Michael Atkinson just doesn’t get it. The South Australian attorney general has penned a letter explaining his staunch opposition to a R 18+ rating for computer games in the country, which can be read at Grow up Australia, a site in support of a classification above the current MA 15+ marking. In the piece, Atkinson defends the current structure, even though it “restricts adult liberty to a small degree.” He opines on what he believes to be a troubling amount of violence in society, and the need to protect children and “vulnerable” adults from excessive gore. His concerns are certainly admirable, I’ll give Atkinson that.

However, it is not his duty – nor that of the government – to act as a dam for adult content.

The Office of Film and Literature Classification exists to provide consumers with the information they need to make informed decisions regarding the content they – and/or their loved ones – consume.

Offensive material should be deemed so based on the discretion of consumers, not the beliefs of individual politicians. Under the law, the current classification system can’t be altered unless every attorney general agrees to such action. Therefore, it only takes one negative vote to stall the entire process. Atkinson has been vocal in his opposition, a position he has held since entering office in 2002. In a previous News.com.au report, Victorian Attorney General Rob Hulls cited the inconsistency between the ratings for films and computer games, indicating a desire for change.

I too find it ludicrous that the OFLC has an R 18+ rating for films, but not for games. Both are visual, storytelling mediums capable of depicting gruesome violence, and as such, should be held to the same standards. In fact, despite technological advancements in the gaming industry, films are still far more realistic, as they actually feature real beings.

Sure, games are interactive, but it’s pretty easy to distinguish a virtual world from the real thing. To play a game, you have to grip a controller, and stare at a screen – television, computer or handheld. You also have to turn the system on in the first place. Besides, any individual could walk into a kitchen, pick up a knife, and imitate actions seen in a movie.

Violence will persist as long as weapons are readily available, and people are capable of hate, envy and other negative emotions. Banning violent games won’t stop that. Violence has been around for ages, whereas video games are a creation of the 20th century. Games don’t train people to kill. In fact, they can actually be therapeutic, offering a conduit to ease tension and release stress.

In a News.com.au poll introduced earlier this month, 85 percent of the 2,701 respondents showed support for the introduction of an R 18+ rating for computer games. It is important to note that the poll – as I glean – was not restricted to Aussies, so the results could have been inflated by individuals residing outside of the country. Still though, it would be reasonable to assume that most respondents were indeed Australian citizens, given that the poll was hosted on an Australian news site.

Those sampled only represent a small portion of the entire population, but the ratio of “yes” to “no” is astounding. A landslide, if you will.

Atkinson points out that a small number – 11 since January 2007 by his count – have been refused classification under the current system, the latest of which was Valve’s Left 4 Dead 2. Valve and Electronic Arts lost their appeal of the original ruling, and will instead release an edited version of the game, sans decapitation, dismemberment and wound detail.

In Australia, games that are refused classification are essentially banned from the market, forcing developers and publishers to either cut objectionable material, or appeal the original ruling. As a precaution to protect the street date, Valve submitted a sanitized version of L4D2 while its appeal was under consideration.

Atkinson cites a few studies that connect violent games to aggressive and apathetic behaviors, all while ignoring research that does not support his ideals. Games don’t need to be excessively violent or laden with drug use and sex to provide fun, engrossing and emotional experiences. However, as an artistic and expressive medium, interactive entertainment often attempts to simulate real life, depicting both the virtues and ills of society.

The real world isn’t all sunshine and lollipops; games shouldn’t be either. Admittedly, some titles go behind what one would expect to see in life, but an adult gamer should have the option to play an uncut version of L4D2, and people like Michael Atkinson shouldn’t stand in the way.

Sources: Grow up Australia via GamePolitics, News.com.au via GamePolitics, News.com.au via GamePolitics

Popularity: 1% [?]