11 May 2010

Simon Corbell and R18+ games

| johnboy
Join the conversation

Simon Corbell is trying to make the R18+ computer games issue go away until after the federal election.

“I am very encouraged by the high level of response to the Commonwealth Government’s discussion paper on this issue, with approximately 60,000 submissions received,” Mr Corbell said.

“Of these 60,000 submissions, about 98% of the respondents were in support of the introduction of an R18+ classification for computer games in Australia.

“The overwhelming level of response is clear evidence that this is an important issue for many people in our community. This is, however, a complex issue and any decision needs to be considered carefully by all Attorneys-General over coming months.”

It has been agreed by all jurisdictions to do further work before making a final decision, however, Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O’Connor, has released a status report to keep interested members of the community informed of the progress being made.

One of those issues that everyone wishes they didn’t have to touch.

Join the conversation

All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments

I’m surprised no-one has really talked about the implications of this together with the proposed internet filter. Both issues are being driven by minority lobbies based on the ignorance of the general populace which gives it traction. Anyone with an understanding of technology knows the filter is just a politcal joke and a lack of R+ classification for games causes more harm than good. But what does that mean combined? Does that mean I can’t look at any website that reviews a game that happens to be refused classification in this country because our politicians haven’t caught up with the times? Does that mean evey gamer website is blocked because it reviews something like “Left For Dead 2” which heavens forbids has zombies being shot but I’m still allowed to go the cinema and watch Zombieland? This kind of legislation just trips over its own stupidity and relying on an antiquated classification system for an internet filter is plain foolish. Pull your head in Conroy (and BTW where is my frickin broadband).

What is there that needs to “be considered carefully” – the mob have spoken – overwhelmingly at 98% I’d say!!! Whilst R rated games don’t appeal to me personally (I find Grand Theft Auto/Tekken already violent enough), why should games over M+ be banned? Time for the politicians to realise that serious gamers want this classification, and it is time to stop listening, and ACT!

I am more worried about drop kicks that buy their 9 year olds M rated or M+ games (without so much as a second thought), than 18+ adults playing ultra-violent games. Anyone that is going to be a problem to society ‘through playing these games’ was already going to be a problem for society anyhow…

thy_dungeonman10:26 pm 11 May 10

So a bond university survey showing 91% of people support an R18 rating, then a whole lot of correspondence from people who want an R18 rating, then a discussion paper gaining 60,000 submissions with 98% in favor, plus the fact that the current guidelines already take interactivity into account and therefore any arguments that computer games are different are null and void and it’s only logical that we have the same classifications for computer games, and they still can’t decide? I hope they do consider all the arguments made in the submissions closely because it will still lead them to realize we need an R18 classification. It’s amazing how much support this thing has yet they seem to be treating it as if introducing an R18 rating would suddenly let off an explosion of public backlash.

My guess is violent video games (of which I’m not a fan) are less responsible for violence and brutality around the world than mainstream religion or US oil, oops I meant foreign policy

I suppose a sensible decision was never likely, was it?

Lets step into the 21st century Australia. Seriously. The rest of the world is laughing at us. Finally SA AG runs away and we are still ‘thinking about it’. Sheesh.

DeadlySchnauzer12:42 pm 11 May 10

I remember when they first released the discussion paper they noted that both the content *and* the volume of submissions for each outcome would impact the final decision. Now that they have 58’000+ submissions in favour, they are saying “oh, we need to take more time to look at the content, thats whats important”


Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.