Hotline Miami 2 Refused Classification in Australia - Update

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Shocksplicer:
Jesus Christ this shit makes me want to reenact some choice scenes from the first game at the offices of the Classification Board.
...
I'm just joking.
Mostly.

You're toeing a dangerous line.

Myself, I'm convinced that even if the members of the board were in fact comprised entirely of men(?) with giant animal heads that I still couldn't have any less respect for them than I already do.

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

The game isn't even out yet, but since the first game was basically just one giant mind screw it's entirely possible.

Haerthan:

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Why wouldn't it be? If the artist wants it in, then it should be in. The only way that scene gets changed is through a contract between the developer (artist) and its publisher. Or self-censoring if they want to legally sell it in Australia.

Captcha: California. Hotel California you mean Captcha?

EDIT: DOes that mean that Autumn, a game that has more than just an implied rape scene, will get banned in Australia? Well congratz Australians your government is filled with idiots.

First some context, I'm an Australian and I'm a gamer of many many years.

I'm not going to play devils advocate since I happen to be on side with the Board. If based on their judgement they consider Hotline Miami 2 to be 'too offensive to the normal Australian's sensibilities' based on an extensive set of legal and moral criteria then, honestly that is completely fine.

The artist might have wanted his rape scene (whether it's real or fake within the context of the game is irrelevant, it is still a scene that visually occurs), but the real question is 'does his rape scene have any merit or offer any significant insight or point for discussion within the subject?'

If it does not, then I think that censoring it is completely reasonable. Adults complaining that 'I'm old enough/sensible enough to have rape in my game' is on a certain level, perverse.

Also I should think everyone knows by now that just because a game is R18+ and cannot be bought by minors doesn't mean it won't get played by minors. Stop thinking that 'because I can handle it fine' means that everyone can.

One final point to bring up, if media can influence people positively then it can also influence them negatively.

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

From what I can recall of the demo (didn't play it but saw videos) the context of the scene was that you were an actor in a horror film aiming to depict the events of the first game. If you played the first game you'll likely recall a level where you go to a crooked movie producers house, kill all his gangster buddies, kill him, and then rescue a woman who he had chained to a bed, carrying her unconscious to your car. Apparently the point being made during the movie shoot levels from the second game is that from a certain perspective (that of law enforcement looking over the tapes afterwards) it looked like Jacket just massacred everyone in the house and abducted that woman. A lot of the levels in the first game had cameras all over them, so in the game's world Jacket's killings were highly publicized and no doubt most people thought he was some sort of terrifying serial killer.

As to whether it was necessary? I don't really know, I kind of like the idea of an in universe director turning Jacket's exploits into a shlocky, exploitative horror film. I don't speak for all survivors but I'm personally fine with the scene being in the game, however stupid it was to release a demo of that particular level with no context.

AlphaAscalon:

Haerthan:

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Why wouldn't it be? If the artist wants it in, then it should be in. The only way that scene gets changed is through a contract between the developer (artist) and its publisher. Or self-censoring if they want to legally sell it in Australia.

Captcha: California. Hotel California you mean Captcha?

EDIT: DOes that mean that Autumn, a game that has more than just an implied rape scene, will get banned in Australia? Well congratz Australians your government is filled with idiots.

First some context, I'm an Australian and I'm a gamer of many many years.

I'm not going to play devils advocate since I happen to be on side with the Board. If based on their judgement they consider Hotline Miami 2 to be 'too offensive to the normal Australian's sensibilities' based on an extensive set of legal and moral criteria then, honestly that is completely fine.

The artist might have wanted his rape scene (whether it's real or fake within the context of the game is irrelevant, it is still a scene that visually occurs), but the real question is 'does his rape scene have any merit or offer any significant insight or point for discussion within the subject?'

If it does not, then I think that censoring it is completely reasonable. Adults complaining that 'I'm old enough/sensible enough to have rape in my game' is on a certain level, perverse.

Also I should think everyone knows by now that just because a game is R18+ and cannot be bought by minors doesn't mean it won't get played by minors. Stop thinking that 'because I can handle it fine' means that everyone can.

One final point to bring up, if media can influence people positively then it can also influence them negatively.

Now I don't exactly know the context of Hotline Miami 1 and 2. But I consider EVERY artifact made by humans (or art, since art shows the culture of a people or developer etc) has a point. I do not know Hotline Miami's point, but rest assured by its very existence it has a point. It has a context. Being on the side of the Board is just imposing your moral/legal/religious/etc stance on a people that think differently from you.

The whole thing of "minors can get their hands on R18+ games" just smacks of "think of the children". If parents do their jobs, if the clerks in stores do their jobs, the incidents of minors getting their hands on adult entertainment drastically gets lowered. And this comes from a guy who supports the government in some things. Censorship however is not something I will ever support.

Yes media can influence people negatively, but only that influence. No reputable science has ever found a correlation between violence (physical or sexual) and videogames.

