Syndicate Banned in Australia - UPDATED

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

And naturally our country is still being run by a bunch of senile old farts, a woman who wasn't even born in Australia, and a nanny country to all things from road rules to Video Games.

Foxbat Flyer:
only one way to describe my anger at my government... FUCK YOU GUYS!!! I blame this all on Julia Gillard, first she screws the economics, and now delaying R 18+ games to be alowed?!?! now that out of my system, Im so damn sick of the Australian government thinking that parents are irresponsible, so they dont allow any good things in, like Mortal Kombat :( atleast Dead Island got through i guess...

Well, lucky im moving to the UK in 3 months time :D

In fairness, the problems with the OFLC randomly slapping the RC tag on games have been around since during Howard's time in government. I could also point out that the Gillard government was the one that put out the request for submissions regarding putting a R-18+ rating in place for games, even if nothing seems to have come of it yet.

Damn, that sounds awesome.
Oh, EA, talking about censorship... The hypocrisy is so amusing.

You know, for being the sons and daughters of a bunch of convicted felons and their jailors, Australians sure are squeamish.

idarkphoenixi:
Australia needs to get out of the 1990's and grow the fuck up...

Games are no longer a childs plaything. In fact, most customers now are full grown adults. If you allow porn, violent movies and rap, then you can allow games.

actually things were better in the 90's.. soldier of fortune got past the ratings board then without censoring and that had gore and locational damage. very graphic for the time

Xangi:

Farther than stars:

Xangi:

Surely they mean "archaic"?

Oh wait, this is EA, they're not famous for their brains, and in fact are famous for their LACK of brains.

Silly me.

No, they mean arcane. Archaic wouldn't even make any sense. Games haven't been around for long enough to be archaic, let alone the Australian government's notoriety for banning them.
Either way, I don't mind whether you like EA or not, but don't go knocking them for something as simple as this.
And personally I would never call them stupid. Sure, they've done some dumb things but looking at the over-all record; getting into bed with studios and copyright holders that brought them games like the Happy Potter series, The Sims, Mass Effect (and by extension Dragon Age), Dead Space, just to name a few. I would call that pretty smart business practice.

Arcane makes significantly less sense, no matter how you define archaic. Also, if you think telling a government to shove it is smarter than appealing to them to get your product sold (in terms of business), then you clearly should never run a business. The ideal handling of this situation would be to do what smart game companies ALWAYS do when dealing with Australia, make a special censored version. Or, better than that, just give them the German version, since that one is already going to be censored.

Also, EA is not known for smart business practice in the realm of PC gaming. If you had played DS2 or ME2 on PC, you'd realize what a hassle it is to deal with Securom, which they insist on putting in their games. Sure, they do great on 360 and PS3, but soon that console generation will be forced into obsolescence by Nintendo starting a new generation, and then what? What happens when Mass Effect 6: Shepard goes to college doesn't sell? They'll be wishing they didn't alienate the whole PC market.

tl;dr
Archaic makes more sense no matter how you slice it (though if English is not your first language I can see the confusion), and EA is still dumb.

So that's going to be your argument, huh? "Archaic makes more sense, just because it does"? Yes, English is my first language (which you might guess from me being British!) and at least I told you why I think arcane makes a perfectly good adjective there.
Anyway, that aside, I would argue that pandering to the Australian government could possibly be the worst thing to do in this situation. If game studios will just blindly go along with their demands, they'll end up censoring more and more, giving gaming an increasingly bad rep in that country.
Moreover, the way that they did tell the Australian government to "shove it" was rather mild to be honest. In politics, if you want to shine through you need strong opinions and to be able to stand up to your opponents. Otherwise you just seem weak and I wouldn't want that for the gaming industry, no matter who the company is.
And lastly, my money is still on EA, who I think are capable of a lot more than you give them credit for; I suspect they're in it for the long haul. Also, I'd contradict you and say that Mass Effect is a trilogy, but if Halo is anything to go by, I fear you might be right about Mass Effect 6. =/

Xangi:

Andy Chalk:

"The game will not be available in Australia despite its enthusiastic response from fans. We were encouraged by the government's recent agreement to adopt an 18+ age rating for games. However, delays continue to force an arcane censorship on games - cuts that would never be imposed on books or movies,"

Surely they mean "archaic"?

Oh wait, this is EA, they're not famous for their brains, and in fact are famous for their LACK of brains.

Silly me.

Ahh, calling someone for their lack of brains when you dont even understand the word they used... So very cute.

