Using his Edge-Online blog, Alex Walker has penned an open letter to South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson about the lack of an R18+ rating classification in that country.

Walker notes that “the Classification Board has refused classification to twice as many games as the British Board of Film Classification has in the 23 years since it first rated a video game.” He calls out Atkinson on some of his recent statements and uses comments from David Cook, Director of the British Board of Film Classification to aid his case.

Walker finishes with a challenge:

I’m not sure how, given the weight of evidence, you can stand by the inconsistencies in the Australian approach to classifying film and video games. I call on you to stand aside, and allow for a debate on the classification system, a debate which you have so far stifled.

Walker adds that he did email a copy of the letter to Atkinson, but he does not expect a response.

Yesterday, GamePolitics reported on Risen, the latest game to fall victim to Australia's outdated content rating system. The RPG, currently in development by Piranha Bytes, was refused classification for the Australian market, largely because Down Under lacks the equivalent of the ESRB's M (17+) rating.

The situation frustrates Tom Crago, who heads the Game Developers Association of Australia. Crago spoke to itwire about his concerns:

Well it’s a joke isn’t it?  We are once again caught in this awful, ridiculous web of the antiquated classification system...  Here in Australia the sooner that changes, the better; it is obviously a battle to ensure common sense prevails.  We will get there eventually, but in the meantime as gamers in Australia we suffer, and to be honest we are embarrassed at how backward our government is...

The biggest problem we have here in Australia is that we don’t have an R classification for video games...  It’s ridiculous because it assumes that games are fundamentally different to film and outrageous in that it assumes that adults shouldn’t be allowed to access adult content in video games... 

We are the butt of a lot of jokes; I travel, obviously a lot, talking to other developers and publishers and people cannot believe it that we still have this ridiculous system here in Australia, designed twenty or thirty years ago, and hasn’t changed since...

[South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson] is of course the problem... clearly this is a guy that doesn’t get it, and to be honest, I don’t think, ever will get it...

South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson, who has to date single-handedly blocked the implementation of an R18+ video game rating in the Down Under market, explains his opposition in a letter to Kotaku.

For starters, Atkinson writes that he does not trust the Classification Board to do the right thing. He claims that the group stretches the current MA15+ category to accomodate games that should be refused classification. He fears that the same thing will happen with R18+ titles.

Although he is portrayed as a lone wolf on the ratings topic, Atkinson claims that there are other A.G.'s who agree with his stance. He complained, too, that he receives a great deal of hate mail on the subject. On this point, Atkinson writes:

It confuses and baffles me why I am being harangued, threatened and abused by people who want the right to play a handful of games. It confuses my why so many gamers are arguing that they should have the right to play games that enable them on-screen to bash, torture, slay, slaughter, rape and take drugs.

 

I am concerned about the state of mind of an individual who thinks he should have the right to do this in a computer game and then wants to tell me about it. Add to that the threats to me and I feel more certain about my stance that I should do what I can to minimise the number of these games in Australian homes.

Atkinson points out that only three (out of 903) games considered in 2007-2008 were refused classification (i.e., banned). He cites the 2008 murder of a Bangkok cab driver whose killer - according to Thai authorities - claimed to be re-enacting a scene from Grand Theft Auto. In addition, Atkinson calls into question a video game industry sponsored poll which maintains that most Australians favor an R18+ rating.

Meanwhile, Aussie game journalist Jason Hill calls upon gamers to respond maturely to Atkinson:

As tempting as it is to also indulge in name calling and silly stunts, Australian gamers must continue to provide eloquent, intelligent and reasoned arguments about why they would like Mr Atkinson to change his long-held opposition to changes to our broken classification regime.

Demonising or attacking Mr Atkinson in the same manner that so many Americans targeted anti-games crusader Jack Thompson is not helpful. It is actually damaging the cause, no doubt helping to justify his stance.

Disappointingly, Mr Atkinson told Kotaku that he has received "more abuse and threats over my stand against R18+ interactive games than any other topic of public debate", including anonymous threats posted under his front door in the middle of the night...