AlphaAscalon:

Haerthan:

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Why wouldn't it be? If the artist wants it in, then it should be in. The only way that scene gets changed is through a contract between the developer (artist) and its publisher. Or self-censoring if they want to legally sell it in Australia.

Captcha: California. Hotel California you mean Captcha?

EDIT: DOes that mean that Autumn, a game that has more than just an implied rape scene, will get banned in Australia? Well congratz Australians your government is filled with idiots.

First some context, I'm an Australian and I'm a gamer of many many years.

I'm not going to play devils advocate since I happen to be on side with the Board. If based on their judgement they consider Hotline Miami 2 to be 'too offensive to the normal Australian's sensibilities' based on an extensive set of legal and moral criteria then, honestly that is completely fine.

The artist might have wanted his rape scene (whether it's real or fake within the context of the game is irrelevant, it is still a scene that visually occurs), but the real question is 'does his rape scene have any merit or offer any significant insight or point for discussion within the subject?'

If it does not, then I think that censoring it is completely reasonable. Adults complaining that 'I'm old enough/sensible enough to have rape in my game' is on a certain level, perverse.

Also I should think everyone knows by now that just because a game is R18+ and cannot be bought by minors doesn't mean it won't get played by minors. Stop thinking that 'because I can handle it fine' means that everyone can.

One final point to bring up, if media can influence people positively then it can also influence them negatively.

No. You are wrong. Who the fuck are you or the grumpy-grandma board to tell me or artists what they can or cannot create or consume? Bugger off.

It could be a rape scene purely for the sake of having a rape scene. It could be the most half-assed, pointless and offensive piece of shit ever depicted. It is still the right of us as fucking people existing on this earth to make and enjoy these FICTIONAL pieces of media. If it were a real fucking snuff/rape film, then yes of course it's wrong! But it's not. It's fake! It's a story! The fact that censorship exists at all for creative work fucking staggers me in its pointlessness and stupidity.

The minors point is moot. It's the parent's responsibility to limit that. If they are letting their child watch 'Chainsaw Fuck 3', that is entirely their fault.

Sure, media affects people negatively and positively. THAT IS WHAT ART AND STORYTELLING IS. Who the hell remembers or enjoys ANYTHING that did not affect them on an emotional level?

You need to pull back and look at the bigger picture.

AlphaAscalon:

Haerthan:

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Why wouldn't it be? If the artist wants it in, then it should be in. The only way that scene gets changed is through a contract between the developer (artist) and its publisher. Or self-censoring if they want to legally sell it in Australia.

Captcha: California. Hotel California you mean Captcha?

EDIT: DOes that mean that Autumn, a game that has more than just an implied rape scene, will get banned in Australia? Well congratz Australians your government is filled with idiots.

First some context, I'm an Australian and I'm a gamer of many many years.

I'm not going to play devils advocate since I happen to be on side with the Board. If based on their judgement they consider Hotline Miami 2 to be 'too offensive to the normal Australian's sensibilities' based on an extensive set of legal and moral criteria then, honestly that is completely fine.

Following that, aren't most Australians against violence and vigilante murder? Isn't it sensible to ban any game which depicts any murder done outside the context of an imminent danger to yourself?

http://vimeo.com/48843153

Here in England, we show scenes like this at any time past the watershed, watchable by anyone of any age, based on the assumption that parents are mature enough to not have their children watching TV past 9PM.

(It's also a really good show, and you should watch it.)

Odd that our once-colony has fallen so far off the freedom of the arts.

Typical poltically correct nonsense: Blood and bodies everywhere, but what gets people whining is "sexual violence".

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Half of the things in Hotline Miami aren't really necessary.

Though to be fair I'm not sure what the point of having a fake out like that is, but the devs say it's an important part of the character's arc in universe, so hopefully we'll see it go somewhere. I trust them to pull that off.

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Was the one in Pulp Fiction necessary?

Genocidicles:

It's a digital game. They're not making any physical copies. So banning it like this implies they're banning it from being sold on a digital storefront.

I'm sure there's a way to get access to another country's steam store with a proxy or whatever, but still.

This would prevent it from being sold on PSN and XBL, not sure if Steam is affected but possibly. That said GoG, Ozgameshop, Gamersgate, GMG etc are not. It's a weird system, as I said it's easy enough to get around, to the point that I've done it without even realizing with some games.

Haerthan:
With the chance to sound like a broken record:

This is censorship. Not what Target did.

So yea.

Err not really, censorship would ban the ownership or viewing of it, the game itself is not banned, just the sale of it in our stores.

Trishbot:
Don't you just love governments telling adults what type of harmless entertainment they can and can't enjoy?

Well they aren't saying you can't enjoy it, it just can't be sold here. Minor but important difference.

Is the social and political landscape of Australia really this conservative, like with Japan and how they still force all pornography to apply that annoying mosaic censor on everything? Or is this just a small committee of appointed bureaucrats exploiting their position to push their personal views with public apathy preventing them from making an issue of it?

