Mark, editor-in-chief of the Sunshine Coast Daily, has been a journalist on the Coast for 20 years and is passionate about fighting for a better deal for the region. When he's not at work, he loves nothing more than spending time with his wife Julie and three kids. Do we really need more violent video games?
| Mark Furler
Just when you thought there were enough violent games on the market, the federal government is considering updating our classification system to include R18+ games.
Unlike with films, magazines and other publications, there is no adult classification for games in Australia, so any titles that do not meet the MA15+ standard – such as those with excessive violence or sexual content – are simply banned from sale by the Classification Board.
Given the level of violence I’ve seen in games already on our shelves, I don’t think anyone – adults or children – is being starved for choice.
Sure, adults have a right to play whatever games they want – until one crazy goes on a killing spree and, guess what, we find out that he was “infatuated” with a particularly violent or sexually explicit game.
Today, a spokesman for the Minister for Home Affairs Bob Debus confirmed the issue of whether or not to allow an R18+ classification for games would be discussed by censorship ministers at the next Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) meeting on March 28. It will be the first time the issue has been discussed since November 2005.
According to the Classification Board, 18 games have been banned since 2001. Eight of the games had their bans lifted after they were modified and resubmitted.
The most recent game to be axed by the board was the sci-fi-themed shooting game Dark Sector, which was refused classification this month.
The reason given was that it contained graphic violence, including "decapitation, dismemberment of limbs accompanied by large blood spurts, neck-breaking spurts, neck-breaking twists and exploded bodies with post-action twitching body parts".
Other recently banned games include Reservoir Dogs (for high levels of violence, including the ability to shoot the heads off hostages during a bank heist).
A survey of more than 1600 Australian households conducted three years ago found 88% of Australians supported an R18+ classification for games.
But Australian Family Association said even M-rated games on the market had "concerning" levels of violent and sexual content.
Let’s hope the federal government seriously considers this issue rather than allowing the new system just because everyone else is doing it.
Have your say
Not Registered? Quick registration and comment.
Already Registered? Login and comment.
The path to economic recovery must be forged on the ... >>
Mark My Words : Carers for elderly need more support
Police Patrol : Last alcoholic drink was 10 hours prior?
Paul Munnings : It's elementary, pick Watson
Ashley Robinson : Stay clear of Roy
Through My Eyes : Crack open a beer
More RSS feeds
Install the news toolbar
Set up an email news alert 
Recent Comments
These next gen systems, as well as having all that grunt under the hood, provide content filters for those who need them.
Also, anyone who claims that a computer game influenced them to commit a crime is not only a criminal, but a liar. if your argument is that certain people cannot distinguish between fantasy and reality, then maybe we should ban imagination and free thought.
- My point is how violent do you really need it - there are plenty of games on the market now that cater for the most blood thirsty of gamers. Do we keep stretching the boundaries until there are none at all. - MF
You mention Reservoir Dogs - The movie which was also rated R - is far more compelling and moving than the video game in every single way.
Yet as far as I'm aware, you've never voiced worry of it's release, or worried that it will fall into the hands of children.
Moreover, most research carried out on violence in the media finds that the end result is an incredibly minor influence on a developing child.
Not one study of either movies or video games has found violent media turning passive people into violent people.
Instead, finds show violent people being attracted to violent media (books, movies, television and games all equally).
And most studies have found is that what makes those people violent is home life, genetics and poverty.
Furthermore, studies in the UK show that interactivity engages the player less than other media.
Although it may seem a child is engaged in the world, interacting with the world, this has less impact than reading a novel, as a child reading has to use their imagination which engages a child more thoroughly than a world simply presented to them.
If you're going to ban things, ban books. After all, the Bible and Koran and even Catcher in the Rye have caused more deaths than any video game.
So instead of worrying your pretty little head about those computer games, how about using your talent for the written word to fight for equality and justice, not just for your region, but the entire country.
- Thanks for your opinions Funkyj - but I have anything but a 'pretty little head' - as for your comments, yes I have previously written about my concerns about violent films - and no I don't agree with you purported studies saying there is no link between violence in media and violence in real life - I have read plenty to say exactly the opposite. Here's just one - from seven years ago when games were a lot less violent.. http://www.apa.org/releases/videogames.h...
I guess it's according to who is funding these studies sometimes. - MF
This is another case of parents wanting others to make choices so they don’t have to be the bad guy and control what their kids buy and play. Adult gamers should not have the government telling them that they can’t play what the rest of the world can.
- I certainly have repeatedly written about my concerns about alcohol and drugs - and the failure of parents to take responsibility for their kids. I would never advocate parents trying to fob off responsibility for what their kids watch or play - http://www.thedaily.com.au/blogs/mark-my...