Please write to your state Attorney-General or Mr Atkinson... But please don't descend into name calling or threats.

 

As GamePolitics readers know, South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson has been blocking the adoption of an R18+ video game rating for some time.

That's despite the fact that an R18+ for movies has been in existence for years Down Under.

But it appears that Atkinson may be feeling the heat a bit. A letter written by the AG and published in the Adelaide Advertiser is a bit, well, over the top:

A Queensland letter writer... claims that democracy is at an end because I, as Attorney-General, will not agree to an R18+ category for interactive computer games... It is true that I am opposed to an R18+ category for interactive games, but I am one of at least four Attorneys so opposed.

 

I welcome [an election] challenge... on this issue. Among my constituents are hundreds of refugees who are trying to find lodgings for the family, gain employment and sponsor relatives from the old country.

 

Their vote is hardly likely to hinge on the "right" to score gamer points... by running down and killing pedestrians on the pavement, raping a mother and her two daughters, blowing oneself up in a market, cutting people in half with large calibre shells, injecting drugs to win an athletics event or killing a prostitute to recover the fee one just paid her (Welcome to the world of R18+ computer games).

 

Those of my constituents who are refugees have been subjected to the practical instead of the virtual suffering that R18+ nerds seek to inflict for their gratification on the computer screen.

Via: Kotaku

Is this guy stubborn, or what?

South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson continues to be the sole roadblock to the introduction of an R18+ classification for video games Down Under. Movies already enjoy such a rating.

Oh sure, things seemed to be looking up last November when he welcomed a public debate on the merits of an R18+ rating pending “some minor changes” to a discussion paper introduced by the Standing Committee of Attorneys General (SCAG). But four months later, Atkinson has yet to make those changes.

In February, GameSpot Australia polled the nation's attorneys general and found that, indeed, Atkinson is currently the only A.G. still opposed to the introduction of an R18+ rating. His colleagues support a public consultation on the matter but are stuck waiting on Atkinson.  Said Victorian Attorney General Rob Hulls:

I fully support there being consultation on this issue, but ultimately the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) is waiting for the South Australian Attorney to agree to consult on the matter.

GameSpot AU recently contacted Atkinson’s office to inquire about the holdup and see if there was an ETA on the revisions.

Discussions are continuing between the [South Australian] attorney general's office and the SCAG Secretariat about amendments to the discussion paper.

In other words, Australian gamer friends: Don’t hold your breath.

If Atkinson ever stops dragging his feet, the finalized discussion paper will be released online and survey the public’s opinion on the introduction of an R18+ classification for Australian games.

-Reporting from San Diego, GamePolitics Correspondent Andrew Eisen.

GU Comics asks a very legitimate question concerning some Australian gamers' plan to march on Parliament in costume to protest the lack of an R18+ rating Down Under.

As GamePolitics reported yesterday, the "Cosplay for a Cause" rally has been scrubbed. A new event in which gamer protesters will wear everyday clothing is being planned.

GP: Thanks to GamePolitics correspondent Andrew Eisen for catching this one...

In Australia, gamers continue to petition their government for an R18+ rating.

As GamePolitics has reported, one man - South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson - has so far successully blocked the R18+.

That being the case, gamers Down Under plan to take their protest directly to Atkinson on March 4th - and in costume as well.

According to R18games:

Gametraders is organising a rally to support an R18+ rating for video games in South Australia. The rally will take place at 1pm on the 4th of March, on the steps of the Adelaide Parliament House. As you all know, Adelaide is the home of the South Australian Attorney-General, Michael Atkinson, chief opponent of an R18+ rating for games in Australia.

However, it appears that some gamers are concerned that protesting in costume will make their position seem frivolous; that aspect of the protest is under review:

It’s clear from the feedback... that a lot of people have some concerns about the cosplay nature of the rally. Gametraders has contacted [R18games] to say they will be issuing a further statement shortly...

As GamePolitics readers know, South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson (left) is viewed by many gamers Down Under as being the roadblock to the implementation of an R18+ video game rating. Australian films already have such a rating, so why not video games?

