The Australian Classification Board – Censorship and Banning

I, like most other Aussie gamers, was upset when the zombie-killing game Left 4 Dead 2 was banned. Indeed the ratings system here is backwards, yes it’s outdated, but the real key issue we have with it is that it is a hypocritical decision because the original game, containing practically everything the sequel has been banned for, came out without a hitch. After an unsuccessful appeal by Valve, the makers of the game, the title was modified and passed the ratings system with the highest MA15+ age gate, however if the Classification Board – or just South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson – is going to insist on there being no R18+ rating for videogames then so be it, the arguments against the lack of the classification (which cannot be granted without the agreement of all state and Commonwealth attorney generals) will continue, but the least one could ask for is that consistency is shown in the meantime.

It’s these double standards that have many gamers foaming at the mouth; Fallout 3 was initially banned because of the game’s drug references but not because of the violence and gore which included features such as the Bloody Mess perk which increased the violence and, should the player utilise the abilities granted to him/her, pick up decapitated heads and place them, say, on dinner plates. Rather ludicrously, once the drugs in the game were renamed to no longer reflect their real-life counterparts (i.e. Morphine changed to Med-X), even though their properties and effects within the game were still the same, it made it past the ratings system with no further problems.

My own personal dilemma is that I really enjoyed Fallout 3, and yet I absolutely acknowledge that if I had young children then I would never, ever, want them to play through it; blowing people’s heads off through VATS or having them explode their enemies into a red mist. So that’s where choice comes in: once over the age of 18, they would have every legal right to watch an R rated film because the rating system’s purpose of existence is to appropriately screen material from the underaged public. But for the Board to completely take away the choice of purchasing games in their full uncensored form is akin to a condescending pat on the head of all those gamers over 18 years of age, essentially claiming that we are incapable of telling the difference between fact and fiction, even though we are trusted to be able to with film.

Violence and drugs aside, it was the immersive experience of Fallout 3 that stood out along with the game world’s system of moral code and consequence which made it such a powerful medium of escapism from ‘the real world’. Arguably the violence within the game, while gory and excessive to the point of ridiculousness, may have been relevant to the post-apocalyptic, fictional world of the Capital Wasteland, much like how the Mad Max movies (an inspiration of the series) and many other film worlds have been depicted. It was portrayed in such a way in order to capture the lawlessness of a world stripped down to its base survival instincts, and presented via a biting satire of 1950s Americana in a fantasy setting tinged with black humour.

To some extent however, I do have to ask myself whether the experience could have been as memorable and as fun without the weapons and the violence and the excessive gore and drug use… who knows? But the main thing about Fallout 3 as a game was that there was a deeper role for the player, built around a gameplay system where terrible things could be done, including the murder of civilians, should the player choose to do so. Similarly with the Grand Theft Auto* series – to speak in film terms, essentially the videogame equivalent of an overblown mockumentary on modern American society – the ultimate decision as to how to approach the game was up to the player and direct consequences would occur as a result. Games have come a long way since the days of linear plots and distinct fixed boundaries as to what the player could and could not do, but the whole concept of choice – the lack of it through real-life censorship and banning as well as in-game options – is still a divisive topic. Yes, violence has been around long before videogames, but sadly the industry’s argument for “games as art” has not been done any favours by those titles that have deliberately sought the controversy.

* (Interestingly with GTA IV, the Classification Board had initially banned its sale before a modified version adhering to an MA15+ rating was accepted for release. The changes? You could still kill people by shooting them or running them down in a car but no pools of blood would appear afterwards beneath their corpses. You could still hire prostitutes and engage in sexual acts in vehicles but you could only see the car rock up and down with a fixed camera angle as opposed to a controllable one, which somehow makes it all okay. Furthermore, the downloadable episode The Lost and Damned featured the completely uncensored content above and still somehow made it past review – if the Board is going to enforce censorship of material, it could at least do so with common sense and, again, consistency.)

~

The Snuff Film Equivalents of Gaming

Why does gaming carry with it such a stigma within Australia then? Perhaps because of its history of attracting controversy, rightly or wrongly, and with good intentions or entirely self-serving ones. Games such as Manhunt 2, a title fundamentally built on the premise of executing enemies in the most vile and revolting manner possible, was deservedly banned here and heavily censored elsewhere.