Alma Mare:

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Was the one in Pulp Fiction necessary?

The first time I watched any of Pulp Fiction was watching from the car crash to the end, on a hotel TV with standard cable (cuts out all of the Gimp and thrusting, with only the gags and pantless ending implying the rape).

When I watched the unedited version, the scene in Pulp Fiction had a much larger impact. While you could make an argument that it's not as important as other elements (Willis still rescues Marcellus in the edited version, giving a motivation), it takes away much of the film's teeth. The point isn't whether an individual element is necessary, but whether or not its removal dampens the whole.


I certainly hope the review board goes back on this, because if films like Pulp Fiction, Serbian Film, Human Centipede 1, or Funny Games are released in Australia, then this review board seems to be pointless singling out and hampering the video games medium.

I love how the people deciding whether something is too offensive for Australians or not is a group of out of touch old people who have probably never played the game before.

I mean, what's the point of an R18 rating if you never use it?

My favorite update is where the developer said that Australians should pirate their game.

RicoADF:

Haerthan:
With the chance to sound like a broken record:

This is censorship. Not what Target did.

So yea.

Err not really, censorship would ban the ownership or viewing of it, the game itself is not banned, just the sale of it in our stores.

That still counts as censorship, they just won't come into your house to check your harddrive for it. The government,a legal authority, is telling retailers or digital storefronts active in Australia not to stock it.

I'm willing to be these same government functionaries were probably part of the Je Sui Charlie! bandwagon a few days previous.

On topic: It's a sad day for humanity when grown adults take it upon themselves to decide what entertainment content other grown adults should be allowed to experience.

Off topic: Laughing my ass off at the fact that an official statement by video game professionals should include the phrase 'thrusting actions', how can anyone be expected to read that and keep a straight face.

Looks like I managed to annoy some people before I left for work this morning.

As clarification on my support of the Australian Board of Classification, I support their decision based on their criteria. They are a regulatory body doing it's job.

The problem with internet argument/discussion is that it's incredibly hard to frame the issue. Is their decision right based on their criteria? Is the criteria correct/sufficient? Is the depiction of sexual violence and rape necessary for the plot of Hotline Miami 2? Are depictions of sexual violence and rape handled properly in video games? What is the proper way to handle those depictions?

Which one are we discussing? In what order? Etc etc. It's a rabbit hole that is far easier to navigate when speaking instead of typing. I know that my hands have never been able to keep up with the pace of my thoughts.

Haerthan:

AlphaAscalon:

Haerthan:

Why wouldn't it be? If the artist wants it in, then it should be in. The only way that scene gets changed is through a contract between the developer (artist) and its publisher. Or self-censoring if they want to legally sell it in Australia.

Captcha: California. Hotel California you mean Captcha?

EDIT: DOes that mean that Autumn, a game that has more than just an implied rape scene, will get banned in Australia? Well congratz Australians your government is filled with idiots.

First some context, I'm an Australian and I'm a gamer of many many years.

I'm not going to play devils advocate since I happen to be on side with the Board. If based on their judgement they consider Hotline Miami 2 to be 'too offensive to the normal Australian's sensibilities' based on an extensive set of legal and moral criteria then, honestly that is completely fine.

The artist might have wanted his rape scene (whether it's real or fake within the context of the game is irrelevant, it is still a scene that visually occurs), but the real question is 'does his rape scene have any merit or offer any significant insight or point for discussion within the subject?'

If it does not, then I think that censoring it is completely reasonable. Adults complaining that 'I'm old enough/sensible enough to have rape in my game' is on a certain level, perverse.

Also I should think everyone knows by now that just because a game is R18+ and cannot be bought by minors doesn't mean it won't get played by minors. Stop thinking that 'because I can handle it fine' means that everyone can.

One final point to bring up, if media can influence people positively then it can also influence them negatively.

Now I don't exactly know the context of Hotline Miami 1 and 2. But I consider EVERY artifact made by humans (or art, since art shows the culture of a people or developer etc) has a point. I do not know Hotline Miami's point, but rest assured by its very existence it has a point. It has a context. Being on the side of the Board is just imposing your moral/legal/religious/etc stance on a people that think differently from you.

The whole thing of "minors can get their hands on R18+ games" just smacks of "think of the children". If parents do their jobs, if the clerks in stores do their jobs, the incidents of minors getting their hands on adult entertainment drastically gets lowered. And this comes from a guy who supports the government in some things. Censorship however is not something I will ever support.

Yes media can influence people negatively, but only that influence. No reputable science has ever found a correlation between violence (physical or sexual) and videogames.

The artist can have his rape scene. He's within his rights to have one in his creative work. I'm sure he has a point. I would never support anyone anywhere in taking away a creators rights to create what he wants to.

However. The direction I'm coming from is not one about personal consumption. It's about a creator with a product wanting to advertise and sell that product in a country. Does that creative work have material that is culturally or morally significant? Does is have material that is culturally or morally offensive?

If a creative work is offensive to a group of people they have every right to deny the creator rights to advertise and sell that work in their space.