My point is that surely there are already enough violent games on the market - why do we keep having to 'raising the bar' in the violence stakes. Why would anyone want to watch people having their heads chopped off and limbs pulled apart - whether in a game or in a movie - in such graphic detail is can't be contained within an M15+ rating.
Sure we have had violence since the start of time - my point is do we have to expose so many people to it. For those who really are so desperate and blood thirsty for such garbage - let them get it on the black market. Let's not have our government 'endorse' this sort of rubbish - MF
Game development budgets are exceeding a lot of blockbuster movie budgets; it's a multi billion dollar industry that caters for a mainly adult audience and as such we need artistic freedom in our entertainment.
I, as a consumer, should be able to pick and choose what content I deem appropriate for my viewing or gaming pleasure. It should not be dictated to me by a nanny state.
- So big bucks and we relax the rules heh? Sounds like a good formula for chaos - MF
Could you put a bit more effort into your replies, I am genuinely interested to see if you have a valid argument or are you just ranting your conservative opinion.
- We have a rating system for games now that is being abused. You go to end games store (my son is an avid gamer and I enjoy playing also) and you see plenty of examples of 10 and 12 year old kids being sold M15+ games. My point is that if you limit their visibility and availability, they are less likely to be played by young teenagers. If adults want to order them, let them use the myriad of options on the internet - just as they do with porn. - MF
If your kids get a hold of inappropriate content from ANY source, it WILL NOT play.
- Good advice, but I wonder how many parents even know it exists? - MF
You want to talk about excessive violence and feeding sick minds ideas on how to go about their rampage, look no further than your $15, big screen, movie experience. Who knew a perfectly legal $400 compound bow could kill so many people...
Leave games, and gamers alone!
- You're a sensitive lot you gamers - MF
You publically stated an opinion about a subject you are not fully informed about. The R18+ rating is NOT about having more violence in games, it's a broad classification that covers adult content.
Your spinning a web of misinformation just so you force your conservative view point on others. I dont want you or anyone else dictating what I choose to find entertaining.
p.s. I'll understand if you decide to filter this content
- No you can have your say - that's what the forum is about - MF
I don't have time to provide links, but look him up on Wikipedia and visit AtomicPC's website for more information.
I know it's simply your opinion, but inform yourself about the facts rather than just reading a press release.
As gamers, we're sick of our hobby, and in some cases our livelihood, being under constant attack by a mis-informed media who tries little to present facts and balanced stories about it.
I agree with your thoughts about the prevalence of violence -particularly in games- but you need to keep in mind that digitally-based technology is fast becoming the dominant visual medium (and already is for 18-25 year olds) and the current rating system is censoring what stories can be told.
If they are genuinely mature, why do they feel the need to see blood, guts and all the other forms of mutilation that Mark was writing about.
People argue that movies have the same effect, but movies and books are inhenently different than games, as in those you are not controlling the story line.
The acronym "RPG" means "Role Playing Game", which means the consumer is the one totally in control of the game character, acting through them; they are choosing to behead the victim, perform acts of cruelty to innocent people, etc. Why people find this entertaining is beyond me.
Violent movies and games are just as bad as each other, and I think that it is just a vicious cycle; with children watching violent movies and playing games when they are still young, it doesn't take long before they need a more violent experience to give them the same "high" as the previous one did.
Once I started playing games in my mid teens, it didn't take long for me to become totally desensitised to killing anyone and anything in sight.
Imagine a girl introducing her boyfriend to her parents and they ask him "So what do you like to get up to in your free time?", and he answers: "Oh, I'm really into Postal 2 at the moment" :)
Halflife 2: People sawed in half with circular saw. How many people are likely to view that as "normal"?
However as is the case with movies,alcohol and cigarettes. you need to show ID to buy them. Simply put, i think they are taking a step in the right direction because they arent trying to ban all the games now, they're making a separate classification R18+ Which will also help other game publishers put their games into the right age group.
Because come on, honestly there are so many games out there in the market that are R18+ but have been put into the MA15+ bracket after a few minor changes. This will stop these game publishers from doing that hence safeguarding minors from buying content that isnt suitable for them.
Also if they release this R18 class into the market then it will mean more stringent security, for instance - ID checks at the counter, Most probably the R18 games will be close to the counter too so that people working there can keep an eye on who is viewing it etc.
Basically what im saying is that, We cant ban people from freedom of choice, what we can do is make sure that kind of content isnt sold to minors.
Just like how Video Ezy asks whenever someone hires a R18 movie for identification or unless they're obviously older then 18 they dont ask sometimes.
"Once I started playing games in my mid teens, it didn't take long for me to become totally desensitised to killing anyone and anything in sight."
You belong in the puzzle factory.