"The interactive nature of the game increases the overall impact of the frequent and intense depictions of violence. This, coupled with the graphic depictions of blood and gore, combine to create a playing impact which is high." <<I'd say that's Mission Accomplished, Valve. You should send a thank you card to the OFLC for the excellent review.

To clarify, I simply meant to complement that the violence and intensity of the action in the game rise above simple aesthetics and actually strengthen and reinforce the game design. IMO, that's a good thing for a game of this type to have. And to have that pointed out so clearly by a legislative body of non-gamers is evidence that the game design is focused and accessible. I do hope that Valve and the OFLC are able to come to some form of an agreement (hopefully without excessive compromise) so that the game may be released in Australia.

It's so sad that one man can hold a country to ransom because he has no idea what he's talking about. Really starts to feel that we're not living in a democracy sometimes. I really hope that a high profile case such as this (an anticipated sequel to a game that had massive appeal) will help to move things along.

If it doesn't get released, I'd think that piracy rates for L4D2 will sky-rocket in Australia. People COULD buy it off Steam, but not everyone would have a Steam account, let alone know of Steam.

For Valves sake, I hope that the game is released, without any changes... but I doubt that will happen.

Poor Aussies, so many violent video games constantlly pwning your government. How backwards does a country have to be to think that video games are only for children 17 or under?

And when a game appears before them obviously created for adults, they "refuse" to rate it, effectively banning it. Sounds like a bunch of old farts in power trying to fight that new fad the kids call "video games"... or a country that is messed up. I don't know much about Australia other than the games they ban every year. So I'm just speculating.

@Tony
Read some more, there's a lot of stuff behind why one man refuses to allow or support and R18+ rating, and how hard it is for those who oppose him to get rid of him. Either way it's not so much a backwards country as a country with a few conservative politicians so well entrenched in their positions removing them is like pulling out a Double G.

Christopher,

It's got nothing to do with a 'conservative' politician or government and every thing do to with a tyrannical government that has no value or interest in perserving personal freedoms, they would rather take them away. Unfortunantely, Australia's problems are bigger than video games. Get rid of the dicators. And, yes, any one that would tell an adult, a grown man, what kind of entertainment they can enjoy in their free time is a tyrant.

I remember when GTAIV was released here in New Zealand, we initially got the cut Australian one. However, after it was brought to the gaming publics attention that it wasn't properly rated, the censorship board looked at the uncut one and decided it was all go. I hope this doesnt have to happen again as it was a total mess.

With L4D2 I'm hoping it gets properly reviewed by the censorship board, and they don't take into account that Australia may ban it. We are NOT Australia. Over here we have an R18 rating for a reason.

@Frank
Our government isn't tyrannical, and there's actually a very large push to institute a fair and accurate rating system for video games, but there's one staunchly conservative politician who refuses to budge. Believe it or not it's not the entire government that has an issue, although there is no overarching political mindset that supports the notion, there are more than a few politicians that support it.

Sure there are problems larger than video games, but every country has bigger fish to fry. Australia never instituted a bill of rights into our constitution for many reasons, one of the major reasons people rejected it when it went to a vote so many years ago is because of how flawed a concept that is, and nowadays most Aussies aren't even aware there's no formal protection of their freedoms. Video games were refused an R18 rating back in the 90s due to misinformation about a media that wasn't properly understood, and now that we want one all the stops are in place, so we have to remove all these barriers to our doing so before the thing can be implemented.

The current political climate dictates that an R18 rating will happen, the question is merely when. After all Atkinson can't remain in politics forever, and with each generation we move closer to having the majority of the population computer aware. Also with the major pushes happening to try and fight our current ratings it's hoped that enough awareness and pressure can be put on the government to change (that is of course never a surety).

@chris,

did you just say your government isn't tyrannical and then go on for 2 paragraphs about how it is??? If it is one person or the whole system supporting the ban is irrelivant. The precedent has been set and the trend continues to ban games. If it is only one guy that a dictatorship sounds to be a better description of the situation surrounding game reviews.

if the current political climate dictates an R18 rating why are we having this discussion, oh yeah they are still banning these games as of this month!

@Ryan

It's a bureaucratic artifact - Australia is in the unfortunate situation of having one of its state Attorney-Generals be completely opposed to the notion of an R18+ rating for games (despite there being one for film). And for a legislative amendment to proceed it must meet with unanimous support from all state Attorneys-General. In effect this chap (Michael Atkinson) has been exercising a veto power over legislative reform.

I'd suggest when other (western) democracies face similar situations - where all it takes is one dissenting view in a group of long term politicians to derail reform - you'll see the same situation arising.

There's plenty of politicial mileage to be found in being portrayed as the protector of the children (which is Atkinson's core argument) - while there's precious little reward in being seen as the person who brings adult videogame content to the masses. That's just the dynamic of Australian mainstream voters at present. I'd suggest the same "soccer mom" dynamic exists elsewhere as well - except most of these territories had the foresight to include videogames under the ratings aegis they provide film and other media so it isn't an issue.

Bottom line: it's a constitutional loophole being exploited for political ends, not a trait of dictatorship.

...Interesting... but I'd have to say one person being able to stall an entire government from updating a video game ratings system when the majority of the country wants it, is kind of a broken system.

Aussies need to patch their goverment to pwn the RL politician griefers not allowing them to play L4D2!

If the US outlawed L4D2, I'd move to a different country or devote my life to the reform of game laws .... sad, but true

@Ryan Jones
Nope that's definitely not what I did.

And it's not a dictatorship as the fellow blocking stuff has no real power other than that. He in fact, is also beginning to overstep his bounds (like those stupidly broken laws to make bikies illegal, that have hit a roadblock in court). So it really does matter if it's one fellow or the system, the system wouldn't be changed without ease, the fellow on the other hand is coming under fire from all directions. As long as we don't end up with another conservative in the same position all will be well.

@Justin Kranzl
Couldn't have put it better.

@Tony
"when the majority of the country wants it, is kind of a broken system."
Well that's the issue isn't it, the majority of the country doesn't realise there's an issue in the first place. If gamers in Australia represented a largely significant portion of voters then our say would be heard just a bit more loudly. While that portion is growing in size, it's still not a "majority" of voters.