// I don't want to kick the hornets nest that is children and media consumption. I should have left that out earlier.

I wouldn't expect scientific evidence to prove or disprove a cause and effect relationship between consumption of media and actions taken. It's not as simple as 'Action A' results in 'Outcome B'.

I think that looking for correlation is a better approach. Violence in someones past, consumption of alcohol, having a terrible boss at work, watching violent media for entertainment. These things don't exist in a vacuum isolated from one another. If you live your day to day life in a place where violence is common place or permeates multiple facets of your life (work, study, recreation, etc). Then wouldn't it be best to examine everything someone does or consumes?

You said that media can 'only influence people.' To what degree then? What else is there? Yes media can't make someone take an action. It can tell them that action exists, that people have thought about it, that people have undertaken it, etc.

Digi7:

AlphaAscalon:

Haerthan:

Why wouldn't it be? If the artist wants it in, then it should be in. The only way that scene gets changed is through a contract between the developer (artist) and its publisher. Or self-censoring if they want to legally sell it in Australia.

Captcha: California. Hotel California you mean Captcha?

EDIT: DOes that mean that Autumn, a game that has more than just an implied rape scene, will get banned in Australia? Well congratz Australians your government is filled with idiots.

First some context, I'm an Australian and I'm a gamer of many many years.

I'm not going to play devils advocate since I happen to be on side with the Board. If based on their judgement they consider Hotline Miami 2 to be 'too offensive to the normal Australian's sensibilities' based on an extensive set of legal and moral criteria then, honestly that is completely fine.

The artist might have wanted his rape scene (whether it's real or fake within the context of the game is irrelevant, it is still a scene that visually occurs), but the real question is 'does his rape scene have any merit or offer any significant insight or point for discussion within the subject?'

If it does not, then I think that censoring it is completely reasonable. Adults complaining that 'I'm old enough/sensible enough to have rape in my game' is on a certain level, perverse.

Also I should think everyone knows by now that just because a game is R18+ and cannot be bought by minors doesn't mean it won't get played by minors. Stop thinking that 'because I can handle it fine' means that everyone can.

One final point to bring up, if media can influence people positively then it can also influence them negatively.

No. You are wrong. Who the fuck are you or the grumpy-grandma board to tell me or artists what they can or cannot create or consume? Bugger off.

It could be a rape scene purely for the sake of having a rape scene. It could be the most half-assed, pointless and offensive piece of shit ever depicted. It is still the right of us as fucking people existing on this earth to make and enjoy these FICTIONAL pieces of media. If it were a real fucking snuff/rape film, then yes of course it's wrong! But it's not. It's fake! It's a story! The fact that censorship exists at all for creative work fucking staggers me in its pointlessness and stupidity.

The minors point is moot. It's the parent's responsibility to limit that. If they are letting their child watch 'Chainsaw Fuck 3', that is entirely their fault.

Sure, media affects people negatively and positively. THAT IS WHAT ART AND STORYTELLING IS. Who the hell remembers or enjoys ANYTHING that did not affect them on an emotional level?

You need to pull back and look at the bigger picture.

I was stating an opinion. So my opinion is not wrong, thanks.

Did I say anywhere that the developers of Hotline Miami 2 can't create their video game how they like? Did I say anywhere that you as an individual can't consume Hotline Miami 2? No, thanks.

If you want to understand where I was originally coming from, please read the rest of my post above.

mrdude2010:
I love how the people deciding whether something is too offensive for Australians or not is a group of out of touch old people who have probably never played the game before.

I mean, what's the point of an R18 rating if you never use it?

The ACB website provides details on 4 of the, I think 8 board members. I won't link it because I'm not sure if that's allowed. The 4 are 3 women and 1 man between the ages 45 and 50. Most are University graduates and all have extensive histories of interacting with and being in charge of people.

Based on what I could find they don't play the game. They do have the game plot explained to them and they review footage of any contentious material.

The R18+ rating exists for any media (not just games) that fit into it's guidelines. All of which can be found on Wikipedia on the Australian Classification Board page.

Nurb:
Typical poltically correct nonsense: Blood and bodies everywhere, but what gets people whining is "sexual violence".

That's probably because Sexual Violence is different to Violence both under Law and in general.

Baresark:
My favorite update is where the developer said that Australians should pirate their game.

Being provocative gets them more publicity.

Redflash:
On topic: It's a sad day for humanity when grown adults take it upon themselves to decide what entertainment content other grown adults should be allowed to experience.

Off topic: Laughing my ass off at the fact that an official statement by video game professionals should include the phrase 'thrusting actions', how can anyone be expected to read that and keep a straight face.

And just because: Then I guess humanity has been sad since we stopped being nomadic.

Damn, my heart goes out to you Australian gamers. Soon all you'll get to play will be like block-pushing puzzle games. At least until the Australian government decides that the boxes could have feelings and we just don't know it ala companion cube, at which point it will be decided the boxes could potentially identify as female, and thus the game promotes violence against women.