Atkinson spoke at length with GameSpot about his opposition to the R18+, which to date has proven insurmountable:

The interactive nature of electronic games means that they have a much greater influence than viewing a movie does. People are... essentially rehearsing harmful behaviour...

I have three sons who regularly play computer games at home... I see my children become physically and emotionally obsessed with games and it is difficult to drag them away from the gaming console. The repeated act of killing a computer-generated person or creature desensitises children to violence...

Extreme violence, perverted sex and criminal activity are not essential for adults to enjoy playing electronic games. There are plenty of sophisticated games that are of interest to adults... Some of the most popular and highly recommended games for adults would not be R18+ rated.

Critics sometimes claim that I am ruining the game development industry. There are very few computer games that are refused classification each year. In 2007/8 just three computer games were refused classification... This represents avery small proportion of the 961 [rating] decisions made last financial year...

Some of your readers may believe that the present system restricts adult liberty. It certainly does restrict choice to a small degree, but that is the price of keeping this material from children and vulnerable adults. In my view, the small sacrifice is worth it...

In this segment from Australia's Stateline program, South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson explains his objection to the introduction of an R18+ rating.

GP: Thanks to GP reader Ryan O'Meara for the link!

While Australia's grownup gamer population has been clamoring for an R18+ rating that would avert the video game censorship which has plagued the country in recent years, South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson (left) has been blocking consideration of such a change.

Something, apparently, has changed Atkinson's mind.

GameSpot Australia reports that a discussion paper as well as public commentary on the R18+ are back on the table. According to Atkinson, a compromise was reached on the content of the discussion paper:

I believe the draft discussion paper did not adequately represent both sides of the argument. I voiced my concerns to other Attorneys-General and we reached agreement that some minor changes will be made to the discussion paper.

 

I am not opposed to a public debate on the merits of introducing a R18+ classification for electronic games--in fact, I welcome it. But it’s unhelpful to commence that debate with what I believe is a biased discussion paper. There is little point in seeking public comment on an unfirm footing that neglects one side of the argument. I look forward to contributing to the development of a fairer discussion paper.

The Age has more.

Thanks to: GP reader Cheater87 for  the link!

With a number of high-profile games facing bans or near-bans, gamers in Australia are literally begging for the addition of an R18+ classification.

But, as The Age reports, one guy is screwing it up for everyone.

GamePolitics has reported in the past on the anti-game antics of Michael Atkinson, the South Australian Attorney General. The Age has the latest:

Censorship ministers in March agreed "in principle" to canvas public opinion on the proposed introduction of a R18+ classification for games and release a discussion paper on the issue, but Mr Atkinson has refused to agree to make the report public, effectively shelving it...

"Games may pose a far greater problem than other media - particularly films - because their interactive nature could exacerbate their impact," Mr Atkinson said. "The risk of interactivity on players of computer games with highly violent content is increased aggressive behaviour."

Australia is the only developed country without an R18+ classification for games... Ron Curry, CEO of the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia, [said] "You could be forgiven for taking a view that the South Australian Attorney-General has now actively censored the debate on censorship. What's next?"

GP: It's amazing that one guy can stand in the way of a nation of gamers.

Big thanks to: GP reader Jarrod from Australia for the tip!

And did we mention that... The Australian government is moving toward implementation of mandatory Internet censorship? Just like China!

Now that's progress...

Following last week's disturbing news that the highly-anticipated Fallout 3 would be banned in Australia, website Australian Gamer has remarks attributed to the man blamed by many for the ban.

Australian Gamer has posted a scan of what appears to be a letter from Michael Atkinson (left), Attorney General of South Australia, to an unnamed constituent. Atkinson's continued opposition to the introduction of an R18+ rating for the Australian games market has meant that games judged unsuitable for 15-year-olds are routinely refused classification. The country's highest rating is currently MA15+.

From the Atkinson letter:

I am aware that statistics show many game players are adults. Indeed, a whole generation has now grown up with computer games. It is not surprising that those who enjoyed gaming as children... play electronic games with their own children... 62% of Australians in these gaming households say the classification of a game has no influence on their buying decision...

