Skip to main content

Graffiti Game Banned in Australia

Gamenews.com.au is the first to report that Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure has been refused classification upon a re-classification review by the Federal Goverment. This decision overturns the OFLC?s original MA15+ rating given in November 2005. ...

"The Classification Review Board has determined, in a majority 3 to 2 decision, that the computer game Marc Ecko?s Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure should be refused classification.

The Review Board met on 6, 8, 13 and 14 February 2006 with the Convenor exercising a casting vote because the members were equally divided in opinion.

A computer game that is refused classification (RC) is immediately banned throughout Australia. It cannot be demonstrated, sold, hired or imported into the country. A computer game is refused classification if it exceeds the guidelines for the MA 15+ classification."

The OFC refused classification for the game because players were rewarded for doing graffiti in game, received graffiti tipswhile playing, and the game contained interactive biographies of graffiti artists.

The Age reported a while ago about Attorney-General Philip Ruddock's statement that the game Mark Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure would be referred to the Classification Review Board for re-classification due to local councils and state governments angry at its MA 15+ rating.

Click the following link for the pdf press release by the OFLC.

Submitted by anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 16/02/06 - 3:41 AMPermalink

  • 1. Mcdrewski - Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:27:31Z
    In other news, the popular electronic boardgame "Operation" has been banned for promoting surgery amongst unqualified people.

    Thank you, nanny state!

    *sigh*

  • 2. LiveWire - Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:36:0Z
    And all because only children play games. If the game is not appropriate for a 15 year old, it cannot be sold in Australia. Therefore all Australian gamers are no older than 15, and there is nothing to warrent a higher rating.

    At least that's what the Australian ratings system tells me anyway.

  • 3. some dude - Wed, 15 Feb 2006 22:57:56Z
    The world is crazy i tell ya! graffiti getting banned, prostitutes bitching about GTA games (in which they do what they are payed for - as in real life...), masterpieces like Psychonauts go unnoticed and the world goes around...and around
  • 4. Mdobele - Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:12:46Z
    I'm kind of split on it.... On one hand I couldn't agree more that we need a 18+ classification, on the other I do see the point about promoting a blatant illegal activity.... and to be honest the developers knew that and were even using that to sell copies. That said I haven't played the game but certainly intend to at least check it out.
  • 5. Mcdrewski - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:7:31Z
    I see your point Mick, but last night I saw the channel seven show "Prison Break" and thought why is glorifying the escape from lawful custody not "promoting crime" in the same way?

    answer: because people percieve that the additional limitation of being in an 8:30pm timeslot restricts the show to adults, and the last meeting of attorneys-general decided that kids could get access to R games if an R rating were introduced.

    I can't put the actual link, but look at the press release h t t p://tinyurl . com/82pyr

    "On balance, not all Ministers were satisfied children would not access games classified as suitable only for ad*lts."

  • 6. Anonymous - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:42:0Z
    At the end of the day we can always pick up a Uk copy of the game off ebay :) Probably cheaper too (Au game prices are a joke)
  • 7. TheBigJ - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 12:5:50Z
    *deep sigh*

    It's not like we didn't all see this coming.

  • 8. TheBigJ - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 14:40:18Z
    To Anonymous #6, please remember that when a film or game is hit with RC in Australia, it is not lawful to import it from overseas.

    Many people do it and get away with it, but this is not the point. The only solution to this problem is a change of the laws that allows this to happen - I do not believe we should be complacent in having to break the law to get our hands on this game, or any other.

  • 9. Souri - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:42:58Z
    I feel that this case has set an unwelcomed precedent for the way games are rated in Australia, and it'll be held as an example for those with a morale high ground to strike at any game that offends them. This has got to be the lowest point for the OFLC and our games rating, where games can now be refused classification not only due to violence, drugs, or sexual content, but if it simply rewards any illegal behaviour. An interactive biography on grafitti artists was a major cause of concern? Absolutely ridiculous. Those three reasons that the OFLC gave - they were exremely poor excuses to have the game banned just to please a few politicians, and everyone knows it. If those reasons were applied to many other games, I'm sure they would not have received classification either.

    Two times the OFLC were made to re-classify a game that had already passed for a MA15+ rating, and both times they have given in. What does this imply? That the OFLC are easily buckled under pressure, or their ratings system is flawed. Either way, both scenarios are deeply concerning.

    This game is not a simulator. Playing this game will not train you to be an aerosol artist, just like Battlefield 2 won't give you the skills to fire, load, and aim real weapons, or fly a jet. It has simple mechanics to spray grafitti, and there's some run/climb/jump action in some rather unrealistic scenarios, along with some combat action. Here's something the review committee should read sometime.