I'd like to hear how this isn't censorship tho, i'm sure the SJWs have some excuse prepared to explain how this isn't censorship and how this shit totes isn't influence by a social justice agenda whatsoever.

Whatever, maybe this is a good thing. Maybe australia can just end up being the nanny social justice island and all the censor-happy nervous wrecks can go live there while everyone else gets to live free of their over-sensitive crap.

AlphaAscalon:
snip

>Did I say anywhere that you as an individual can't consume Hotline Miami 2? No, thanks.

Yes, you pretty much did.

If they live in australia, you have. You have said you support the decision to deny them access to the game. You have exactly said that they as an individual can't consume it.

I also like how you say this is how

>If a creative work is offensive to a group of people they have every right to deny the creator rights to advertise and sell that work in their space.

When you've said yourself that it's a small group of 50-somethings, and i very much doubt these individuals were elected, so no, it's not "a group of people in their space", it's a tiny group of (pretty sure they're not elected) people telling an entire country how to live.

This may blow your mind, so hold on to your seat, but get this.

Adults can act perverse if they want to. They can consume perverse material if that is what they desire.

You can live in your boring, bleak little sterilized world if you want to, but when you, or anyone else, wants to impose that outside your bubble, you better make damn sure everyone in that area is on board, and i doubt these old close-minded farts are sending out a census to make sure everyone is on board. I don't care if "that's their job", their job is shit. Nazi's were just "doing their job" too, but that doesn't mean the job is good, they should keep doing it, or that they're blameless.

It doesn't matter what you personally think of the material artistically either. You don't have to buy the game if you don't want to. Isn't that an amazing thought. You don't have to consume any media you don't want to. If you don't like a game, don't' buy it, don't play it, don't enter an area where you might be exposed to it. That's totally your right to do that, but it's also anyone else right to seek that shit if they want to. I mean i don't like indian food, but i'm not supporting legislation to burn down every Indian restaurant in america, because i'm not a psychotic megalomaniac.

AlphaAscalon:
[snip]

I am an Australian as well.

I do not agree with the ban, after watching the 'rape scene'. [link in OP]

insaninater:

AlphaAscalon:
snip

>Did I say anywhere that you as an individual can't consume Hotline Miami 2? No, thanks.

Yes, you pretty much did.

If they live in australia, you have. You have said you support the decision to deny them access to the game. You have exactly said that they as an individual can't consume it.

I also like how you say this is how

>If a creative work is offensive to a group of people they have every right to deny the creator rights to advertise and sell that work in their space.

When you've said yourself that it's a small group of 50-somethings, and i very much doubt these individuals were elected, so no, it's not "a group of people in their space", it's a tiny group of (pretty sure they're not elected) people telling an entire country how to live.

This may blow your mind, so hold on to your seat, but get this.

Adults can act perverse if they want to. They can consume perverse material if that is what they desire.

You can live in your boring, bleak little sterilized world if you want to, but when you, or anyone else, wants to impose that outside your bubble, you better make damn sure everyone in that area is on board, and i doubt these old close-minded farts are sending out a census to make sure everyone is on board. I don't care if "that's their job", their job is shit. Nazi's were just "doing their job" too, but that doesn't mean the job is good, they should keep doing it, or that they're blameless.

It doesn't matter what you personally think of the material artistically either. You don't have to buy the game if you don't want to. Isn't that an amazing thought. You don't have to consume any media you don't want to. If you don't like a game, don't' buy it, don't play it, don't enter an area where you might be exposed to it. That's totally your right to do that, but it's also anyone else right to seek that shit if they want to. I mean i don't like indian food, but i'm not supporting legislation to burn down every Indian restaurant in america, because i'm not a psychotic megalomaniac.

I might just take the time to reply to some of your points but first.

Looks like you have:

Talked to me like I'm an idiot, assumed everything about me that you need to in order to frame your 'argument', compared the ACB to the Nazi Party and insinuated that I'm a psychotic megalomaniac.

Wow man. You have lost all credibility. It's hilarious.

Instead of replying to the small points of legitimate discussion that are lost in that chunk of pointless vitriol.

Allow me to blow your mind. The studio that developed Hotline Miami 2 defeated their own application.

The criteria under the R18+ classification states that:
Sexual violence is permitted only to the extent that they are "necessary to the narrative" and "not exploitative" or "not shown in detail".

One of the first screens presented to the player upon starting Hotline Miami 2 is one where they are warned of the explicit content and then given an option to 'Turn off' said scenes. This is an immediate admission that these scenes are not 'necessary to the narrative'.

AlphaAscalon:
The direction I'm coming from is not one about personal consumption. It's about a creator with a product wanting to advertise and sell that product in a country. Does that creative work have material that is culturally or morally significant? Does is have material that is culturally or morally offensive?

If a creative work is offensive to a group of people they have every right to deny the creator rights to advertise and sell that work in their space.

