Report Comment to a Moderator Our Moderators review all comments for abusive and offensive language, and ensure comments are from Verified Users only.
Please report a comment only if you feel it requires our urgent attention.
I understand, report it. Cancel

Nnooo: Australian classification costs are prohibitive

By Rachel Weber

Nnooo: Australian classification costs are prohibitive

Tue 09 Apr 2013 9:22am GMT / 5:22am EDT / 2:22am PDT

Bruce Thompson explains why current system has to change

An indie developer has explained why the new automated classification system for games in Australia can't come soon enough, explaining the current system makes releasing games in the country just too expensive.

"The current Australian ratings system increases the cost of making games for the Australian market and prevents many small developers from releasing their titles here," Bruce Thompson, business and marketing director from Nnooo told Vooks.

"Australia's classification board is currently the most expensive ratings board we deal with. Their fee is AUS$890 or AUS$1,210, depending on how much information you provide them with."

The new proposed system put forward by Jason Clare, the Australian minister for home affairs, aims to reduce red tape, introduce automated classification (with a pilot for mobile and online games at first) and to allow small changes to be made to games without the need for reclassification.

Thompson's example of costs under the current system shows why these changes are so important, and should make Australia a more attractive market for developers and publishers.

"We can sell a game in the Americas (with a population of about 1 billion) for no ratings fees, in Europe (with a population of over 700 million) for €500 per platform and in Australia (23 million) for AUS$430. Considering that only 2 per cent of our revenue comes from Australian sales you can see how ridiculous this is. "

From Recommendations by Taboola

1 Comment

Agreed - Australia was the most expensive, and the hardest. We even went to the effort of getting a developer authorised as an assessor, and offering this to other devs (i.e. for $500 less). I can't see any reason why a self-assessment system wouldn't work.

Posted:3 years ago


Login or register to post

Take part in the GamesIndustry community

Register now