 

Given this data, I cannot fathom what State-enforced safeguards could exist to prevent R18+ games being bought by households with children and how children can be stopped from using these games, once the games are in the home. If adult gamers are so keen to have R18+ games, I expect children would be just as keen. I have publically argued that because electronic games are interactive, the violence and other adult content in games have a strong impact. I am particularly concerned about the impact these games have on children, who can spend a lot of their unsupervised leisure time gaming.

As most GamePolitics readers know, Bethesda's highly-anticipated RPG Fallout 3 became the latest victim of Australian censors when it was refused classification (i.e., a rating) this week.

news.com.au now has more info on the Fallout 3 situation. The site is reporting that in-game drug use led to the game's ban Down Under and quotes from a report by Australia's Office of Film & Literature Classification:

In the Board's view these realistic visual representations of drugs and their delivery method bring the 'science-fiction' drugs in line with 'real-world' drugs... The player can also select and use 'Morphine' (a proscribed drug) which has the positive effect of enabling the character to ignore limb pain when the character's extremities are targeted by the enemy.

news.com.au notes that disappounted Aussies have reacted badly to the news about Fallout 3. In an online posting, one gamer asked, "What are the syringes in Bioshock filled with – magic fairy dust?"

Australia's lack of a rating that scales beyond the 15-year-old level is apparently at fault. As GamePolitics has previously reported, South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson has been a major force opposing the addition of an R18+ rating.

As GamePolitics has previously reported, elected officials in Australia are considering the addition of an R18+ rating for video games. Currently, any title that doesn't meet the content standard for Australia's MA15+ is effectively banned.

Writing in The Australian, columnist Ross Fitzgerald maintains that the move to an R18+ is being motivated by game industry lobbying:

The whisper is that... Attorney-General Robert McClelland (left) and his junior, Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus, have had a stream of lobbyists representing Nintendo and Microsoft in their ears about creating this new R-rating for violent video games.

Labor appears to be moving away from its stated policy of clamping down on violence as... members gang up on South Australia's hapless, evangelical Christian Attorney-General, Michael Atkinson, over his veto on a new R-rating for computer games.

I'm no supporter of Atkinson's deep social conservatism. I suspect that he rejects the R-rated computer game rating more for the sex in the R category than the violence... the rest of Australia's state and federal attorneys should hang their heads in shame for trying to foist a category of computer games on us that will contain mostly mind-numbing violence.

Recently GamePolitics reported on a move to create an R18+ rating for video games in Australia.

The idea is popular among Aussie gamers since adding the new classification would offer grownup consumers additional gaming choices. A number of titles which qualified for sale in the U.S. market, for example, were banned Down Under because they failed to meet the mark for Australia's current highest rating, M15+. These include Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure, 50 cent: Bulletproof and Blitz: The League.

Predictably, not everyone in Australian politics agrees with the proposed change. But, as reported by news.com.au, South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson (left) was shouted down in Parliament last week while arguing against adoption of the R18+ rating:

Mr Atkinson is the most vocal opponent to a R18+ classification for games... During the speech, Mr Atkinson began to describe five games that had been banned in Australia. As he was describing drug use in the game Narc, he was cut off by raucous interjections and returned to his seat.

The text of Atkinson's speech explains his objections (it's about the children!), and includes the following:

I do not want children to be able to get their hands on R18+ games easily. I understand that the lack of an R18+ classification denies some adults the chance to play some games, however, the need to keep potentially harmful material away from children is far more important...

Proponents for the classification say the latest technology allows gaming platforms and computers to be programmed to allow parental locks. Today’s children are far more technologically savvy than their parents. It’s laughable to suggest that they couldn’t find ways around parental locks if R18+ games were in the home...

I contest any idea that it is necessary for games to include material of this kind and that a game is more interesting to an adult because it contains extreme violence, explicit sexual material, instruction in crime or characters using illicit drugs...

GP: Unfortunately, we don't have any news on which members of Parliament interrupted Atkinson's speech or why they did so...