Early in October, gamers rejoiced when the ban was lifted on the soon-to-be-released sequel to Australia’s favorite zombie video game, Left 4 Dead 2. Prior to this, Left 4 Dead 2 was refused classification because the three-person outfit running Australia’s entire Review Board were perturbed by all the virtual blood, guts, and gore on display. Valve, the game’s developers resubmitted a version of the game that had all the violence taken out so even 15 year olds could play.
Good for 15 year olds. But what about the 18 year olds? Or 30 year olds? What about the people who are mature and old enough to know that violence in reality is never a good thing, but could be fantasized in the realms of entertainment as a cathartic outlet for our pent-up animalistic rage?
Whilst it is admirable that these three valiant defendants of all that is pure and innocent in the world look out for the little ones who may supposedly turn to guns and drugs because of video games, they are in turn preventing the possibility for games to mature as an expressive artistic medium, and is costing developers and consumers alike. Furthermore, the Review Board appears illogical in the public’s eyes when just a year earlier, they allowed the release of the first Left 4 Dead with little fanfare, and no censorship. That game was far more violent than the censored version of Left 4 Dead 2.
The recommendation this writer suggests, something the public has demanded for so long, is the introduction of an R18+ classification on top of the current MA15+. In doing so, the children can be protected and the adults can have their thought-provoking, uncensored life-in-art video games fun.
But the final boss to be defeated, standing between all Australian video gamers and their ultimate prize of gaming freedom is the South-Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson.
He is the sole obstacle, the last of Australia’s attorneys-general deliberately holding out against a necessary unanimous decision to implement a new classification system that includes the R18+ rating.
His argument for opposing the R18+ rating is one that has been heard before all over the world by paranoids such as the infamous and now-disbarred attorney Jack Thompson. Atkinson argues violent games “increase the risk of children and vulnerable adults being exposed to damaging images and messages” and that as video games are “interactive… they have a much greater influence than viewing a movie does.”
Sounds familiar? That’s because every conservative government/regime/tyrant makes video games scapegoats to the violence in their countries/state/district. The Columbine shooters were avid fans of violent computer games, and just recently, a drunken father in Texas allegedly got into a spat with his son over a missing video game and shot him.
The argument to prove the video game dissenters wrong is that countless scientists, psychologists, and sociologists around the world have worked to prove whether video games provokes violence, and all results conclude that there is no empirical evidence to suggest it does. In fact, evidence has shown that there were deeper issues at stake in each of these horror stories; for instance, lest we forget, the Texan father was drunk at the time he killed his son, had prior criminal history, and has been abusive before. The Columbine shooters were under the influence of drugs that brought about their psychotic tendencies. Also, maybe, just maybe, the availability of guns to anybody in America might have something to do with all this death. To simply say that games are the root problem would be shallow and illogical.
But returning to the main argument, the absence of an R18+ rating would not be desirable, even to Atkinson, because logically, such a classification would indeed shield young minds from all the violent, sex-crazed, drug-fuelled material. In this year alone, those 15 year olds we seek to protect have been playing games which involve shooting innocent civilians in the head or engaging in unsavory activities like drug-running – all quite legally. Because of the current rating system, teenagers could get their hands on mature titles like Grand Theft Auto 4 and Fallout 3, exactly the opposite of what Atkinson wants.
This is what can be predicted to happen by having an R18+ rating: for one, we won’t be the butt of jokes from other countries as to our backwardness; two, people have to show identification to verify age upon purchase of games thereby keeping the kids away from the adult stuff. And if Atkinson worries that in homes the games will end up in the hands of the children of gamers anyway, there is such a thing as a “parental lock” to deny them access. Finally, everyone will be happy to play video games the way they were made to be played.
One thing good has come out of this Left 4 Dead 2 debacle though; people are talking about the classification issue again. And hopefully Atkinson will see that imposing his personal view on an entire country, no matter how noble the intentions, is an abuse of his position. This writer waits with bated breath for the day when positive change comes, until then, there are zombies to kill. All this anger at the Classification Review Board needs to be let out somewhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment