Hope you like the new curtains, MGK readers. This is Wendy White, here to balance the gender equation. Math is hard, tee-hee!
Ahem.
I promise to show all my working.
It is not as a woman that I speak to you today. Today, I speak to you as a representative of the Mad Max Country.
You may have heard of us. We are a country where the dirt is as red as the blood spilt upon the asphalt. A country where a stingray lurks around every corner, and the tea and coffee are served not with biscuits, but spiders.
Although we are rather fond of a nice Monte Carlo.
In the last couple of days, my native land has been in gaming news for the banning of Fallout 3.
The Fallout series is a charming set of games set in a desolate post-apocalyptic world which bears a distinctive 1950s flavour. It is as if you’ve rocked up to the World Fair a day late and found it trashed by mutants armed with nuclear weaponry who want to bare not only their own souls but those of anyone else within a 2.5 kilometre radius.
In Fallout, the world is your mutated, glowing oyster. Back in the day I had an enormous amount of fun working my way through the clever plots and witty dialogue, while fending off enthusiastic delegations of Radscorpions.
Here, the game has received an “RC” (Refused Classification) rating from the OFLC (Australia’s Office of Film and Literature Classification) – which means, in essence, that the game is illegal to sell or import into the country.
The reason? A game “that contains drug use… related to incentives and rewards is Refused Classification”.
The use of stimulants like Mentats which can provide stat boosts (along with negative side-effects including addiction) has been identified as being to be too close an analogue to real-world drugs. Apparently in F3 the drugs (chems) play a more significant role than in the previous games; previously your character could live through the story without actually needing to use any chems at all, bar one or two shots of Rad-Away. And, admittedly, a bunch of stim packs (but if health packs begin to warrant bannings then there really is going to be a fuss).
In addition, the OFLC had problems with the inclusion of a real-life drug, morphine.
I’m aware I’m not the only one to make this comparison, but – wait a minute – what about Bioshock? Sure, I guess jabbing a syringe filled with plasmids into your arm isn’t something you’re currently able to in the here and now (unless you have one of those awesome Bioshock pens) but the similarities are striking. Perhaps genetic material is to narcotics as rainbows are to mustard gas.
As far as the OFLC is concerned, Bioshock players can continue to shoot up their rainbows and unicorn tears, but the Nuka Cola? Off limits.
Why not give the game an R18+ rating then? Problem is – they can’t.
While we have this rating for films, Australia does not have anything higher than a MA15+ for games.
To create an R18+ rating, we have to change the law, and for that, we need to consensus of the Attorney Generals of each state in Australia. As I hear it, only one of them is holding out. A man by the name of Michael Atkinson.
And here, friends, is where gamers leap upon their collective bandwagon with glee to spew hatred upon this injustice forced upon us all. It’s a little embarrassing.
I took some time to research this fellow and his policies (expecting another ill-informed Jack Thomspon) and the man is both intelligent and articulate. His arguments are built on well researched information and reasoning.
Bugger.
The following quotes come from a letter he sent to an anonymous Kotaku source, and a speech he gave on the subject of R18+ games earlier this year.
“I have consistently opposed an R18+ classification for computer games. I am concerned about the harm of high-impact (particularly violent) computer games to children. Games may pose a far greater problem than other media – particularly films – because their interactive nature could exacerbate their impact. The risk of interactivity on players of computer games with highly violent content is increased aggressive behaviour.”
Now, after a long session of Half Life 2, I don’t have urges to go picking up any movable object I find and lobbing it at the downtrodden overall-clad citizens around me, or a desire to attach large blades to ground-based motors. I have also not increased my theft of sandwiches belonging to large Eastern European men due to the influence of Team Fortress 2. (That said, driving my car after playing a long round of Katamari Damacy can be a little harrowing.)
However, at no point does Mr Atkinson ever say that he thinks children are going to emulate what they see in games – and this is the point that people seem to be missing when critisising him.
He’s not saying that games train us to emulate the actions of our characters. He’s saying that perhaps some of these experiences are inappropriate for kids. Can’t really fault him there.
I have a friend with a four year old child. Recently, I saw her standing behind her father and watching him play Postal, as he shot bystanders with shotguns and urinated on the remainder until they vomited.