OT: Good on EA

While I'm not interested in the game itself, I am angry with the Office of Film and Literature Classification for refusing classification just on principle. If they can't classify it, then they should make up a new classification for it. Censorship is never the answer.

random_bars:
Am I the only one who came in here with a sort of sense of understanding from knowing the Aussie government has done this in the past, only to get somewhat pissed off when I discovered that the actual reason the game is being banned is nothing more than 'too much gore'?

I just really think this is a fucking stupid way of judging things. Here we have a game which personally I think is the first game I can think of which I genuinely would feel somewhat uncomfortable playing, due to the way you (as the player) are committing horrific actions in a genuinely evil, fucked up world, and yet this is glorified with a straight face and seen as perfectly okay.

I have no qualms at all about playing as an evil character, doing terrible things, but there's something about this game that I just don't like, and I think it's that there doesn't seem to be any explanation or justification for this evil. It's not darkly cynical like the first Syndicate game (from what I've seen of it). It's not over-the-top, comedic evil, like Evil Genius. It's not evil which is actually treated as evil, like the No Russian level in Modern Warfare 2. It's just... Evil for the sake of evil.

I think it's the bits where you stab a guy in the head and take the chip from his brain while a calm, cheerful voice congratulates you that get me - along with the casual killing of innocents who pose no threat at all to you. I just don't like the way that not only is there no attempt to portray this as a horrific action - either within the game's fiction or outside it, to the player - but that it's almost glorified.

Has anyone else thought anything like this or am I being a baby?

It is not just evil for the sake of being evil though. It is corporations taken to their logical extreme. Look in the news right now, you will see dozens of corporations filing lawsuits and what not against one another left, right, up, and down.

If they could legally send squads of soldiers or agents after one another, you could bet your last penny on it and be a winner. And in a dystopian future where the corporate entities rule the world why wouldn't they do exactly that? And there are no innocents, if you belong to the enemy syndicate you are already a combatant, they are in the way, witnesses, and resources that you can deny to your enemy, if you kill them they can no longer utilize them, why would this be portrayed as a horrific action? The game itself is about playing as an agent for a syndicate, if they tried to give you sad faces or some other punishment for mowing down the fodder then that would be a massive disconnect, and honestly if someone needs the GAME to tell them that killing innocent people is a no no, then they have a lot more problems than this.

Honestly I think it will be refreshing to play on the other side of the fence again, there are far too many games playing good for goods own sake!

TL:DR: the evil isn't over the top, its logical, no ones innocent and they all deserve to die, the game is refreshing in letting you be really evil.

Urgh, and that meeting of Attorneys-General plus Brendan O'Connor's "dedication" to sort out the matter by the end of the year was so promising... well fucking done Greg Smith you limp-dicked little tool. Everyone was in for it, even John fucking Rau despite his weird ideas, and you hesitated... just that little too long to show that you were weak. Though eventually agreeing it didn't take much from the anti-game lobbyists to make you cave. "Grand Theft Auto is a game that lets you pick up, have sex with and murder prostitutes". I can't believe that they got you with that old argument.

There's always one isn't there. Michael Atkinson was bad and I'm glad he's gone but Greg Smith is just weak.

I think EA is taking the right road here. If the ACB refuses to change, (or others refuse to change it,) fuck them. A game development goes through enough without having to alter itself to adhere to the ACB's fragile sensibilities. Maybe people will start getting angry and start pushing that spineless fool Smith and anyone else like him in the right direction.

just remember these people will be dead in a few more years or retired

EA, screw you. Just goddamn decide if you're going to be awesome and make the gaming community cheer you or if you're going to go the bad karma route.

Still, good on you. Our government are twits.

Xangi:

Surely they mean "archaic"?

Oh wait, this is EA, they're not famous for their brains, and in fact are famous for their LACK of brains.

Silly me.

Nobody here in my lovely sunburnt country really understands how they catalogue their games. It's quite mysterious, really. You could even say it's secret.

Arcane - ar·cane/ärˈkān, Adjective: Understood by few; mysterious or secret.

Xangi:

Andy Chalk:

"The game will not be available in Australia despite its enthusiastic response from fans. We were encouraged by the government's recent agreement to adopt an 18+ age rating for games. However, delays continue to force an arcane censorship on games - cuts that would never be imposed on books or movies,"

Surely they mean "archaic"?

Oh wait, this is EA, they're not famous for their brains, and in fact are famous for their LACK of brains.

Silly me.

Mr Xangi, meet Mr Dictionary.