I respect your support and understanding for the position of the board (definitely not a fun job), but unless their criteria in this case is actual law then I can't support their decision. Their only criteria for refusing to assign a rating in cases like these should be whether or not the work in question violates Australian law. If it's not, then it should be available to purchase for legal adults. If the people find it distasteful or perverse then they won't buy it, and stores are free to not stock it if they wish, but that is not for the ratings board to decide.

They are a part of the government and as such they are not supposed to be deciding what art gets into the country based on whether or not they find it offensive, or based on the assumption that their morals are representative. This is the government regulating a form of free expression out of their market based on the decisions of a group of people that the public, and therefore the source of culture, has little-to-no say in.

EDIT:

AlphaAscalon:
One of the first screens presented to the player upon starting Hotline Miami 2 is one where they are warned of the explicit content and then given an option to 'Turn off' said scenes. This is an immediate admission that these scenes are not 'necessary to the narrative'.

This might just be me being argumentative, but that's not inherently true. It's entirely possible that the developers give you that option but that it makes the game incomprehensible. Hotline Miami the First was well known for being confusing and hard to follow, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that they'd just take that and run with it.

shirkbot:

AlphaAscalon:
The direction I'm coming from is not one about personal consumption. It's about a creator with a product wanting to advertise and sell that product in a country. Does that creative work have material that is culturally or morally significant? Does is have material that is culturally or morally offensive?

If a creative work is offensive to a group of people they have every right to deny the creator rights to advertise and sell that work in their space.

I respect your support and understanding for the position of the board (definitely not a fun job), but unless their criteria in this case is actual law then I can't support their decision. Their only criteria for refusing to assign a rating in cases like these should be whether or not the work in question violates Australian law. If it's not, then it should be available to purchase for legal adults. If the people find it distasteful or perverse then they won't buy it, and stores are free to not stock it if they wish, but that is not for the ratings board to decide.

They are a part of the government and as such they are not supposed to be deciding what art gets into the country based on whether or not they find it offensive, or based on the assumption that their morals are representative. This is the government regulating a form of free expression out of their market based on the decisions of a group of people that the public, and therefore the source of culture, has little-to-no say in.

Thank you. You know why.

The main reason I initially set myself in this position was because after reading this thread this morning I saw almost an entire page of people venting and blaming things. No one was even trying to discuss this issue and its complexities, let alone the actual problems with the ACB itself.

I can't say whether the classification criteria is specifically in-line with the law. I haven't gone seeking information on that point. I suppose I'm choosing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

From a personal standpoint I'm reluctant to agree with a completely libertarian approach to game classification. Simply saying 'anything goes' and not considering potential consequences is irresponsible. The impact media has on human beings is not something that can be taken lightly. Society isn't so neat.

Of course I support civil rights and liberties in general, I hope no one else mistakes that.

Where I disagree is that the ACB is a part of Government. They do decide on Film and Video Games. That's why it exists. You can't have a census every time a new piece of media puts in an application. Taking a mixed selection of educated experienced citizens to act in the peoples' stead is what governance is.

I do agree with you that the public having no say in who these people are and how they operate is wrong. There does need to be reform of the ACB and the classification process in general.

I'd like to see a separation of Film and Video game classification personally.

EDIT:

AlphaAscalon:
One of the first screens presented to the player upon starting Hotline Miami 2 is one where they are warned of the explicit content and then given an option to 'Turn off' said scenes. This is an immediate admission that these scenes are not 'necessary to the narrative'.

This might just be me being argumentative, but that's not inherently true. It's entirely possible that the developers give you that option but that it makes the game incomprehensible. Hotline Miami the First was well known for being confusing and hard to follow, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that they'd just take that and run with it.[/quote]

Eheh, I see your point. I wouldn't say you're being argumentative. Though I would say I was getting fairly heated in that response.

Or you could consider it as a way for people who may be triggered by such events to skip the scene. Sure the game won't make as much sense but at least they look out for the viewer. The fact that a pixel game had a character take their pants down and was the reason for a ban makes no logical sense.

Not only did the board lie but because they only get shown an out of context video and some paragraphs to explain said scene means they can never make a proper decision. This is coming from a country where drug use in a game is liable to get it banned. Honestly, these are adult games. If I can watch 50 Shades of Grey, Nymphomaniac, Pulp Fiction and a plethora of other content with even worse scenes I should be able to do the same with games. Sure there's the "connection" between the player and the content but what is different in its effect on the individual or public compared to cinemas showing films with people injecting themselves or getting flogged?

The board should be made of people who were not born in the 60s and 70s but from people who have actually been around and PLAYED games.
Hell, I could suggest having a board made of 3 females and 1 male creates biased opinion. Long story short, when the rest of the world is fine with this content and allows it, what makes Australia a special little snowflake?

Slightly off topic, if I bought the collectors edition would I be able to activate the game here in Australia or would I need to have my American friend activate it on my account from America? (instead of using a VPN)

wildstyle96:
Or you could consider it as a way for people who may be triggered by such events to skip the scene. Sure the game won't make as much sense but at least they look out for the viewer. The fact that a pixel game had a character take their pants down and was the reason for a ban makes no logical sense.

