 |
|
|
| |
Australia's Atkinson: Only 'Small Number Of Very Zealous Gamers' Want M Rating
by Leigh Alexander [PC, Console/PC]
|
|
| |
|
December 11, 2009
|
| |
Australia's lack of a mature rating for video games -- and the de facto banning of many games from the region as a result -- is a matter of public interest, says the country's Attorney General Michael Atkinson.
"You don’t need to be playing a game in which you impale, decapitate and dismember people," Atkinson tells ABC News, discussing the recent decision by Australia's classification board to deny a rating to Sega's Rebellion-developed Aliens vs. Predator.
Industry figures such as Tom Crago, head of the Game Developers Association of Australia, have criticized Australia's approach to ratings as "antiquated" and "a joke" -- and Atkinson now says those in favor of a mature rating for video games are in a minority.
"This is a question of a small number of very zealous gamers trying to impose their will on society -- and, I think, harm society," he says. "It’s the public interest versus the small, vested interest."
Atkinson's primary concern appears to be that audiences will be influenced by the realism of games. "98 percent, 99 percent of gamers will tell the difference between fantasy and reality, but the 1 percent to 2 percent could go on to be motivated by these games to commit horrible acts of violence," he says.
Games without a rating cannot be released in Australia, so titles that would have been classified for mature content simply don't see store shelves in the region without content edits. Aliens vs. Predator is just one of many games to come up against this roadblock; major titles like Left 4 Dead and Fallout 3 are other examples.
Atkinson also spoke out similarly following the decision to deny a rating to Left 4 Dead 2, conceding that the content regulation "certainly does restrict choice to a small degree," but that "the small sacrifice is worth it."
|
| |
|
|
Fixed it for him.
Apparently one only NEEDS these violent depictions in the news, in books, in movies and on television. But NOT games. And we have not even begun to have a discussion about sexual content...
Every advance in human culture has been made against the omnipresent pressure from hypocritical opportunits like him.
That said, there is more we can do with games than the challenging destruction of human looking characters. Not get to get rid of that, just visibly and loudly do other things too so that people point and laugh when a jerk like this guy starts spouting off.
It sounds like one good size letter writing campaign could blow this argument out of the water.
Well if that's the case I'm sure people won't mind handing over their drivers license becase 1 or 2 percent of them aren't responsible enough to drive sober 100% of the time.
I will never understand what makes people believe video games are the ultimate violent motivational tool.
Note: My information here is courtesy of this article, and I haven't done any further verification myself:
http://kotaku.com/5419298/hey-stop-blaming-the-australian-governmentpeople-for-b
anning-games
http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp
This guy is living in the 70's. The Australian game makers and players really need to raise a stink about this luddite whose is censoring entertainment options from Australian adults.
Atkinson's primary concern appears to be that audiences will be influenced by the realism of games. "98 percent, 99 percent of gamers will tell the difference between fantasy and reality, but the 1 percent to 2 percent could go on to be motivated by these games to commit horrible acts of violence," he says.
OK . . . here is the idea for a protest: Ask that the Bible and Koran be banned from Australia. Although 99 to 98 percent of the readers of these Holy books do not act violently . . . the 1 to 2 percent that are motivated by this religious books to commit violent acts must be restrained. Society needs to be protected from these Christian and Muslim extremists!
Austrialia should ban peanuts; 98 99 percent of people have no problem with peanuts but 1-2 percent are at risk for choking.
Austrialia should ban stairs; 98 99 percent of people have no problem with stairs but 1-2 percent are at risk for falling and hurting themselves.
Austrialia should banold people 1 -2 percent of people have no problem with being old but 98-99 percent are at risk for death beucase of their condition in the next 30 years.
Austrialia should ban goats 98 99 percent of people have no problem with goats but 1-2 percent are at goint to try to have...
do I need to go on? besides, 80 pervent of statistics are made up on the spot anyway. This person is clearly driven by irrational thinking from anecdotal evidence. ignorence in the leaders of a nation can only create ignorent laws; and such arrogence can only lead to a destruction of the status quo.
austrialia will change but it will have to get worse beofre it can ge better
What is the percentage of the population incarcerated down under? I would imagine it's more then two percent. I'm sure all those in prison for violent crimes first got their ideas from Tetris.
Atkinson own myopic views will only hurt him in the long run--especially as the average gamer grows old and become more political.
I am curious as to what the next scapegoat will be. I've read about comic books, tv, heavy metal, rap, and movies destroying the "modern" world from within. What's next?
What do I mean? Well, he won his parliamentary seat rel-election with 76% of the vote in 2006. If anyone really cared about his stance on video games, you'd think they'd voice their discontent in the polls.
Thus while I would like to see Australia have M-rated games in the future, my support for the democratic process requires me to agree with Atkinson. His constituents really could care less about the issue of violent video games.
Further, the fact that gamers who are upset about this (who are in fact an extreme minority) would rather whine and wallow in self-pity on the comment sections of various websites rather than take action isn't exactly helping the cause. You're not just consumers and observers; there are interest groups to contribute to, pamphlets to disperse throughout Atkinson's district, etc. If you genuinely care about the issue, take action!
Wow, how many seconds did you spend researching this? I'd expect such shoddy research from comical American president Arnold Schwarzenegger, but not from a professional journalist.
Mr Atkinson and particularly the ALP as a whole work by exploiting common misunderstandings about the Australian political system to not only implement strict censorship, but also convince people that it is not their fault. It is particularly annoying when white-knight simpletons, who supposedly oppose the policy, stroll around the internet doing Atkinson's dirty work for him.
Thanks for the article.
edit: somehow completely forgot to mention the reference to 'M rating' in the title. Another sign of brilliant fact-checking
One of the main problems with the current situation is that Michael Atkinson is elected in South Australia, to the South Australian Parliament. Those of us in the broader community who continue to be affected by the man's incoherent logic are unable to vote him out. If he were actually the attorney general for the entire nation we would have the option of making a point of pressuring the current government into understanding this is a policy issue they should be concerned about. As it is, the majority of the political establishment are happy to sit back and allow Atkinson to wage his war on common sense and prevent an R rating for games. His state counterparts have the power to break the agreement that allows Atkinson to get away with this but it'd be far too much effort for very little gain as far as they are concerned.
The "say what you want but the people will ultimately decide" stance he takes is a complete and utter load of horses**t. Hopefully the people of South Australia will do what is right but considering the problem affects the whole country, this shouldn't be an issue that is lumped on their laps alone.
Actually it's not even the entirety of SA that get to vote him in or out, it's his local electorate of Croydon. Sadly this is a strongly conservative electorate, hence why he always wins his re-election, his electorate just isn't game aware as a whole. Perhaps if more than 3885/22065650 (0.01%) people had a chance to vote him out things might be different.
Regardless I believe each state's AG can actually force a ratings change for their own state. Would trying to get them to do this be more effective than trying to get Mr Atkinson to back down? Alternatively roughly 2000 gamers could move to Croydon.....
Discounting this, At the very least, the whole SA government is complicit. a) the Attorney-General serves entirely at the will of the ruling party, b) The AG is a cabinet minister and therefore, theoretically the whole cabinet stands by this policy.
Other examples of similar ALP policies, The federal ALP's draconian internet censorship plans or the SA governments recent moves to ban the open sale or advertisement of ANY R18+ material (it has to be kept under the counter.) It makes no sense that the party would be pro-censorship everywhere else, yet (aside from Atkinson) be anti-censorship on games.
In my opinion, every article condemning Atkinson as the lone obstacle just plays right into the hands of those who are actually implementing this policy.