Silly you indeed.

things will never change with this country. always behind and idiots for politicians. i think every company, like valve with L4D 2, should tell australia how retarded their rating system is and refuse sale for the country down under. maybe then australia finally realizes that a 18+ rating for games is beneficial.

Not interested in stupid shooterisation of Bullfrog classic that should never, ever have been made
.
For once? Good work, censors.

I hate to say it, but EA's gained back a bit of my respect now. Anyone who tells my benighted government to get bent like that is okay in my book!

As an Australian, I feel confident there will be avenues to acquire this game, without resorting to piracy. All the government has done is deprive themselves of some tax dollars and deprive Australian retailers of some sales.

Daemonate:
Not interested in stupid shooterisation of Bullfrog classic that should never, ever have been made
.
For once? Good work, censors.

I agree. I'm not interested in this game either; I wish my government would use censorship to stop other people buying and playing it.

Funny, when SOPA comes out no one will even know that gory games are banned because all gaming sites would be permablocked. And the EA site is already run by draconian moderators.

Woodsey:

Xangi:

Andy Chalk:

"The game will not be available in Australia despite its enthusiastic response from fans. We were encouraged by the government's recent agreement to adopt an 18+ age rating for games. However, delays continue to force an arcane censorship on games - cuts that would never be imposed on books or movies,"

Surely they mean "archaic"?

Oh wait, this is EA, they're not famous for their brains, and in fact are famous for their LACK of brains.

Silly me.

Mr Xangi, meet Mr Dictionary.

Silly you indeed.

In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

Farther than stars:

Xangi:

Farther than stars:

No, they mean arcane. Archaic wouldn't even make any sense. Games haven't been around for long enough to be archaic, let alone the Australian government's notoriety for banning them.
Either way, I don't mind whether you like EA or not, but don't go knocking them for something as simple as this.
And personally I would never call them stupid. Sure, they've done some dumb things but looking at the over-all record; getting into bed with studios and copyright holders that brought them games like the Happy Potter series, The Sims, Mass Effect (and by extension Dragon Age), Dead Space, just to name a few. I would call that pretty smart business practice.

Arcane makes significantly less sense, no matter how you define archaic. Also, if you think telling a government to shove it is smarter than appealing to them to get your product sold (in terms of business), then you clearly should never run a business. The ideal handling of this situation would be to do what smart game companies ALWAYS do when dealing with Australia, make a special censored version. Or, better than that, just give them the German version, since that one is already going to be censored.

Also, EA is not known for smart business practice in the realm of PC gaming. If you had played DS2 or ME2 on PC, you'd realize what a hassle it is to deal with Securom, which they insist on putting in their games. Sure, they do great on 360 and PS3, but soon that console generation will be forced into obsolescence by Nintendo starting a new generation, and then what? What happens when Mass Effect 6: Shepard goes to college doesn't sell? They'll be wishing they didn't alienate the whole PC market.

tl;dr
Archaic makes more sense no matter how you slice it (though if English is not your first language I can see the confusion), and EA is still dumb.

So that's going to be your argument, huh? "Archaic makes more sense, just because it does"? Yes, English is my first language (which you might guess from me being British!) and at least I told you why I think arcane makes a perfectly good adjective there.
Anyway, that aside, I would argue that pandering to the Australian government could possibly be the worst thing to do in this situation. If game studios will just blindly go along with their demands, they'll end up censoring more and more, giving gaming an increasingly bad rep in that country.
Moreover, the way that they did tell the Australian government to "shove it" was rather mild to be honest. In politics, if you want to shine through you need strong opinions and to be able to stand up to your opponents. Otherwise you just seem weak and I wouldn't want that for the gaming industry, no matter who the company is.
And lastly, my money is still on EA, who I think are capable of a lot more than you give them credit for; I suspect they're in it for the long haul. Also, I'd contradict you and say that Mass Effect is a trilogy, but if Halo is anything to go by, I fear you might be right about Mass Effect 6. =/

In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

Game studios have no problem going along with Germany's demands, and my point was that they could just give Australia the German copy (translated obviously), but let's not even kid ourselves here, Most people will get American or European copies anyway, legally or otherwise.

Also, I didn't even BEGIN to rant about origin, but I'll shorten it to this. I didn't buy BF3 because of origin, and I won't be buying ME3 because of origin, and I was a HUGE fan of ME1 and I liked ME2. If a game has EA's DRM, I won't buy it, and I know MANY MANY MANY other people who feel exactly the same.

