60 coaches online • Server time: 21:54
* * * Did you know? The best blocker is Taku the Second with 551 casualties.
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Draft League Expansi...goto Post 90+ Custom Rosters!goto Post NBFL Season 32: The ...
Focus
Last seen 9 years ago
Overall
Rookie
Overall
Record
0/0/0
Win Percentage
n/a
Archive

2008

2008-12-29 19:06:44
rating 4
2008-12-22 19:14:50
rating 3
2008-12-14 20:44:54
rating 3.7
2008-12-10 19:04:30
rating 3.5
2008-12-09 18:04:47
rating 2.8
2008-10-25 22:22:14
rating 4.6
2008-10-04 15:45:23
rating 5.5
2008-08-23 21:49:20
rating 5.2
2008-08-14 21:20:59
rating 5.3
2008-08-07 02:19:48
rating 4.1
2008-07-21 04:24:07
rating 5
2008-07-11 08:35:15
rating 4
2008-07-03 00:47:38
rating 3.4
2008-06-29 10:45:13
rating 3.4
2008-06-18 09:17:57
rating 2.7
2008-04-15 22:58:07
rating 3.8
2008-07-11 08:35:15
44 votes, rating 4
Sucks to be Aussie
So not only do we have to put up with trans-pacific lag when playing multiplayer games. Not only do we have to put up with an inferior nationwide internet service, now we can't play certain video games because we don't have a rating above 15+ to put on video games?

And I was looking forwards to fallout 3, now I'm gonna have to work out zones and import the damn thing myself somehow.

http://kotaku.com/5023636/heres-why-fallout-3-was-banned-in-australia

And the reason why there's no R rating?

The reason that Fallout 3 has been refused classification is that any "positive" portrayal of illicit drug use in a film or game will result in a R18+ rating. The OFLC have decided that some of the chems in Fallout look similar to real-world illicit drugs, and they can have a positive effect on the player, so they decided that the game falls within the "R18+" guidelines.

If this was a film, then it would get a R18+ rating, it would be released, and that would be the end of it. Unfortunately, there is currently no R18+ classification for games in Australia, so games that qualify for one are "refused classification".

The good news is that there is presently a massive push to implement a R18+ classification for games here. It is supported by the industry, it is supported by voters, it is supported by almost all politicians.

Introducing the new rating is a simple matter, with one caveat. The change needs the support from the Attorneys General of every state.

Unfortunately, the one politician who is loudly objecting to the change is Michael Atkinson, the Attorney General of South Australia (a relatively conservative state). He is actively defying his party with this stance, but he is a senior member of the party and is otherwise pretty competent, so they aren't willing to discipline him over the matter.

His argument is the old "think of the children" one. No amount of reasoning with him has been successful so far. He argues that children will inevitably get their hands on R18+ games (and somehow be "damaged"), so he sees himself as some sort of moral hero by opposing the rating. He also seems to like the attention it brings.

So, as long as Michael Atkinson objects to the R18+ rating, we will continue to see this nonsense happening.
Rate this entry
Comments