Inspired by snuff films and containing just about the same amount of substance, I managed to get my hands on the first Manhunt via a friend who bought a copy before the decision was made to retrospectively ban it several months after its release, and I have to say I was utterly disturbed by its violence. It was a glorification reaching a level of vile desensitisation, and with no reason or purpose in the game apart from achieving, again, the most graphic kill animations possible. The gameplay mechanics were solid from a functional point of view, but Manhunt was pointlessly sadistic in every other respect. The worst thing about it and particularly the likes of baseless games such as Soldier of Fortune, Postal, and going back as far as the controversy Mortal Kombat courted and thrived off, is that they give game critics the ammunition they need to pigeon-hole videogames as a medium to such an extent that knee-jerk reactions without proper context (or even playthroughs) are far too common, ala the ridiculous furore with Fox News’ infamous take on Mass Effect, completely ignoring the qualities of games that promote moral thought and decision making in the midst of strenuous situations, along with the impact on the player’s conscience. These snuff games do nothing but take morality out of the equation altogether, fully warranting their bans and sullying the image of videogames in the eyes of the government and the mass media.

~

The Modern Warfare 2 Airport Level Controversy (Spoilers)

It had been strongly hinted at in the trailers, but until the footage leaked onto the internet (for the short period before it was removed) no one was at all prepared for the fact that the airport level of Modern Warfare 2 had players engage in the act of killing civilians from the terrorist’s point of view. It must be noted that the stage is entirely skippable and features constant warning messages of disturbing content, but in these cases it helps to take a step back to think about the ramifications and purpose of such an inclusion before making an uninformed decision and leaping for the panic button.

Curiously in terms of Australian banning, the game received an MA15+ rating from the Classification Board months ago and is still scheduled for its original worldwide November release date just over a week away - despite how, as stated in its report, “civilians are shot with blood burst bullet wounds; civilian corpses are strewn across the airport floor, often in stylised pools of blood; injured civilians crawl away with lengthy blood trails behind them,” but because “no post mortem damage can be inflicted on victims and, in other missions in the game, killing a civilian results in mission failure,” the violence in this context is okay. Which makes one wonder why killing zombies in Left 4 Dead 2, hardly realistic targets, is not.

In all honesty I appreciate Infinity Ward taking a huge gamble here with the level; so long as that, in whatever manner this airport stage does play out and in the full scheme of things, it does not trivialise terrorism and the fact that innocent lives have long been lost as a result of it. And judging by the aims of Modern Warfare 1 in showing the horrors and loss of war – and even just trusting in the developer to display basic human sensibilities of what constitutes good taste – I predict that it absolutely will not.

I fully expect it to turn out to be an utterly devastating and tragic moment in the game – it appeared as if the level was the finale to the first chapter where you play as an undercover CIA officer who has infiltrated the group but is powerless to the events of the massacre (which has unfortunately lost its shock value having been spoiled) – carrying with it a deep emotional resonance with the player. An impact never before seen in gaming albeit a talking point for years to come.

The quote from the president of the Australian Council on Children and the Media is:

“The consequences of terrorism are just abhorrent in our community and yet here we are with a product that’s meant to be passed off as a leisure time activity, actually promoting what most world leaders speak out publicly against” – which completely misses the point and provides a good insight into how games are seen in this country. It is obvious that the developer’s aim here is to ensure that people will not enjoy playing through the stage, contrary to the entire point of playing a game in the first place which, considering the Classification Board’s approval of its release, indicates an agreement in the purpose of this level.

Indeed, if we are shocked to the core as we ought to be, Modern Warfare 2 could prove to be a positive step towards the further exploration of videogames in testing the potentials of its own medium; using its uniquely identifying feature – being in control – to create a palpable sense of morality and enforcing the shocking and disturbing consequences of the player’s actions in a digital representation of the real world. In other words, a significant advancement from games being constantly referred to by others as a mere “leisure time activity,” and meant for those with easily-influenced minds without the ability to discern from what is right and wrong, as opposed to more “serious” art forms. Sadly, Atkinson continues to argue otherwise whilst at the same time enforcing inconsistency, saying that “Expecting game designers to be responsible by not glorifying terrorism will always lead to disappointment,” and yet still granting its unedited release as an MA15+ title.

