games.on.net has managed to get a hold of the Classification Board’s report explaining why the game had to be banned. Matt Williams, the author of the article, has named two games that already feature the type of violence the report covers.

It is not clear what EA Games will do following this decision. They have three options on their hands. They can release the game in Australia, in a modified form; appeal to have the rating lowered to MA15+; or just refuse to sell the game in Australia.

After the story aired, a representative from the AG’s office confirmed this to Kotaku Australia.

“The AG doesn’t want any dilution of the Refused Classification category for games, but remains fully committed to an R18+ rating for video games, [...] the point is that he wants games with extreme gratuitous violence or gratuitous sexual violence to remain in the Refused Classification category.”

Seven News has used Grand Theft Auto IV as an example. In regards to his comments regarding the game, the representative stated that it was “just his reaction after watching the game”, and that he has no plans to change the game’s rating to RC.

The Guidelines use the following hierarchy of impact:
• very mild – G
• mild – PG
• moderate – M
• strong – MA 15+
• high – R 18+
• very high – RC

In addition, it mentions what games will be refused classification, and still argues that interactivity affects the level of impact.

Due to the interactive nature of computer games and the active repetitive involvement of the participant, as a general rule computer games may have a higher impact than similarly themed depictions of the classifiable elements in film, and therefore greater potential for harm or detriment, particularly to minors.

Interactivity may increase the impact of some content: for example, impact may be higher where interactivity enables action such as inflicting realistically depicted injuries or death or post-mortem damage, attacking civilians or engaging in sexual activity. Greater degrees of interactivity (such as first-person gameplay compared to third-person gameplay) may also increase the impact of some content.

Interactivity includes the use of incentives and rewards, technical features and competitive intensity.
Except in material restricted to adults, nudity and sexual activity must not be related to incentives or rewards.

Computer games will be Refused Classification if they contain:
(i) illicit or proscribed drug use related to incentives or rewards;
(ii) interactive drug use which is detailed and realistic.

Finally, the guidelines state what can and cannot be permitted in an R18+ game:

R 18+ – RESTRICTED
Impact test
The impact of material classified R 18+ should not exceed high.

Note: Material classified R 18+ is legally restricted to adults. Some material classified R 18+ may be offensive to sections of the adult community.

Classifiable elements
THEMES
There are virtually no restrictions on the treatment of themes.

VIOLENCE
Violence is permitted. High impact violence that is, in context, frequently gratuitous, exploitative and offensive to a reasonable adult will not be permitted.

Sexual violence may be implied, if non-interactive and justified by context.

SEX
Sexual activity may be realistically simulated. The general rule is
“simulation, yes – the real thing, no”.

LANGUAGE
There are virtually no restrictions on language.

DRUG USE
Drug use is permitted.
Drug use related to incentives and rewards is not permitted.

NUDITY
Nudity is permitted.

Ron Curry, the CEO of iGEA, was pleased at how R18+ was proceeding, yet raised some concerns about the discussing of interactivity.

“We are pleased to see this process moving forward and understand that great care has been taken to balance the concerns of those who have resisted an R18+ classification and adults who want to play video games designed specifically for mature audiences and readily available in other developed democracies.

“There will be continued debate about whether the interactivity of video games has a greater impact than other forms of media, and we will continue to refer to the lack of the evidence to support these claims. With that being said, we welcome the commitment from all parties involved to seek a reasonable outcome to address this longstanding issue.

“We now look forward to the Commonwealth, States and Territories implementing these guidelines in an expedient manner.”

You can view the entire set of guidelines at the Classification Board’s website here.

“The “Hardcore” game mode allows players to play in a manner that exceeds strong in impact,” claims the report, “engaging a headshot-only mode which results in frequent, detailed blood and gore as the zombies and mutants [sic] heads explode into bloody pieces that spread around the environment and onto the screen. The game also contains an “Extra mutants mode” which increases the amount of mutants the player must kill to proceed, resulting in an increased intensity and frequency of violence. In addition the game contains a baby mutant that jumps onto the screen and explodes into bloody chunks when killed.”

In response to the ban, SEGA’s managing director, Darren Macbeth, had this to say:

“There are far worse titles currently available in the marketplace which involve more than shooting down mutants in humorous circumstances. We will do everything we can to prove that House of the Dead: Overkill is worthy of an MA15+ rating in Australia.”

The company had three choices on its hands: edit the game’s content so that the game is passed MA15+, challenge the RC rating, or don’t release the game in Australia. They chose the second option, and the Review Board will meet on September 26 to review the decision.

“Any suggestion that we’re trying to derail the R18+ rating for games is completely untrue. Is a train derailed because it stops at a station? All we’re trying to do is create a situation where we have more certainty for gamers when it comes to classification, instead of rushing into something.

“We’re not against an the R18+ rating for games at all, we just don’t want to rush it through. For example, we don’t agree with what John Rau wants to do either with removing MA15+ – instead of browbeating let’s get a national approach.”

John Rau’s decision to remove MA15+ and just replace it with R18+ would not only means that game classification would be out of step with films, but South Australians would also be unable to purchase the majority of titles rated MA15+.

“This has been on the agenda for a very long time now – over 10 years now? Waiting a little bit longer to make sure classification is done correctly is not derailing the process – why the rush now? We would just end up with bad policy.