Not only did the board lie but because they only get shown an out of context video and some paragraphs to explain said scene means they can never make a proper decision. This is coming from a country where drug use in a game is liable to get it banned. Honestly, these are adult games. If I can watch 50 Shades of Grey, Nymphomaniac, Pulp Fiction and a plethora of other content with even worse scenes I should be able to do the same with games. Sure there's the "connection" between the player and the content but what is different in its effect on the individual or public compared to cinemas showing films with people injecting themselves or getting flogged?

The board should be made of people who were not born in the 60s and 70s but from people who have actually been around and PLAYED games.
Hell, I could suggest having a board made of 3 females and 1 male creates biased opinion. Long story short, when the rest of the world is fine with this content and allows it, what makes Australia a special little snowflake?

Slightly off topic, if I bought the collectors edition would I be able to activate the game here in Australia or would I need to have my American friend activate it on my account from America? (instead of using a VPN)

I can see your points. It leads back into the idea that reform of the board is needed.

I disagree with the comparison between film and video games though. When you watch a film you as the audience connect with what you see on some level. The same can be said of video games however there is also the addition of control. You aren't just the audience anymore you are interacting with the world of the game.

I can't speak for anyone else on what the difference in but for myself I can sit and watch stuff like the scenes in Pulp Fiction and not be offended. It might make me a bit uncomfortable.

If I was then asked by a game to command my avatar to sexually assault someone in order to continue the story I'd say 'are you joking? no way in hell.' There would be more context than that but still.

It stops being you seeing an actor doing something by a script and starts being 'you' giving permission.

// To your off topic, I think you can still activate it if you got an international key. I've gotten international keys for games before and had no issues. But then it's a refused classification game so you might be better off getting your friend to do it.

AlphaAscalon:

insaninater:

AlphaAscalon:
snip

>Did I say anywhere that you as an individual can't consume Hotline Miami 2? No, thanks.

Yes, you pretty much did.

If they live in australia, you have. You have said you support the decision to deny them access to the game. You have exactly said that they as an individual can't consume it.

I also like how you say this is how

>If a creative work is offensive to a group of people they have every right to deny the creator rights to advertise and sell that work in their space.

When you've said yourself that it's a small group of 50-somethings, and i very much doubt these individuals were elected, so no, it's not "a group of people in their space", it's a tiny group of (pretty sure they're not elected) people telling an entire country how to live.

This may blow your mind, so hold on to your seat, but get this.

Adults can act perverse if they want to. They can consume perverse material if that is what they desire.

You can live in your boring, bleak little sterilized world if you want to, but when you, or anyone else, wants to impose that outside your bubble, you better make damn sure everyone in that area is on board, and i doubt these old close-minded farts are sending out a census to make sure everyone is on board. I don't care if "that's their job", their job is shit. Nazi's were just "doing their job" too, but that doesn't mean the job is good, they should keep doing it, or that they're blameless.

It doesn't matter what you personally think of the material artistically either. You don't have to buy the game if you don't want to. Isn't that an amazing thought. You don't have to consume any media you don't want to. If you don't like a game, don't' buy it, don't play it, don't enter an area where you might be exposed to it. That's totally your right to do that, but it's also anyone else right to seek that shit if they want to. I mean i don't like indian food, but i'm not supporting legislation to burn down every Indian restaurant in america, because i'm not a psychotic megalomaniac.

I might just take the time to reply to some of your points but first.

Looks like you have:

Talked to me like I'm an idiot, assumed everything about me that you need to in order to frame your 'argument', compared the ACB to the Nazi Party and insinuated that I'm a psychotic megalomaniac.

Wow man. You have lost all credibility. It's hilarious.

Instead of replying to the small points of legitimate discussion that are lost in that chunk of pointless vitriol.

Allow me to blow your mind. The studio that developed Hotline Miami 2 defeated their own application.

The criteria under the R18+ classification states that:
Sexual violence is permitted only to the extent that they are "necessary to the narrative" and "not exploitative" or "not shown in detail".

One of the first screens presented to the player upon starting Hotline Miami 2 is one where they are warned of the explicit content and then given an option to 'Turn off' said scenes. This is an immediate admission that these scenes are not 'necessary to the narrative'.

And you think that a group of old farts who've never played the game know whether or not the scene is necessary moreso than the creators of the game?

Please, tell me how that works. Explicit content filters are on lots of games that still have things like murder and sex and stuff in their games. People have found ways around this. The scenes may still be necessary, even if it's possible to portray them slightly differently, like showing only various reactions to someone getting raped, or only hearing it without seeing it, or a movie using it's cuts to film around something graphic, but still have the message of what's going on very clear. Giving the option to frame things this way is a nice courtesy for those who may be sensitive to it, but that doesn't mean the content itself has changed much, only the way it's framed. Of course, i don't know, i haven't played it, but neither has the board that banned it, so i guess that hardly matters, as my uninformed opinion of it is just as relevant as their uninformed opinion of it.

