Australia refuses classification to State of Decay
Healing items constitute "drug use related to incentives."
The Australian ratings board has denied an age classification certificate, required for a game to be published legally, for Xbox zombie survival game State of Decay.
Because the game features real-world drugs which are used to buff and restore health, their use being depicted by the swallowing of pills, the ratings board believes that the game encourages drug use by associating it with reward. Because of this perceived incentivisation of drug use, the game will not see the light of day in the territory without some serious alterations.
The full report explaining the move was obtained by Koataku Australia and is reproduced below.
"The game contains the option of self-administering a variety of "'medications' throughout gameplay which act to restore a player's health or boost their stamina. These 'medications' include both legal and illicit substances such as methadone, morphine, amphetamines, stimulants, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, codeine, aspirin, 'trucker pills"', painkillers and tussin. Of these, methadone, morphine, and amphetamines are proscribed drugs and the term 'stimulant' is commonly used to refer to a class of drugs of which several are proscribed. Players obtain drugs by scavenging for them in the environment or by manufacturing them in a 'Medical Lab'. When players find drugs in the environment the name of the drug appears onscreen and the drug is also represented by a visual icon such as a pill bottle or syringe. Within the 'Medical Lab' players are prompted to make substances such as 'Potent Stims', 'Mild Stims' and 'Painkillers'. The laboratory includes a 'research library' and 'chemical dictionary'.
"When administering drugs, the player is briefly depicted moving a pill bottle toward their mouth. The sound of pills rattling in the bottle accompanies the depiction. The name of the drug appears onscreen along with its representative icon. Consumption of the drug instantly increases a player's in-game abilities allowing them to progress through gameplay more easily. The Applicant has stated that a 'player can choose not to make any drugs or scavenge for them, but it would be very difficult to complete the game without some form of medication'. In the Board's opinion, the game enables the player's character to self-administer proscribed drugs which aid in gameplay progression. This game therefore contains drug use related to incentives or rewards and should be Refused Classification."
Australia's ratings system recently underwent a major renovation, with legislation enacted six months ago which introduced a 'mature' rating for game featuring heavy violence, sex or other social taboos. Whilst it was hoped by many that this would fulfil the same function as the '18' classification in the rest of the world, allowing Australians access to adult games, it seems that some games are still deemed inappropriate. Yesterday, Saints Row IV, bought by Deep Silver in THQ's pre-bankruptcy fire sale earlier in the year, was refused classification too, on the basis of "sexualised violence."
No adult in their right mind would think that "short animation showing character popping a pill" = "You should go out and abuse prescription drugs". Moreover, why the arbitrary decision on this? They let Farcry 2 and 3 in and they have this feature. Fallout 3 was allowed in and you can actually get "addicted" to illicit and non-illicit drugs in that, they even call it an addiction. Bioshock has this as its core mechanic, Stalker, Dead Rising, Left 4 Dead, the list goes on, and I'm sure some of the ones I didn't mention were M, not even MA15. So why pick out this as deserving of no rating at all?
I am so sick of this. So very sick of it. I am a legal adult, and I should be allowed to choose what I consume, not have it chosen for me.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Tucson K Bagley on 26th June 2013 9:33am
Other forms of IP entertainment like books, film, television etc can get away with as much sex and violence as they want when addressing an adult audience. But for some strange reason we aren't allowed to. Even though the sex and violence in the "worst" games is a pale shadow of what can be found routinely in other media.
By the way the King James version of the bible has “harlot” in it 48 times, “sodomite” 5 times, “fornicator” 5 times, “smite” 133 times, “kill” 208 times and “maim” 7 times.
I really don't get why calling something an Elixir is fine but calling it a drug is not. I suppose we must be protected from ourselves though.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Andrew on 26th June 2013 10:38am
And I agree with you for once. I can understand if they say that in video games the exposure is more continuous that in movies or books. But that is only an excuse so they won't have to say what they really thing; that for pure puritanism and ignorant conservationism they dare to treat games as "stuff for kids" without even sitting down a looking once (just once) to find stuff like Last of Us, Braid, Limbo or Dear Esther.
They only show their ignorance to the rest of the world. and like ignorant they are, they think their acts speak good of them. When they only make them the mockery of the entire gaming world.
Pretty much any country outside of America has this issue though. England does it. Grotesque, The Bunny Games and the Human Centipede II are all banned films in England in their original uncut version. Hell the original cut of Enter the Dragon was banned in England until 1999.
It all sucks, but at least Australia sucks a lot less then it used too.
Edited 3 times. Last edit by Andrew on 26th June 2013 1:11pm
The main problem is the poor treatment of the media itself. Just because it is interactive.
Lets make a movie with zombies, drugs and a heroine that regularly takes pills to power herself up for the fight against the undead.
It will get a Adult (18+) rating and you can watch it everywhere. Where is the difference?
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Benjamin Crause on 26th June 2013 8:34pm
That's the censors problem.