And you know what? I can’t really think of a reason why that is okay for a child to view. I don’t think she’s going to grow up to be a murderer with bladder issues. But I don’t think that experience should have been shared.
One point Atkinson makes that I will pick on, is that 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.”
True enough. The majority of children growing up today do tend to possess the edge on their parents when it comes to technology. However, I still think the majority of children will not have the resources to bypass any sophisticated parental locks or controls (should they introduced) for digital material.
Those children who are technologically savvy enough to do so, will still be able to access the game regardless of whether it is banned here or not.
This, I think, is probably the weakest link in Mr Atkinson’s argument.
He also says “with so much money and time going into game development, I do not believe a gamer is bored with a game only because it does not include extreme sex, violence, or illegal acts.”
This is also true enough, although that isn’t really why gamers are clamouring for these aspects to remain. It is more due to the concept of games as art, and that censoring that art reduces its value. We don’t want to compromise on the original vision.
Atkinson doesn’t agree. He mentions that the game 50 Cent: Bulletproof was banned for the close-up, slow motion killing scenes in the game, but when a censored version with MA15+ violence was released, it was allowed to be sold in the country (oh wow, thank goodness, I was totally looking forward to that one).
But seriously, who here really thinks the 50 Cent game is a work of art?
Many games, like many films, are crap. They contain elements that add no real benefit to gameplay or storytelling. Axeing these pieces is unlikely to cause outrage, because no one is particularly enamoured with the games to begin with.
Well-made games though – games like Bioshock and (hopefully) Fallout 3 – removing parts of them does, to me, seem like they are removing some of the integrity of the game as art, and detracts from the believablility and depth of the experience.
He continues his arguments with this;
“I cannot see how adding an R18 classification for games will stop parents from making bad choices for their children.”
This is perfectly reasonable. However, Atkinson mentions that about 70% of surveyed Australian households buy video games, and that most of them did not pay attention to the rating system when purchasing games. However this ignores two things.
One, that some of those surveyed are buying for people over the age of 15 and therefore are not considering maturity when making a purchase. The other point is that when the highest rating is MA15+, a lot of parents will be lax with the rating because hey, their child is pretty mature. However, slap an 18+ rating on a game, and many parents would think twice. “Hey,” they’d muse, between spankings, “This is the same rating they give X-rated porn! Maybe I don’t want my kid seeing that.” While parents might be slack about some 15+ movies, I doubt many of them are renting out 18+ flicks for the kiddies.
“This is the price of keeping this material from children and vulnerable adults. In my view, it is worth it.”
I’ll quote Ben Franklin here; “Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.”
That said, I am left wondering if my desire for the uncut game is purely selfish. He makes a good argument.
I want the chance to purchase an unedited version of Fallout 3 in this country. However, if it is edited and released here, the Morphine renamed to Moar Fine, perhaps, and the drug models replaced with brightly coloured walkie talkies that shoot rainbows up your nose – I will most likely buy it. With some small amount of disappointment. Although, then again – nasal rainbows.
It’d be lovely, though, if the other gamers upset by this wouldn’t make us look worse by flinging monkey-poop at a man who, by all intents and purposes, seems entirely reasonable and quite well-mannered. We’re providing fuel for the argument the anti-gaming lobby love to use, that games make people more aggressive.
Maybe I can be sanguine about this because I might just have happened to have stopped by my local EB last weekend and picked up the Fallout boxset for $AU14.95 – that’s right, Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics for the price of a movie. So my post-apocalyptic thirst is quenched, for the time being, by cheap, cheap nostalgia.
[Edit: 14th July – No Mutants Allowed reports that Aussies can still import F3 legally]
Wendy herself has certainly never been affected by video games in any way, shape or form, other than having to check under her bed every night for Radscorpions. You can find her at Solar Whelk, which is as much a desolate wasteland as those depicted in her beloved post-apocalyptic games.
Related Articles
21 users responded in this post
I’m not sure how ‘well reasoned’ his defence is, given that we have a R18+ rating for movies already. Why are games more likely to be theived from the locked cabinet than movies? Why are parents more likely to play violent video games with their toddler around than watch violent movies? Parents make bad choices anyway, but this punishes those who make good choices. Also those who lack children. Durr.
