Slashdot Mirror


Left 4 Dead 2 Banned In Australia

An anonymous reader writes "According to Australia's Office of Film and Literature Classification, Left 4 Dead 2's content exceeds that allowable for an MA15+ rating. Any such game is rated as Refused Classification, effectively banning it. From the report: 'The game contains realistic, frenetic, and unrelenting violence which is inflicted upon "the Infected" who are living humans infected with a rabies-like virus that causes them to act violently. The player can choose from a variety of weapons including pistols, shotguns, machine guns, and sniper rifles. However, it is the use of the "melee" weapons such as the crowbar, axe, chainsaw and Samurai sword which inflict the most damage. These close-in attacks cause copious amounts of blood spray and splatter, decapitations and limb dismemberment as well as locational damage where contact is made to the enemy which may reveal skeletal bits and gore.'"

16 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Advertisement? by acid06 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The player can choose from a variety of weapons including pistols, shotguns, machine guns, and sniper rifles. However, it is the use of the "melee" weapons such as the crowbar, axe, chainsaw and Samurai sword which inflict the most damage. These close-in attacks cause copious amounts of blood spray and splatter, decapitations and limb dismemberment as well as locational damage where contact is made to the enemy which may reveal skeletal bits and gore.

    Seriously. Did they pay the ratings board to write that?

  2. Guns vs. melee by straponego · · Score: 5, Funny

    'However, it is the use of the "melee" weapons such as the crowbar, axe, chainsaw and Samurai sword which inflict the most damage.'

    That's odd, I think I'd rather be hit by a crowbar than blasted with a shotgun. Oh well, only one way to find out.

  3. Looks like.... by Korey+Kaczor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Looks like somebody high up in Austrialia is a wee-bit angry about not having any of the promised downloadable content of l4d...

  4. Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by rve · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't they have an 18+ rating for games in Australia?

    Polls consistently show that the vast majority of gamers are adults.

    1. Re:Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 5, Informative

      No we do not.

    2. Re:Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by Pyrus.mg · · Score: 5, Funny

      Few Australians escape the dingos to reach the ripe old age of 18 and those who do have usually lost limbs to crocodiles or tragic boomerang incidents, assuming they haven't been paralyzed by some sort of venomous critter. Not exactly hardcore gamers in other words.

    3. Re:Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by afidel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sounds like the nanny state is extending across the former empire. We all know the Indians are even more prudish than us Americans, the Aussies appear to be bowing to the idea that a game can be too violent for an ADULT to play, what's next the Canadians deciding drinking is too much fun and that it keeps people from serious work? The Puritans may have died out as an organized religion but the harm they have done to the western world is pretty endemic.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by adamkennedy · · Score: 4, Informative

      R18+ is not applicable to video games, which has been an ongoing complaint of the industry for a LONG time now.

      So in the sense this isn't "banned" as such, it's just that the censors are given the game and told to work out the category.

      Normally, anything so bad that it doesn't fit into the R18+ classification (which usually means stuff like "realistic depictions of rape" and varying gradients of behaviour heading towards but falling short of "child pornography") are the only things that end up beyond the available ratings and in the "Refused Classification" area.

      The problem is just that they WOULD quite happily give it R18+, but they aren't allowed to. Which leaves violent games like this thrown in with rape video and similar stuff, where they don't belong.

      Everyone knows it's fucking ridiculous, and as the game-playing public ages I imagine it will get fixed eventually. It just results in stupid edge cases in the short term.

    5. Re:Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by Hecatonchires · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Adding a new rating requires an all in favour vote by the Attorney Generals of each state. There is a particularly rabid religious AG who always votes no. We're waiting for him to die.

      --

      Yay me!

    6. Re:Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by Techman83 · · Score: 5, Informative
      Unfortunately no we don't, M15+ is the highest. We need to have a unanimous vote by the Attorney Generals to get something like an R18+ for video games and Michael Atkinson voted no to the change (everyone else voted yes).

      "He doubts whether any safeguards could be put in place to deter young people, who after all (are) the most computer literate and savvy in our society, from being able to access material."

      news.com.au

      Until he is replaced or retires, there will not be any change to the classification system.

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i cat
      Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
    7. Re:Not suitable for 15 yr old boys? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 4, Funny

      We're waiting for him to die.

      Why wait? Get out your crowbars, axes, chainsaws and Samurai swords!

      I'm sure you'll doubly enjoy to see his blood spray and splatter! If Martin Bryant was able do it, so can you!

      We want to see Atkinson's head. On a platter. Along with his left arm and right leg!

  5. I can see the headlines now. by boxxertrumps · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The game that was so good it was banned in Australia.

  6. Re:And... by Quothz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is different than the evening news? I'm all for sex over violence and a happy world but honestly the stuff that happens in that description is up nightly on TV.My friend down in AU says he watched 28 days/weeks later, so how is this any different?

    Well, don't take this as support of the ban, but there is a difference between totally passively watching violence (and simulated violence) and actively controlling simulated violence. Different bits of the brain get used, and I believe there's some evidence that both can negatively impact social development in children, with the latter having a measurably stronger impact. I'm not aware of any research showing that either adversely affects adult behavior when viewed as an adult.

  7. Re:yarr by afaik_ianal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The silly thing is that when they ban a game, they increase the number of local torrenters, which increases availability to those under 18.

  8. here's an idea by SEAL · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Valve's Zombie shooter has been refused classification, which means it can't be made commercially available in the country.

    Valve should thumb their nose at Australia's rating board and make the game freely available there.

  9. Re:Heh by Nocterro · · Score: 5, Informative

    Illegal to sell or import. Unlike the USA, our "rating" system is an undisguised censorship system.

    --
    [clever sig]