From M/Cyclopedia of New Media
- In Australia, videogames are classified under a truncated film model. Unlike America’s ESRB, this scheme does not possess an “AO� Adults-Only category - games that warrant R-ratings are refused classification and import rights. Classification development was the OFLC’s response to violent products like Night Trap, envisioned by 1993’s Select Committee Report as a “reasonable answer to video game violence.� The scheme materialized in 1994.
- The Australian Office Of Film and Literature Classification scheme for video games:
- G: General
- G8+: Ages 8+
- M: Ages 15+
- MA(15+): Restricted to 15+
- RC: Refused classification.
- N.B.: No R-rating
- Objectives:
- To allow adults access to what they wish to see
- To protect minors from harmful content
- To protect anyone who does not wish to be exposed to certain content
- To address community concerns
- Figure 1.: OFLC Classification
How games are reviewed:
- The OFLC requires publishers to submit proposed ratings along with a product overview (i.e. plot details and screenshots). The OFLC then approves or denies proposed ratings based on portfolios.
Issues associated with the OFLC:
- Classification and games:
- Several incompatibilities result from using a film-based scheme on videogames. While these media share similarities, they are unique, separate forms. Durkin (1995) argues that films involve passive interaction while games require active participation. A child fond of violent films interfaces with violence in a different way to a child who actively triggers depictions of violence by hacking-and-slashing in a videogame (Singer and Singer, 2001).
- Classification and the industry:
- Durkin suggests that producers have an advantage in the review process as the ratings committee does not actually play games (due to time constraints as there are no dedicated videogame sectors within the OFLC.) Several R-rated games have slipped into Australia under MA ratings. Diablo received R-ratings in a dozen European countries, though Blizzard suggested an M-rating to the OFLC and was granted this (Caslon.com.au. 1999).
- Classification and parental control:
- 90% of parents do not use rating schemes (Durkin, 1999.)
- 33% of children select games on their own (Durkin, 1999.
- Only 39% of parents know what games their children play (Cupitt and Stockbridge, 1996.)
- These statistics reveal issues of enforcement and information. Not all parents are equipped with classification knowledge while studies show that the majority of retailers do not ask for ID’s on purchases.
- Classification and society:
- A broad issue is censorship: the OFLC cannot fulfill its first objective (Figure. 1) as the absence of an R-rating denies adult gamers access to AO games. Electronic Frontiers Australia (1999), describes this a ‘de facto censorship’. This would be a severe problem as current teen gamers eventually slide into future adult demographic - already 58% of gamers are adults (Caslon.com.au. 1999).
- Another societal issue is public knowledge of the system. Durkin (1999) notes that few non-gamers (i.e. parents) are aware of ratings.
- Additionally, the objective “To address community concerns� implies a public outlet to voice concerns over games - however no specific faculty or videogame agency exists beyond the main OFLC channels (Electronic Frontiers Australia, 1999).
- Classification and the future:
- Looking to the future, the effectiveness of OFLC classification is hindered by its inflexibility towards new technology. For example, the OFLC holds no contingencies for online games and p2p violence.
- Secondly, classification is product regulation at retail points, however p2p technology allows unregulated game downloads. What are future ramifications of non-retail, unregulated access to games?
Conclusion
- As we move into an era of technological and artistic achievements in games, classification remains a critical to both the ‘violence debate’ and industry development. The future of videogames in Australia depends on how classification moulds the Australian gaming world.
Related Wiki Links
* Video games - A brief history of computer game violence
References:
- Caslon.com.au. (1999) Censorship Guide, Caslon Media Watch, retrieved December, 2003, from http://caslon.com.au/censorshipguide14.htm
- Cupitt M. and Stockbridge S. (1996) Families and Electronic Entertainment, Sydney: Office of Film and Literature Classification, ISBN 0622304651.
- Durkin, K. (1995) Computer Games: Their Effects on young people: A review, Sydney: Office of Film and Literature Classification, retrieved July 10, 2004, from http://www.oflc.gov.au/resource.html?resource=303&filename=303.pdf
- Durkin, K. and Aisbett, K. (1999) Computer Games and Australians Today, Sydney: Office of Film and Literature Classification, ISBN 0642704619.
- Electronic Frontiers Australia. (1999) Censorship by another name, retrieved January, 2004, from http://www.efa.org.au/censor/cens5.html
- Office of Film and Literature Classification (2003) Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games, retrieved July 29, 2004, from http://www.oflc.gov.au/resource.html?resource=62&filename=62.pdf
- Select Committee on Community Standards Relevant to the Supply of Services Utilizing Electronic Technologies (1993). Report on video and computer games and classification issues, Canberra: The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, ISBN 0642197822
- Singer, D. and Singer, J. (ed.) Handbook of children and the media, Thousand Oaks: Sage, ISBN 0761919546
--Ian Cho 22:35, 28 Oct 2004 (EST)