If he’s in favour of removing the R18+ rating on movies as well, then his argument is intelligent and consistent. Until then, he’s simply assuming that all games must be for kids, despite clear evidence to the contrary. He is being irrational and reactionary- characteristics I would associate with the Liberal party and its Family First allies, not Labor.
Sheesh. “I am concerned about the harm of high-impact (particularly violent) computer games to children.” Well that’s why we want an adults-only rating, silly man.
Comparing it further to Bioshock, could any part of Fallout 3 be taken as an endorsement of the positive effects of cigarette smoking?
‘Cause in Bioshock, if you find a pack of smokes lying around and light ’em up, you get more Eve.
Actually, what about real cigarettes? If these guys want to make laws like this because they claim they’re worried that a child might play the game when the adults aren’t watching, why don’t they totally ban cigarettes because of a fear a child might smoke one when the adults aren’t watching?
Also, booze.
Also, sharp and/or pointy objects. Ban those too.
OR….
Why not avoid an outright ban on any of these things, including the game, and just trust the parents to keep them out of the reach of children?
I’m surprised that it merits needing state approval. I thought that here in the US that the ESRB was a voluntary ratings system, and the MPAA for movies was likewise voluntary. As in, not state regulated. I could be mistaken, of course.
I think the problem with video games is the same as the problem with comics and animation– they were seen as a “kiddies only” thing for so long that a lot of adults over 50 or 60 only think of them as a kids’ thing. And thus, they see an adults-only rating as inappropriate for a kids’ activity.
“I thought that here in the US that the ESRB was a voluntary ratings system, and the MPAA for movies was likewise voluntary. As in, not state regulated. I could be mistaken, of course.”
That’s true in the States, but video games are state regulated in a number of countries, including the UK and, apparently, Australia.
This is why they are heathens who should be smote by the almighty power of US.
Australia has never been a more attractive destination to me.
my parents made us all go to bed before watching R-rated films.
I hated it, but they were right.
I’ve seen kids casually watching adult content with their parents, and worse, playing mature games without any supervision.
government can only go so far in getting people to act with any basic sense.
If it can’t be sold or imported at all, is that a violation of freedom of the press or something?
Wendy, I like the tone and sentiment of your piece, especially your even-handed discussion about Michael Atkinson and his position. I agree with you that the position he holds is wrong, but not wholly ill-informed.
My problem is that you do yourself no favors when you ask “but seriously, who here really thinks the 50 Cent game is a work of art?” Because it’s just as easy to ask, who really thinks a game that feels “as if you’ve rocked up to the World Fair a day late and found it trashed by mutants armed with nuclear weaponry” is a work of art? Injecting your own aesthetic judgment about the worthiness of one game over another lends credence to those who would then argue that *no* video game is a work of art.
And if no video game is art, why care if it is toned down, censored, or otherwise modified?
The 50 Cent game may be a piece of dreck, but that does not make it more or less deserving than your precious Fallout series.
Porter, that’s the kind of attitude that leads to tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars buying a crucifix in a jar of piss because it’s “art.”
It doesn’t lend credence to those who would argue no video game is a work of art. Not everything is art, and it’s time people stood by their guns and pointed out the merits of the things they considered worthy of the name, rather than letting paintings made out of elephant shit be called art because they’re too scared to make value judgements.
Seriously. Your statement makes the Scary Movies, Superhero Movie, Epic Movie, and films of that nature equal with Schindler’s List or Citizen Kane, an issue of Hustler the equal of the works of Shakespeare, some random MS Paint thing uploaded onto deviant art the equal to the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, or Ashley Simpson’s discography equal to Mozart or Beethoven.
In short, you would have everything be shit.
@Andrew- those sort of objective judgments aren’t going to do anyone any favors, in the end. Is schindler’s list equal to the works of Shakespeare? Is (your favorite book) worthy of being called art? Or your favorite band’s best album? Value judgments are fine, but they’re rarely going to strengthen your argument- odds are, any piece of art you think is objectively brilliant can be dismissed as stupid crap by someone smart who hates it.