    Kids Do Not Copy Game Behaviour.
    http://www.ieaa.com.au/factsAndResearch/gamesAndViolence.do

    All this proves is what a mess our rating system is, where something like the Grand Theft Auto series, which should be only available to adults, receives a MA15+ rating, and yet this game is refused classification for reasons which could easily apply to GTA. I would have never thought I'd see the day when we'd need to be protected against the serious issue of grafitti. Someone is definately thinking of the children.

  • 10. TheDMan - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:6:14Z
    I could rant for hours on this issue and related topics of liberty, or lack of it, but I won't bore you all.

    What I want to know is, where is the Australian games industry's response to this ongoing issue? Time after time games are refused classification in Australia and yet there's no sign of any lobbying from any of our industry groups to have an R rating introduced.

    What will happen when an Australian developer creates a game which is sold overseas but refused classification in this country? What's the morality of a country profiting from the export of goods which are illegal to distribute within the country's own borders, due to the negative impact the goods are alleged to have on societies which consume them?

    Bah, too angry to be particularly coherent on this. I'm going to go and shake a tree or something.

  • 11. Souri - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:20:11Z
    Yeh, that issue of Goverment embracing and supporting the profitable games industry in one hand, and yet sets out to limit and censor it in another has been written about in The Escapist. I guess they want their cake and eat it too.

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/11/3

  • 12. TheBigJ - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:28:28Z
    I agree totally - this will not be an isolated incedent. I expect we will see more and more games being banned due to their depiction and "instruction" on criminal activity.

    If all media in Australia was subjected to the same arguments provided by the OFLC / Review Board on this case, how many popular TV shows / movies / books would actually survive a review with their classification intact? Not many.

    How would the majority of Australian people feel if the Government began cracking down on murder-mystery and crime-drama TV shows? What about mature-rated films depicting and "promoting" crime? Scarface? The Godfather? Sin City? Kill Bill? Hah.

  • 13. Mick Gordon - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:39:49Z
    The last 3 films to be banned in Australia were:

    KEN PARK
    The film contains graphic scenes of explicit sexual behavior, and portrays suicide, murder, parental violence, alcoholism, smoking cannabis, incestuous sexual assault by a homophobic father of his sleeping son, BDSM, autoerotic asphyxiation, religious fanaticism, a fake marriage of a father with his daughter, a boy having sex with his girlfriend's mother, and at the end an idyllic sex scene with two of the boys and the girl.

    During an interview, Clark commented, "I decided that I wasn't going to turn the camera away, or shut the door, or shoot from the waist up."

    BAISE-MOI
    Baise-moi (literally translated as "F*ck Me," though "Rape Me" better typifies the intended meaning) tells the story of Nadine (played by Karen Lancaume) and Manu (Raffa?la Anderson) who go on a violent spree against a society in which they feel marginalized.

    ROMANCE
    Romance (Romance X) is a 1999 French movie written and directed by Catherine Breillat. It stars Caroline Ducey, erotic actor Rocco Siffredi, Sagamore Stevenin and Fran?ois Berleand. The film contains several sex scenes that appear to have been unsimulated, especially the famous scene showing Caroline Ducey's coitus from behind with an erect Rocco Siffredi (who is not brought to completion, though).

    So, by my understanding, the OFLC is treating a game about graffiti in the same context as these banned films (you will have to look at the links as Sumea will not let me post the plot descriptions)? Am I missing something here? To be honest, I wasnt really looking forward to the game as it doesnt look like something that would interest me, but I find the whole censorship thing rather interesting. Hey, mabye I AM missing something here and mabye letting a game about graffiti enter Australia is exetremely dangerous - but, at the moment, I am unclear as to why this happens. Interesting...

  • 14. TheBigJ - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:51:4Z
    Actually Mick, I do feel that you are missing something here.

    See, those three banned films did contain depictions of illegal and criminal acts. However, this was not the reason that they were banned.

    Ken Park was banned because it contained sexual material (such as incest, simulation of sex with a minor, etc) that would require an X rating according to the OFLC ratings system.

    Baise Moi was banned because it features a rape scene that is not simulated, which requires an X rating, according to the OFLC ratings system.

    Romance was banned because it features unsimulated sexual material that was deemed appropriate only for an X rated film, due to the OFLC ratings system.

    Since there is no X rating allowed in Australian states, these films all recieved RC instead.

    According to the OFLC ratings system, Marc Ecko's Getting Up is appropriate for an MA15+ rating. The issue here is that politicians have taken action to review this decision and have it reclassified RC.

    So to reiterate, the aforementioned films were not banned due to their depiction or promotion of criminal activity.

