Australian R18+ Discussion Questionnaire Released to Public
GamePolitics is reporting that the Australian Government has released a paper to enable the public to discuss the introduction of an R18+ rating for videogames. The questionnaire enables citizens to add their opinion on a range of arguments surrounding the issue.
They include: ‘œAdults should not be prevented from playing R18+ level computer games simply because they are unsuitable for minors’, with ‘œStrongly Agree’ up to ‘œStrongly Disagree’ for the reader to fill in. It also features the opposing argument, such as ‘œComputer games should be treated differently from films given the specific, negative effects of interactivity on players, particularly their participation in violent and aggressive content.’
The form is designed to simply measure public opinion on the issue and for the rating to be passed it would still rely on every Attorney-General’s approval. That of course means that South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson needs to agree, which based on previous evidence doesn’t look likely. The document features citations from reports such as Britain’s Byron review and does a good job of showing a balanced argument, but assuming you’re a gamer you’ll find some of the negative arguments pretty weak:
There is no demonstrated need to change existing restrictions… Given the very low numbers of games that are affected by the absence of the classification category, the introduction of an R 18+ category is only an argument of principle.
Which is fine unless you’re wanting to play one of the ‘œlow number of games that are affected’. Who knows what result this report will have on the debate, but if it turns out that a good chunk of Australians want an R18+ rating, it might add some pressure onto people like Atkinson.
You can read the questionnaire for details on how to contribute as well as the more detailed report (both PDF links). You’ve got until February 28th to submit your form so send it off soon, you can even do it by email. Activism!











I think you misread “low number of games” as “low number of gameRs”, or else one of them is a typo.
@HunterZ Thanks, fixed the mistake. :)