I never said you were a psychotic megalomaniac, only that your stance is one that would support psychotic-megalomaniac-like activities. I can eat meat, wolves eat meat, so when i'm eating meat, i am engaging in wolf-like activity, but that does not make me a wolf.

I also only compared the ACB to nazis in order to make the point that "doing your job" or "working for the goverment" does not give you a free pass to violate the rights of others without being wrong or needing to be stopped, but i guess if all you want to do is shut your brain off when you hear the word nazi, that's your choice, but that makes you loose credibility for turning your brain off, not me for making the point that appeal to authority is actually a fallacy, and using the nazis as an example, that's called citing an example.

That's really my issue with it. I really don't care who is doing their job, or what bullshit laws are being followed in the nanny state. Grown adults are being denied access to media based on what some board of old shits thinks is appropriate, not based on who's actually getting hurt (and i mean that in a real way, like filming somebody actually getting murdered, not in a "the way the media shapes our perception" hurt someone, actually hurt someone). That's wrong. Period. I don't care how many "think of the children"s or "greater good"s or "doing their job"s you throw around. It doesn't change that very simple fact.

Haha, oh wow... they actually really did just straight up lie in their report. This is hilarious.

A government organisation that has this little regard for their work is just laughable. I feel sorry for the Australians.

GTA was originally banned not because you could kill hookers but because you got your money back when you did. Rockstar changed the amount the player got back and then it was allowed back into the country. Witcher 2 was cencered for two sex scenes, not because they were too graphic but because you received them as payment.

This is purely my opinion and nothing more:

I suspect that the OFLC is not run by old men who don't understand games, I suspect that it is ran buy ideological youthful feminists and SJW's. Doesn't this sound like the kind of issues that a modern day feminists would have a problem with. Since the begging the OFLC has been banning games and blaming Michal Atkinson for it. (Blaming a white old man) I could be wrong of course but I think it should be looked into.

Oh boy am I glad that our glorious OFLC guardians were able to prevent this filthy trash from entering our fair utopia of a country and protect the dull and impressionable minds of our adult population from corruption.

Hail OFLC!

Magmarock:
This is purely my opinion and nothing more:

I suspect that the OFLC is not run by old men who don't understand games, I suspect that it is ran buy ideological youthful feminists and SJW's. Doesn't this sound like the kind of issues that a modern day feminists would have a problem with. Since the begging the OFLC has been banning games and blaming Michal Atkinson for it. (Blaming a white old man) I could be wrong of course but I think it should be looked into.

insaninater:
And you think that a group of old farts who've never played the game know whether or not the scene is necessary moreso than the creators of the game?

You know, we don't have to speculate about this. The board has no secrets about who they are: http://www.classification.gov.au/About/BoardMembers/Pages/Classification-Board-Members.aspx

The average age of the board members (with the exception of one of which the age wasn't specified) is 46. The oldest person being 60 and the youngest 33. There are slightly more women than men on the board. Pretty much all of them are middle to upper class have some form of higher education (bachelors degrees mostly). They have various jobs like hair dressers, artists, militairy jobs and other things. They seem like fairly normal people to me, and while I think they are dead wrong about what they are doing here, blaming their age, gender or other things isn't helpful. People of all ages and genders have various stances on how much freedom of expression should be allowed and these people are in my opinion, way too far on the oppressive side. That is however their failing, not that of their age or gender or whatever. That is of course not mentioning the fact that they are probably following (admittedly vague) guidelines that come from higher up the chain.

On topic, I hope Australians can convince their more oppresive countrymen to stop banning games from being sold. Hopefully they can change the law so that games aren't banned merely for upsetting peoples feelings.

PS: I'm not posting this so you can go and harrass these people. Harrassment is morally wrong and won't solve anything. I'm posting it so people can get a picture of who the boardmembers are so they can stop throwing unsubstantiated claims about age and gender around.

Alma Mare:

CaitSeith:
Just to play the devil's advocate: was that rape scene really necessary?

Was the one in Pulp Fiction necessary?

Was Pulp Fiction's classification refused in Australia?

Sexual Violence and Drugs having benefits will get ya banned here, not really as bad as Germany's blood-iphobia, if you're too lazy to look into other countries rating boards/trends then you only have yourselves to blame. Censorship in a way but by the sounds of it, it doesn't exactly add to the game in any meaningful way, so forgive me if it just strikes me as a developer really not wanting to redo a scene (that'll cost them money to redo) rather then being an affront to the games "artistic intergrity".

Sucks for those that want to legitimately support the developer, but I'd only start the sequeling once the Goverment gets ISP's to go along with the pirate crackdown scheme they're wanting to implement. N'yes Tony, slip that one in under the guise of stopping terrorists and the evil boat people, but you and I know it's to keep Rupert and his friends happy.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.