Vito Cassisi – Tech Blog Delving into technology

Australian CRB – A joke of the highest order!

The Australian Classification Review Board are making decisions so undeniably mentally handicapped, that they can't even agree with themselves!

Consistency is key. That's what my high school English teachers used to tell me. If you're going to produce mediocre work, at least be consistent about it. There's nothing like a wave of marks which show that you're not only incompetent, but lazy. Do well, do shit, do well, do shit. It reeks of 'I can't be fucked'. So when I heard that Australia's 'Classification Review Board', now known as the 'epitome of incompetence' released their revised stance on the yet to be released game Left4Dead 2, I couldn't help but notice the lack of consistency that this board appears to thrive on.

Ignoring the fact that Australia doesn't have an R18 classification due to pure stupidity, Australia classifies games into one of either G, PG, M15+, MA15+, and our favourite, RC (refused classification). What bothers me is that those on the classification board find it increasingly difficult to make up their mind. What makes a game M, MA15+ or RC? They quite simply couldn't tell you. Well, they could, but you'd get 3 different answers, depending on the time space continuum and the curvature of its travel.

Now, you're probably thinking, "This guy is just ranting! Surely they'd be capable of correct judgement!" I wish that were so. But it isn't, and this can be simply seen by the complete lack of consistency between classification of past (and current) decisions. To get some perspective, lets quickly take a look at the reason for Left4Dead's refusal by the CRB:

"...it was the Review Board’s opinion that there was insufficient delineation between the depiction of general zombie figures and the human figures, as opposed to the clearly fictional ‘infected’ characters. This was a major consideration of the Review Board in determining the impact of this game on minors."

Umm, they're zombies. Yes, they're based on human figures. That's what zombies are, risen-from-the-dead run-of-the-mill humans. But let's play Devil's advocate, and say that this was a fair call. The game is very bloody, and violent, and to inflict mass murder on human-like pixel structures would be a bit too much for "minors". The question is, why would a minor be playing a MA15+ game? Unless their parents allowed them to do so, which is ultimately their choice, the classification clearly states it's for those who are of the age of 15 or greater. The fact of the matter is, what's to stop a parent from giving their child alcohol? Nothing. It's bad, sure, but it's not up to the government to ban alcohol from the population, is it?

But let's assume that the CRB has a reasonable answer to that point. Technically a 17 year old is still a minor. Which, in my opinion, is silly in this context since most 10 year olds know the difference between a game and reality; including applicable ethics. But I digress. Let's take a look at another game that the CRB recently classified under MA15+, named Wolfenstein. This is CRB's official stance on the game. Keep in mind the reasons for L4D2's ban whilst you watch this in-game video of Wolfenstein:

Gore? Check!
Dismemberment? Check!
Human enemies? Check!
Melee and gun based weaponry? Check!
RC classification? Whoops!

I guess they accidentally let this one slip though. Nope! They did the same with Fallout 3, another MA15+ classified game. Take a look:

Gore? Check!
Dismemberment? Check!
Human enemies? Check!
Fictional enemies? Check!
Melee and gun based weaponry? Check!
RC classification? Again, whoops!

Finally, to add salt to the wound, there's the original L4D! Which, you guessed it, is also MA15+. Apart from the added melee weaponry, L4D2 is very similar to its predecessor. Not to mention that this is only a fraction of MA15+ games that are similar, if not more violent, than L4D2. It begs the question, if these games are allowed through, why is L4D2 any different? Inconsistency. Plain and simple.

And that's not all, our favourite senator Michael Atkinson, sole campaigner against the R18+ classification, doesn't trust the CRB either! So it would appear that both sides are in agreement that there's something very very wrong with the classification board. For the click impaired, a quote from Atkinson:

"There are many games that are ultra-violent and accessible to minors. I accept that one can't always trust the Office of Film & Literature Classification to apply the guidelines in their plain meaning - it will stretch them to get things through for the industry."

Indeed. And they do it ever so inconsistently! On another note, why refuse an R18+ rating if they're apparently letting them through anyway? Hmm...

When you look at the situation, it becomes clear that it's one giant catch 22 situation. The CRB needs an R18+ classification so it doesn't have to make excuses to allow otherwise R18+ games to be classified under MA15+, or RC. On the other hand, Mr Atkinson isn't willing to trust the CRB until they RC almost every game on the market. So, as usual, the consumer loses. Until Atkinson moves on, of course.

Until then, for the sake of adult gamers (i.e. the majority), it's clear that the CRB need to review another product - themselves. Perhaps three times, and take an average.