  • 15. Souri - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:52:57Z
    Well, it's probably not right o compare banned films to banned games, since banned films don't fit the highest category for film (the R rating), and banned games don't fit anything above MA15+.

    I think why this OFLC decision has got a lot of people scratching their heads is that games that "promote illegal activity" is enough reason to push a game beyond the MA15+ category. Unfortunately, there are a heck of a lot of games out there that this could apply to, and I fear that games are now open targets for any two bit politician to get some publicity and take away more games.

  • 16. TheBigJ - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:15:8Z
    I entered post #14 in haste and I should make the following correction.

    The three films were not given X, but RC according to the OFLC guidelines. If these films were given X ratings, they would be available in Australia's territorites, which is not the case.

    I believe my overall point remains true, however. Besides, Souri is right - I was probably getting a bit off-topic when I brought up films and TV shows, although I was just making a brief comment. The real issue here, like Souri said, is that "promoting illegal activity" doesn't seem like a strong enough reason to require an R18 rating.

  • 17. Mdobele - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:13:2Z
    I just listened to a good interview with on JJJ's Hack program with Shelly, the review boards Convenor and the lady responsible for the deciding vote about the ruling. Head over to the JJJ site and give it a listen.

    One of the interesting points raised was that even if we had a R rating for games the game may still have been banned as it was refused classification due to the "Promoting of Illigal Activity" and not based on a hurtfull to a minor base.

    I still need to play the game though.. bet Bitorrent is going nuts atm over it lol.

  • 18. Souri - Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:36:42Z
    Here are the links to Hack.

    http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/mod_real/thu.ram
    http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/mod_windows/thu.asx
    http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/podcast/thursday.htm

  • 19. pb - Sat, 18 Feb 2006 13:36:38Z
    Industry won't do anything about this because most sales are offshore, so they simply don't care.

    That government wants to have its cake and eat it to is a basic principle of politics - that's how you get votes.

    The history of censorship all over the world, from books and plays to movies and games, has been one of rather arbitrary politically motivated bannings, so citing research about the offending materials effects, exploring the morality of said material or trying to suggest that it should be consistent misses the point.

    Censorship in general is an appeasement strategy in the political world, nothing more. One example is if a politician can get support for his policies on strategic issues of war and peace, free trade, IR, economic reform etc from a nut who has the deciding vote and wants some game banned. The politician will take that support and in return push for the game's ban.

    Its easy to rationalise when you need to do it in order to deal with issues that have a serious impact on millions of people and the only thing that happens is a few gamers have to buy the game online from overseas.

  • 20. TheBigJ - Sat, 18 Feb 2006 15:46:9Z
    Of course, pb. I agree.

    However IMO, raising questions of consistency, double standards and hypocracy can be an important first step when rationalising the position you've put forward.

    To a person who genuinely believes the government is doing this to protect us, or to protect a particular interpretation of morality, pointing out the obvious inconsistencies, lies and bullshit helps to open them up to the idea that there might be some underlying political device being invoked.

  • 21. CynicalFan - Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:16:40Z
    The 'industry' element that was mentioned I think was in reference to the GDAA and perhaps studios themselves. I believe the IEAA which is a local publisher association has put work into the game censorship problem, but they are not made up of developers - perhaps being publishers they would have more sway anyway in lobbying.

    The GDAA won't do anything because their members are reliant on government funding, and, because they think 'E for Everyone' games are more profitable anyway, as a larger 'market or demographic' can be tapped. This is actually wrong, it relies on their being content for both children and adults in a title, not just content for children - think: The Simpsons.

    So, they won't be of much help as their priority is securing further development welfare to keep themselves afloat.

    If you want to make a difference, and making a difference is becoming a pain in their arses. Then write individual letters to the OFLC, Attorney Generals, etc. And let them know what you think and why you think it - quote the OFLC's own reports that support there being an R classification. I would also write letters to the press whether they be paper, TV or online in response to negative news segments. And don't take their initial 'copy and paste' letters and do nothing, send another letter to make them do more work.

    One letter is not a problem for them. One online petition that is sent to them once is not a problem. Hundreds of letters are a pain in the arse to individually reply to, print out and post.

    Hell while your at it, find out who these groups are that are making a push for games to be banned and send those fools a letter to, and apply some irritation there ;). And most of all, perhaps think about becoming organised, perhaps a site that has various tools for this like letter templates, lists of links to supporting evidence as well as interesting extracts to copy and paste into letters, and a list of targets to send the letters to - as well as a newsletter that goes out to members telling them of new news items and research as well as new targets.

  • 22. Anonymous Coward - Mon, 29 Jan 2007 23:53:13Z
    hack per au