined that it be RC. The computer games 50 Cent Bulletproof and Reservoir Dogs received four complaints each protesting the RC decisions.

There is some overlap between the figures quoted above as some people raised several of these issues in the one item of correspondence.

***

Classification Board
Annual Report 2006-2007

Computer games: complaints

The OFLC received 57 complaints about computer games. Of the total, 32 complaints were about the absence of an R18+ classification for computer games. The OFLC received six complaints about the RC decision for the computer game Reservoir Dogs.

Risen

Prod Koch Media / 2009 / Germany

This was Refused Classification on July 20th 2009, the third game of the year to be banned. A modified version was never submitted.

Thanks to Matt for this report.

Australian Government
Classification Board

Production Details:
Title: RISEN
Alternate titles:
Publisher: KOCH MEDIA GMBH
Programmer: PIRANHA BYTES
Production Company: KOCH MEDIA GMBH
Year of Production: 2009
Duration: VARIABLE
Version: ORIGINAL
Format: MULTI PLATFORM
Country/ies of origin: GERMANY
Language/s: ENGLISH
Application type: CG2
Applicant: KOCH MEDIA GMBH

Dates:
Date application received by the Classification Board: 23 June 2009 Date of decision: 20 July 2009

Decision:
Classification: RC
Consumer advice:

A senior panellist has confirmed that the application considered was valid under the Act and that this Decision Report accurately reflects the Board's decision and any minority opinions.

Synopsis:
A role-playing game set on a medieval island where the protagonist has to complete various quests to destroy a magical being and avert the apocalypse.

In the Board's view this game warrants an 'RC' classification in accordance with item 1(a) of the computer games table of the National Classification Code:

"1. Computer games that:

The Guidelines state; "As a general rule...except in material restricted to adults, nudity and sexual activity must not be related to incentives or rewards" and "material that contains drug use and sexual violence related to incentives or rewards is Refused Classification,"
In the Board's opinion, this game contains sexual activity and drug use related to incentives or rewards.

SEXUAL ACTIVITY
The game contains "quests" which a player may choose to complete by acquiring the sexual services of prostitutes. Though it is purportedly not a necessary element of game play, players gain rewards or advance through the game more easily by engaging in sexual activity with prostitutes. A player may also obtain the services of prostitutes to bribe or distract guards. Despite sex being given discreet treatment within the game, sexual activity is clearly linked to incentives or rewards. Examples include:

The protagonist may bribe or distract Romanov's guard by going to a brothel and paying the mistress, Sonya, an amount of "50 gold" for "a girl for the cell guard at the quay". He speaks to the prostitute Anika, saying "one of the guards would like to get to know you better". Anika converses with the guard and it is discreetly implied that she engages in sexual intercourse with him.

The main character talks to Lily, a scantily-clad medieval prostitute. She offers "some Lily lovin'". A quest appears onscreen as "New Quest: A Lovely Time with Lily". Through implied sexual activity (which is not depicted), the player gains "100 experience points".

One quest involves the main character obtaining a "friendly and flexible girl" from Sonya. He talks to the prostitute Olga, saying "I've already paid Sonya for you". Another "100 experience points" are gained by Implicitly engaging in sexual activity with Olga. The game cuts to an implied post-coital moment, where the fully-clothed participants stand on either side of a bed and discuss intercourse in euphemistic terms. Olga then gives the protagonist a "scroll" which, it is implied, may be of use later in the game.

DRUG USE
The game contains references to, and explicit use of, a drug known formally as "brugleweed" but commonly referred to in text and dialogue as "weed" or a "weed reefer". A player can both trade and smoke this drug, which mirrors an illegal Yeal-world' drug in its terminology, use and depiction. Dialogue refers to the drug as having a "relaxing effect" on the character. "23 experience points" are gained by using the drug for the first time whilst every use thereafter leads to a moderate gain of "3 experience points". This direct link between the use of "brugleweed" and a positive increase in "experience points" is an example of "drug use...related to incentives or rewards".

Decision
This game is Refused Classification

Continue...

Lady Killer

Left 4 Dead

Left 4 Dead 2

Valve Appeals against RC-rating

MA15+ censored version

Censored MA15+ vs. Review Board Appeal

Classification Board Report for MA15+ version

Appeal against RC-rating fails

Full Review Board Report

Uncut vs. Censored Version

LEFT 4 DEAD 1 (MA15+) VS. LEFT DEAD 2 (RC)

LEFT 4 DEAD 2 in Senate Estimates

Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude

Miss World 96

Narc

Necrovision

RC-rated Board Report

M-rated Board Report

New Fantasia

Night Trap

PC Foreplay / Adult Film Cameraman

Peepshow 2: The Girlie Game

Phantasmagoria

Phantasmagoria 2: A Puzzle of Flesh

Playboy: The Mansion

Postal

Postal 2: Share the Pain

Private Investigator

Pro Surf Executive

Punisher, The

Reservoir Dogs

Risen

www.refused-classification.com

| Online Since April 2002