“We understand the determination of gamers to get this thing through, but we need to look at it after the ALRC report to make sure this thing is right.”

So, in other words, just because gamers have waited for an R18+ rating for decades does not mean that the decision has to be rushed. After the meeting on Friday, it would make sense that other Attorneys-General would agree with Smith’s decision.

Reports stated that Nintendo, now the distributor of Dimensions, was actually aiming for an MA15+ rating but Nintendo later denied this and were just as happy for the game to be sent back for re-classification, and to distance themselves from THQ, who caused the game to be revoked.

While I have noted your enquiry about my position on this matter, it is important to recognise that, under the National Classification Scheme, new classification categories cannot be introduced without the unanimous agreement of all Commonwealth, State and Territory Censorship Ministers. In addition, prior to Ministers considering whether or not to change the Classification Scheme, there must be national consultation on the proposed change.

A decision regarding the introduction of an R18+ classification is expected to be made by Censorship Ministers at their meeting in July 2011. On that issue I can only advise that I support the national approach to classification and will be informed by the views of the community and my Ministerial colleagues.

It is so close to the SCAG meeting now. Will Greg Smith support the introduction of an R18+ rating, or ignore the majority and only listen to lobby groups who have repeatedly opposed its introduction due to false statements?

Source: Kotaku Australia

The media release linked here reported that three of the games characters are described as under 18, and the in-game pornography mode allows the player to look up characters’ dresses in certain poses. Dimensions is already not available in several Scandinavian countries.

The original PG rating is the result of THQ providing inadequate information when submitting the game. The pornography mode is a feature that may very well cause Dimensions to be placed into a higher rating. Nintendo is now re-submitting the game.

Wightman said in an interview that he will push for the new rating at the July SCAG meeting.

It’s not going to completely stop children getting this material, it will reduce those that do and it definitely won’t make things worse.

So far, all but three states previously said that they would support an R18+ rating.

The Gillard Government wants to provide better guidance for parents and remove unsuitable material from children and teenagers. The introduction of an R18+ classification will help achieve that and will also bring Australia into line with comparable nations. This issue has been on the table for many years, without the necessary progress to make a change. We’ve recently seen several states publicly express their support for an adult only rating for games and I’m keen to reach a unanimous decision at the July meeting.

For many years, there was concern that the most violent games were being shoehorned into the MA15+ category. The guidelines suggest a tightening of that rating, to make sure that such games are not available to minors. Below are the guidelines for the MA15+, R18+, and RC ratings:

MA 15+ – MATURE ACCOMPANIED
Impact test
The impact of material classified MA 15+ should be no higher than strong.
Note: Material classified MA 15+ is considered unsuitable for persons under 15 years of age. It is a legally restricted category.

Classifiable elements
THEMES
The treatment of strong themes should be justified by context.

VIOLENCE
Violence should be justified by context.
Strong and realistic violence should not be very frequent.
Sexual violence may be implied, if justified by context.

SEX
Sexual activity may be implied.
Sexual activity must not be related to incentives or rewards.

LANGUAGE
Strong coarse language may be used.
Aggressive or strong coarse language should be infrequent.

DRUG USE
Drug use should be justified by context.
Drug use must not be related to incentives or rewards.
Interactive drug use that is detailed and realistic is not permitted.

NUDITY
Nudity should be justified by context.
Nudity must not be related to incentives or rewards.
Note:

R 18+ – RESTRICTED

IMPACT TEST
The impact of material classified R 18+ should not exceed high.
Note: Material classified R 18+ is legally restricted to adults. Some material classified R 18+ may be offensive to sections of the adult community.

Classifiable elements
THEMES
There are virtually no restrictions on the treatment of themes.

VIOLENCE
Violence is permitted except where it offends against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that it should not be classified.
Sexual violence may be implied, if justified by context.

SEX
Sexual activity may be realistically simulated. The general rule is
“simulation, yes – the real thing, no”.

LANGUAGE
There are virtually no restrictions on language.

DRUG USE
Drug use is permitted.

NUDITY
Nudity is permitted.

RC – REFUSED CLASSIFICATION
Note: Computer games that exceed the R 18+ classification category will be Refused Classification.

Computer games will be refused classification if they include or contain any of the following:

CRIME OR VIOLENCE
Detailed instruction or promotion in matters of crime or violence.
The promotion or provision of instruction in paedophile activity.
Descriptions or depictions of child sexual abuse or any other exploitative or offensive
descriptions or depictions involving a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18 years.
Gratuitous, exploitative or offensive depictions of:
(i) violence with a very high degree of impact or which are excessively frequent,
prolonged or detailed;
(ii) cruelty or real violence which are very detailed or which have a high impact;
(iii) sexual violence.
Sexual violence related to incentives and rewards.

SEX
Depictions of practices such as bestiality.
Gratuitous, exploitative or offensive depictions of:
(i) activity accompanied by fetishes or practices which are offensive or abhorrent;
(ii) incest fantasies or other fantasies which are offensive or abhorrent.

DRUG USE
Detailed instruction in the use of proscribed drugs.
Material promoting or encouraging proscribed drug use.
As a general rule, computer games will also be Refused Classification if they contain:
(i) drug use related to incentives or rewards;
(ii) interactive drug use which is detailed and realistic

The guidelines also suggest that the G, PG, and M ratings remain unchanged. You can view the proposed guidlines here.