Is Australia’s ‘Refused Classification (RC)’ category for Video Games treating Adults
like kids?
That's a bit of a loaded question isn't it? It's purely subjective and will spark an argument between gamers and 30-50 year old women with nothing better to do because they are ignoring their parental responsibilities and making us front the cost. Gee Burt, I think Jesse might be biased. Ya think, Ernie?
Several decades had gone by since video-games had become mainstream before we obtained an 'R' rated classification for them. For those who don't know video games (allegedly) follow roughly the same guidelines set for films in Australia, which are their to help viewers determine the level of appropriateness for them self or their family with 'R' being the highers (along side 'X') for high impact content. Video games however only obtained the 'R' rating several years ago after constant petitions and one dickhead premier from South Australia who kept voting against it retiring (requiring a unanimous vote to be put through, also this dickhead wanted all R rated films to be coverless, seriously? fight club is just a bar of soap), previously all content that would be classified 'R' would be marked as refused classification or 'RC', which kind of made sense, given there was no adult rating at the time, so it was only the lack of one that was pathetic.
Getting this new rating was not the homestretch. Sure the classification board loosened up, giving us back Mortal Kombat 9, and letting Valve re-apply Left 4 dead 2 uncensored (it's free dlc on steam check it out if you want) which given the first game was almost the same was without any censorship to begin with was its on controversy, but it didn't stop games being classified as 'RC'. Why is this? Short answer: hypocritical assholes. Longer answer that isn't quite the long answer: contradictory guidelines and statements made in the forms the classification board is supposed to follow; within the guidelines of the classification board includes two lines that roughly go like this "an adult is allowed to view, interact with or consume any media they choose," and "refused classification if considered offensive by a reasonable adult," (when referring to any of the classification points, violence, sexual content, etc.). What is a reasonable adult? I don't know, it's probably somewhere along the lines of the board members themselves, but that's irrelevant, if from the start you say people can do what they want, you CAN'T later use terms like 'reasonable adult' which imply and enact a restriction. It's ridiculous it's pathetic, it's a complete fucking joke. You can't even say it's to protect the children.
We need to protect the children. Says the inept parent who doesn't know how to do her(maybe his) fucking job that she signed the contract two when she got horny without protection. That argument is invalid and pointless, or at least it should be, to some people it caries weight still. However there is still an abundance of products that would be considered inappropriate for a child sold on store shelves everywhere every day, and if anyone who looks young wants to buy anything that's considered adult material they need to have ID on them. Every precaution has been taken to make sure kids don't buy inappropriate material, so why would that be an issue. By effectively banning video games (or any other non dangerous product) they are putting on a shelf that's too high for anyone to reach not just children.
To everyone's joy we were blessed with an adult rating for games, that basically did nothing for anyone over 18 leaving us in the same ditch we were stuck in in the first place. Leaving plenty of games still out of our reach just like the children who could no longer play R rated game (given most would have been MA before hand), so yes, we are being treated like children, and while at 20 I still don't quite feel like an adult, talking down to me and telling me what is an isn't okay for my eyes, leads to anger, and anger leads to hate, and you know the rest.
No comments:
Post a Comment