As reported by IGN, Left 4 Dead 2, sequel to Valve's competitive first-person shooter, has been refused classification by the Australian government on the grounds that the game exceeds the maximum rating of MA15+. When a title has been refused classification, it cannot be made commercially available in the country, in an essence banning the game.The original Left 4 Dead was rated MA15+ by the Board.
EA Australia has issued the following statement in response to the government's decision: "[We] are still working through the submission process with OFLC and want to explore all opportunities before making any comment."
The game has been refused classification for the following reasons:
- The game contains violence that is high in impact and is therefore unsuitable for persons aged under 18 to play.
- It notes that this violence is "inflicted upon ‘the Infected' who are living humans infected with a rabies-like virus that causes them to act violently."
- The report singles out the use of melee weapons as those that "inflict the most damage" and cause "copious amounts of blood spray and splatter (sic), decapitations and limb dismemberment… or even cause intestines to spill from the wounds."
- In conclusion, the Board finds that the "interactive nature of the game increases the overall impact of the frequent and intense depictions of violence. This coupled with the graphic depictions of blood and gore combine to create a playing impact which is high."
- Interestingly, the report also reveals that it wasn't a unanimous decision and that "a minority of the Board is of the opinion that the violence is strong in playing impact and therefore warrants an MA15+ classification" instead. However, the majority voted to refuse classification.
Updated:
Valve has released their own statement on the situation saying the following:
"We were surprised to hear of this news yesterday. Obviously, everyone at Valve is pretty bummed. It would be a shame if folks in Australia, or anywhere else, are unable to purchase Left 4 Dead 2 because of a ratings issue."
Nice one, well put. Australia needs a r18+ for video games like other countries. We have one for movies, just not VG.
Ummm, aren't Attorney Generals government officials? In fact, the Attorney General's Department has its own government site ( http://www.ag.gov.au/ )
The article says, "However, the majority voted to refuse classification."
The "majority" hardly seems like one man to me.
The "majority" hardly seems like one man to me.
You ate mixing up your stories.
The majority vote would not grant l4d2 certification under the current system.
The commenter pointed out that there is just one man currently preventing there being a new r18+ certificate that it likely would have passed.
Is that not a government position?
L4D2 is gonna be so much better with all the violence, melee weapons, etc
Well, then isn't it the government's fault that one man can hold such power?
Companies, doesnt matter movie or games, should not have to make special versions for special countries. Then countries complain there release dates are late, or everyone complains the game/movie is lacking a bit because instead of taking more time and money to produce different copies of the game, the company wanted to save time and money to produce 1 copy.
So yeah, its the governments fault.
I'm Australian but I have to disagree with you here. The fact that they need 100% of the people to pass anything is not common sense what so ever...voting by the majority would be common sense. If one person can block a change then they can effectively stop any progress happening for years as we have seen here and nothing gets achieved.
It should be a 50% majority or if not, 70 or 80% or something. Given one overly religious man this power does not make sense what so ever.
And you can't say the government isn't to blame also. Clearly they could do something to change the rules if they wanted about how the ratings board is governed. Instead we have a bunch of conservatives elected who rather than trying to do something like add an 18+ rating for games has instead devoted time and money into a web based filtering scheme for Australia which has been in many many circles criticised and carried out with almost no feedback to the public on what constitutes banned material ect.
So yeah...the government can go shove it as can the AG's.
It should be a 50% majority or if not, 70 or 80% or something. Given one overly religious man this power does not make sense what so ever.
And you can't say the government isn't to blame also. Clearly they could do something to change the rules if they wanted about how the ratings board is governed. Instead we have a bunch of conservatives elected who rather than trying to do something like add an 18+ rating for games has instead devoted time and money into a web based filtering scheme for Australia which has been in many many circles criticised and carried out with almost no feedback to the public on what constitutes banned material ect.
So yeah...the government can go shove it as can the AG's.
LOL, exactly. Requiring unanimity is a great way to ensure nothing gets done. A simple majority like 50% is too much like mob rule, but some sort of majority with checks would ensure this never happened.
lol, like this is a common day occurrence. Please, this is just an excuse to mod your Xbox.
Not the first case of retarded government though... Germany...
Not the first case of retarded government though... Germany...
Retarded is if you feed your kids this kind of gore, THAT is retarded.
Not the first case of retarded government though... Germany...
Retarded is if you feed your kids this kind of gore, THAT is retarded.
No, censorship is retarded, limiting peoples choice is retarded. Besides; it's not a game for kids so i dont see how the **** that has anything to do with it.
Not the first case of retarded government though... Germany...
Retarded is if you feed your kids this kind of gore, THAT is retarded.
Yes, history would be completely different only if parents just took Adolf's Xbox away.
On the other hand I doubt that somebody would like to bring shooting game experience into reality after realizing that you die a lot and you don't have Load Saved Game option there.
The game is about zombies. I don't see that realism is the point.
There is currently alot of discussions about a new R18+ rating.....
One way or another most of us will get the game no matter what the stupid government does.
A proxy should do the trick.
Ummm change of location in steam should get around that........
Billing address may still be an issue.
So a horde of zombies isn't enough to justify strong gruesome violence?
Mature Audience 15years+
Tbh, I'm not sure that makes sense. Blowing/chopping up zombies doesn't exist in real life.
In order to not get fined MS could ban all AUS accounts from playing it and so could Steam.
So they ban a game, does that not prove that they are doing there job, whats the point in having a rating system if they let everything through.
Our tolerance of what is acceptable in violence has changed significantly, I mean what content is not acceptable anymore everywhere else ? maybe only pedophilia.
Rating systems aren't for banning games. They're for RATING games.
Y'know, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. Also, "cheap"?
But us Aussies do enjoy laughing at your funny accents while playing on LIVE.
Oh wait, can't do that, gotta milk that cash cow!
I'm an Aussie, and i'm glad for this news. Valve need it stuck to them.
croydon@parliament.sa.gov.au
hard to believe in this day and age.
What else would you do in that situation? Have a lengthy discussion?
Then again I suppose you need some kind of limit.
Than they know the public is serious and have their own rights... not some retard making up rules for everyone else...
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.