–d
You guys are right on the money with the problem of the definition of art. One person can’t make those value judgments when it comes to tricksy things such as art – especially seeing it tends to be defined as the meaning people take away from it rather than the thing itself.
While I couldn’t resist the extra snipe, it wasn’t necessary.
Consider me an recalcitrant, incorrigible stalwart motherfucker, but Bethesda’s Fallout 3 looks to be as faithful to the Black Isle originals as Tim Tams are disgusting and easily and cheaply procured in the US.
I was hyped for Fallout 3 right up until I heard it was being made by Bethesda. If I wanted to spend hours and hours wandering around aimlessly in a wasteland, I would move to Utah and take up hiking.
Yeah, can we talk about the biscuits more, please? I know that the Gospel of Vegemite is a bit of a non-starter with our North-American friends, but maybe we can get them on board with the biscuits. Wendy, you choose a good example with Monte Carlos, and one cannot ignore Tim Tams, but I do think that one of Australia’s greatest biscuits is the Gaiety. The chocolate, the wafer, the slightly smaller size so that you can tell yourself “I can have three rather than the regular two” – the Gaiety has it all.
The venerable Gaiety is quite nice, and one can’t go past the Iced Vovo, but for me, at present, biscuithood lost a major stalwart when Players stopped making their Devonshire Creams. Melt-in-your-mouth shortbread filled with cream and jam? They shall be missed.
As usual, the question “is it art?” is quickly conflated with the entirely more interesting but separate question “is it good art?” The point about the 50 Cent game not being ruined by censorship is not that it wasn’t art to begin with, but that it wasn’t good enough to be ruined.
If someone did it on purpose, the safest approach is to assume that it has an artistic aspect. There are things, like boat trailers and extension cords, that would be pretty tiresome and pointless to approach as subjects of artistic criticism. But I’m not sure that anybody ever bothers to deny that something is art without really meaning to condemn the lack of artistic merit that they see in that thing.
And if I’m going to start grumbling about my tacks dawlerse, I’ll be taking aim at subsidies and wars before I bother with something boring like Piss Christ. Call it an artistic decision…
@andrew & @eric, I would argue that Andres Serrano *absolutely* created a work of art, the impact of which is still reverberating through the world. Unlike much modern art – conventionally unconventional and designed for a good ROI – “Piss Christ” is polarizing and memorable. So memorable, that 20 years after the fact it’s still brought up in random arguments about the nature of art. So powerful, that its detractors still foam and fulminate at its mere mention.
(Notably, many of the same people who defend the Jyllands-Posten cartoons and decry the threats of violence against their artists are those same foaming fulminators. Sacrilege is in the eye of the beholder.)
And @andrew, if I understand correctly, you are comparing Fallout to Shakespeare? Or is it to Citizen Kane, I’m not clear? Snark aside, do you think the game will have the same lasting impression on the world? Will scholars 50 years hence debate the subtle nuances in the game? And what of the greater impact on society? I’m a regular visitor here (an irregular commenter) and play the occasional game. I’m not a gamer, but I am a geek. I’ve never heard of this game. Question my “geek cred” all you will, but ask yourself: if I’ve never heard of it, what impact on the greater society has been made by Fallout?
Certainly not as much as “Piss Christ” or Schindler’s List. Hell, not even as much as Scary Movie.
Hasn’t the whole hypothesis that kids are affected more by games been kind of debunked at this point? I know some studies in Britain have come out arguing that games have even less impact, because the interactivity makes it more obvious that it isn’t real- you’re more aware of it as play.
Mr. Atkinson’s complaint about the R18+ classification seems specious … mostly because he’s trying to protect “the children”. Isn’t 18 the age of majority in Australia? If the games are restricted to adults, then who the hell cares what the kids think? This is the babies and steak argument all over again.
As for kids getting into adult material, that’s an entirely different question. Mr. Atkinson should go back to logic class.
I found this site called http://URAjerk.com maybe you can use it. It seems to help get me through the issues of dealing with some of the jerks I know. At least I can vent about these jerks, plus I get a kick out of sending them some cards.