aussieboy911 / Member

Forum Posts Following Followers
980 18 11

aussieboy911 Blog

OFLC should put in R18+ for games

You probably know of the dispute over whether there should be an R18+ rating for games in Australia. Most people say: 'yea that's gay or 'OFLC sucks' but most of the time nobody goes over the real reasons for and against this issue. If we don't just look like a bunch of illiterate hate-mongering kids then maybe they will take us seriously.

The reason there is no R18+ rating for games is because games are considered more interactive and therefore more likely to effect children than just simply watching the themes (violence, sex ect.)in a movie which does have a full ratings system. But this way of thinking is flawed:

In the Australian constitution it states: "adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want." Now you could argue that this rule does not say anything about playing games- but what this stands for is what is important: seeing- hearing- reading: these are all basic human rights and are observed in most free countries. This basically says that adults take responsibility and can give consent to do anything they want as long as they don't hurt other people. Right there you have hard proof that banning anything is wrong in the first place. That is what being in a free country is all about.

Secondly, movies and television; which are both forms of media, like computer games; have a ratings system that recommends and restricts audiences of certain ages to watch them. Without a complete ratings system for all forms of media many problems can come up, including misclassification of media. Just allowing a video game to be MA15+ rated because it isn't bad enough to ban is a silly way of looking at it, because if the ratings system is there to protect children from themes that are not suitable to them. How can you defend downgrading the rating to make it more accessible! Sure, there are onlythreeyears between 15 and 18, but it is still terrible ethics when you consider the difference betweena seven-year-old and a ten-year-old to a fifteen and eighteen year-old is the same.

The process of arguing the ban of a video game is far too lengthy and contradicts the point of releasing a game if the decision is overruled, because the game will not be competitive next to a newer set of games with better graphics and possibly better game play because the time span between the first failed release and the new one will be so long.

The stopping of certain games being released in Australia is to stop children from being influenced by what happens in the game and saying: "hey I just made that guy kill fifteen people! That's cool! Heymy guyjust got killed! Man I wish I could be like him!"

Although that is a bit melodramatic, I played Grand Theft Auto when I was twelve-years-old and I'm FINE.

On a study conducted by the OFLC regarding: "the theory that computer games would promote aggression in the young," they found: "no such effects". No, I haven't just taken a quote out of context. The full statement included my previous quote and the one before it and would not have made sense in my blog. The real statement:

"...several well-designed studies, conducted by the proponents of the theory that computer games would promote aggression in the young, have found no such effects." The report also asserted that: "none of the independent research published to date has demonstrated serious effects of aggressive game play upon young people's behaviour."

There you go. Straight from the horse's mouth that video games don't promote aggression in children. This, added with our basic human right of "adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want" surely proves that banning computer games is wrong on all levels. Adults are responsible for what they play and children should not be extremely affected by it, though should be heavily recommended or restricted to content that is not appropriate for them. I am all for children being protected and anyone who thinks otherwise is sick in the head, but why can't adults choose what they want to play?

are children becoming more desensitised to violence and sex through the media?

i saw transformers the other day with a9 year old friend of mine. there is a scene in transformers where the main character (who has just bought his first car- he might be seventeen or maybe eighteen) and he is looking for his grandfather's glasses because they're important to the story about a cube.

his parents hear him talking to his girlfriend (that they dont know about) while they're looking and come in to check on him. they say stuff like 'we heard voices' and 'who were you talking to son?' and then his mum dropped the big one: 'were you masterbating you know we could just call it "happy time" if you wanted...'

my mind boggled. i was shocked. i doubletaked for a second there. this is transformers- a kids movie and they are talking about MASTERBATING WTF!!! if i took this seriously and complained- which i know watchdogs and other people will have done then they will say: but the movie was rated M 15+ (or PG13 in America) and wasnt intended in children. but this doesnt stop kids going to the movie- its only recommended for children and doesnt restrict them from seeing it at all. the few parents who actually see the rating of the movie and think- hey im not letting little 9 year old jonny go and learn about masterbation im not going to let him- well their kids will be teased at school.

this sort of thing is happening everywhere: harry potter 4 & 5 got an M rating but that didnt stop heaps of little kids watching horror and violence in it.

its in music too: avril lavigne who has many young fans says in Girlfriend: "and hell yeah im the mother******* princess." what the hell happened?

i dont like this- moviemakers and songwriters are slowly desensitising children to violence and sex obviously for their own personal gain: violence is more tolerented so more people will go see violent movies. something has to be done.

what is the deal with the soccer/football thing?

some people get really touchy about whether it should be soccer or football. now gamespot may be multicultural but why cant we just make it soccer? there are so many codes of football: rugby union, rugby league (australian thing), NFL and AFL (another aussie thing), International Football (i think is gaelic football) why do some people go socrazy when you do call it soccer? i dont care but for the sake of not getting confused.........