~

Close

The major problem in Australia, if it isn’t already plainly obvious, is that games are not taken seriously. The argument against the incongruent rating system is that it is somehow okay when other mediums such as films depict graphic violence and disturbing content matter when there is indeed an R18+ rating to advise the public of the content, but as soon as such material is in the hands gamers the rules immediately change. The conundrum? Games are dismissed as child’s play; mindless folly and embarrassing source of silly, meaningless “entertainment” incapable of achieving irony or bringing a proper discussion to the table. So when the odd title does come along, trying to add a conscience and tackle the bigger and more controversial issues – much like what any art form aims to do – out comes the stigma of videogames where the accusations of “glorification of violence” pour forth from the media, completely misunderstood and hastily judged before anyone has even had a chance to experience it for themselves.

Not everyone will get the point, of course. There will no doubt be videos posted on Youtube after Modern Warfare 2 comes out of players deliberately and happily killing civilians without the slightest regard to what Infinity Ward are trying, optimistically, to achieve. But just like the Paul Verhoeven films Robocop, Total Recall, and Starship Troopers and Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Inglourious Basterds, etc attempted to challenge one’s sensibilities – to move the viewer out of their comfort zones – the critical response manifested in conflicting forms: face value (senseless violence) versus subtext (parody and satire of violence), all dependent on how one interpreted what they saw. Videogames obviously differ from film in that films take their audience on a fixed rollercoaster ride whilst games tend to offer a plot-driven ride whilst also allowing player control in their progression, but because of a selective and inconsistent R18+ classification system we Australians are given access to the former but often denied the chance of interpretation for the latter.

In taking risks with its content, hopefully time will show that Infinity Ward made a brave choice in an attempt to create a new level of emotion and deeper understanding of real life cruelties via the videogame effect. But maybe the world, and especially Australia, just isn’t ready for the medium of gaming to do tongue-in-cheek or convey poignancy, irony, or a realistic videogame representation of the world because it is, apparently, too real for gamers to be able to tell the difference, regardless of their age.

Upon its release I am confident that Modern Warfare 2 will shock and disgust within a proper narrative and context, because it’s these feelings – a sense of guilt conflicting against and challenging the actions of the player in that scenario – that will really help gaming achieve the same emotional connection of other art forms, and hopefully the industry’s attempts at doing so are analysed appropriately by the public and the powers that be. Even if it is only by those who really get it… which doesn’t look like it will include the Australian Classifications Board nor Michael Atkinson anytime soon.

Witnesses have up to this point neither confirmed or denied rumours that Niko Bellic and/or Johnny Klebitz were at the scene

According to news sources:

“There’s been a major escalation in Sydney’s bikie gang war with the bashing death of a man at Sydney’s domestic airport in front of horrified bystanders yesterday.

Four men aged between 21 and 25 have been charged with affray over the incident and more charges are expected to follow. Police say the attack appeared to be planned and it’s raised questions about the level of security at Sydney Airport.

…

Police believe the violence erupted between members of the Hells Angels and Comancheros biker gangs after senior figures from both gangs flew on the same flight between Melbourne and Sydney.

…

The murder follows a series of tit-for-tat shootings involving two other rival bikie gangs - the latest just yesterday - that has left Sydney’s suburban streets living in fear.”

The victim died of severe head injuries after being bashed by the metal poles propping up the queues.

So then: a bikie war, an apparent assassination of a rival leader in broad daylight at a public place, a death via bludgeoning, the CCTV footage has done a runner. Doesn’t this all sound so very familiar? The only thing missing is that little jingle that plays alongside the words ‘MISSION COMPLETE – $10, 000′. However unlike GTA the bad guys got caught. So let this be a very important lesson to us all: always print out your tickets before your flight for a quicker check-in.

Sources: 1 2 3 4 5