"Please note, this was an online store listing error. This has been fixed immediately and the classification mark for the title is R18+."
In yet another example of the breathtaking stupidity of Australia's new R18+ age classification, the first game to score the rating - Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 Plus on the PlayStation Vita, is also not rated R18+.
"Now hang on, how can that happen?" You ask. Simple. The retail version of the game is strictly adults-only. But don't despair 15-year-old readers! You can pop on over to the PlayStation Network on the Vita and download exactly the same game without fear that you'll be turned into a psychopathic killer by playing the game. It's MA15+ on the PlayStation Network.
I really, truly hope that I don't need to point out how insane it is that exactly the same game, with exactly the same content and exactly the same levels of violence, gore and heaving female chests can have two different age classifications for such a silly reason as one can be bought in a shop, and the other can be downloaded off a server.
One thing is clear here: If the intention of the R18+ rating is to provide better guidance to consumers about the impact of the games that they are buying, it is failing.
3 comments:
Again, the R18 rating is in its early stages. Give it a little time to settle in. Plus, as insane as some of these ratings are, they're rational compared to Australia's previous stance on violent videogames, such as randomly censoring games like Left 4 Dead because the zombies were *technically* still humans, and banning and illegalising the importation of games like Mortal Kombat.
A couple of strange decisions by the ratings board is nothing compared to being detained at customs, wouldn't you agree?
It depends. On a selfish level, of course I would rather have games then not.
But if you consider the purpose of the age classifications - to prevent minors from accessing potentially harmful material and to provide parents with guidance to whether the child should be playing a specific game - then the current R18+ rating is far worse than simply banning extreme games.
I mean, so far we've seen an R18+ game also be given an MA15+ rating, and we've seen a game that was 13+ suddenly become 18+ for a different version. That's just going to confuse parents and it's not going to prevent children from accessing material that the classifications board actually doesn't think they should access.
And don't even get me started on the inconsistencies than an ancient game that has completely unrealistic blood effects scores an R18+ rating while a game with sexualised violence (Rape scene) and violence so extreme it boarders on goreporn (this is Tomb Raider), gets the MA15+ rating.
Either the classification board wasn't ready to introduce an R18+ rating or it simply doesn't understand games. Either way, it's legitimately broken and if it's not fixed quickly it's going to do more harm than good.
I think you make some good points here. It's true that it's better that a minor not get access to a game which can be a negative influence on their development. I still stand by my belief that the R rating will become more standardised over time, although I guess it is indeed a little broken at the moment.
I haven't played either Tomb Raider or Ninja Gaiden, but if I had to hazard a guess I'd say that the difference between the two is that in Ninja Gaiden the player's avatar is directly causing and is instructed to cause the violence, while in Tomb Raider it happens as a consequence of the player's error. Probably. It could also be anything from the size of the average screen it's occurring on, the amount of questionable material and its frequency to simply playtester bias. There's a lot of difficulties and moral issues when it comes to classifying material, especially games.
Post a Comment