FelixG:

Xangi:

Andy Chalk:

"The game will not be available in Australia despite its enthusiastic response from fans. We were encouraged by the government's recent agreement to adopt an 18+ age rating for games. However, delays continue to force an arcane censorship on games - cuts that would never be imposed on books or movies,"

Surely they mean "archaic"?

Oh wait, this is EA, they're not famous for their brains, and in fact are famous for their LACK of brains.

Silly me.

Ahh, calling someone for their lack of brains when you dont even understand the word they used... So very cute.

OT: Good on EA

In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

Talking to someone like they are a child when you don't even understand the context which they are speaking in... So very cute.

As an Australian, refusing the game from classification has only made me more determined to play it. I'll import it from ozgameshop. It's cheaper than buying locally anyway. Therre is a slight risk it'll be found and confiscated by customs, but that's rare.

Xangi:

Woodsey:

Xangi:

Surely they mean "archaic"?

Oh wait, this is EA, they're not famous for their brains, and in fact are famous for their LACK of brains.

Silly me.

Mr Xangi, meet Mr Dictionary.

Silly you indeed.

In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

If they'd meant archaic and antiquated they'd have said it.

Arcane makes sense in the sentence it was used, there's no reason to assume they meant otherwise.

Oh well. Ebay UK, here I come.

That update makes me respect EA a bit more.

Ahahahahaha, SOPA backing EA doesn't like censorship.

Oh wow, time to enjoy myself with this mindless bit of fun designed by professionals!

The problem I have is not that they banned this game, it's the inconsistency. There are already games with graphic violence available, games with dismemberment etc. Either ban them all or ban none of them.

One of the arguments against an R18+ rating is that children will get hold of violent games more easily. Ummm.... right now many games which are rated 18 in other countries get no cuts and put into the MA15+ category... Which, imo, means it's far easier to get as a child than an 18 rated game would be.

Xangi:
In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

Game studios have no problem going along with Germany's demands, and my point was that they could just give Australia the German copy (translated obviously), but let's not even kid ourselves here, Most people will get American or European copies anyway, legally or otherwise.

Also, I didn't even BEGIN to rant about origin, but I'll shorten it to this. I didn't buy BF3 because of origin, and I won't be buying ME3 because of origin, and I was a HUGE fan of ME1 and I liked ME2. If a game has EA's DRM, I won't buy it, and I know MANY MANY MANY other people who feel exactly the same.

I'm intrigued, do you use Steam then?
Also, I'm willing to bet there isn't a dictionary in the world which defines arcane as meaning "magical" and the links to the ones below are just a few. Yes, it's often used to describe magic, but that is literally to emphasize its "mysterious" qualities. Speaking of magic, the first dictionary below lists "arcane economic theories" as an example. Not exactly the most mystical of terms, now is it?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/arcane
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arcane
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arcane
http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/arcane

Farther than stars:

Xangi:
In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

Game studios have no problem going along with Germany's demands, and my point was that they could just give Australia the German copy (translated obviously), but let's not even kid ourselves here, Most people will get American or European copies anyway, legally or otherwise.

Also, I didn't even BEGIN to rant about origin, but I'll shorten it to this. I didn't buy BF3 because of origin, and I won't be buying ME3 because of origin, and I was a HUGE fan of ME1 and I liked ME2. If a game has EA's DRM, I won't buy it, and I know MANY MANY MANY other people who feel exactly the same.

I'm intrigued, do you use Steam then?
Also, I'm willing to bet there isn't a dictionary in the world which defines arcane as meaning "magical" and the links to the ones below are just a few. Yes, it's often used to describe magic, but that is literally to emphasize its "mysterious" qualities. Speaking of magic, the first dictionary below lists "arcane economic theories" as an example. Not exactly the most mystical of terms, now is it?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/arcane
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arcane
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arcane
http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/arcane

Note the words "common speech". In common speech, the letters "lol" indicate that a person finds something funny, but I doubt you'd find that defined as a word in any reputable dictionary.

Yes, I use Steam. Why? Because Valve is a company I feel I can trust. Also, steam doesn't ban you from all your games for reporting someone on the forums(in other words they actually care about their customers). This is just one of several key differences I could point out, but if you seriously think that origin is even remotely comparable to steam, you clearly haven't used either.

Also steam has a massive library of games that I'd otherwise be missing out on, Origin has a library size that is kind of pathetic (when you consider that many of those games can be bought without the DRM), and the exclusives aren't really that good.

Doesn't matter anyways, GOG and GamersGate are my preferred distributors, because I can buy single copies of multiplayer games and give them to friends as well so we can have some fun.

Woodsey:

Xangi:

Woodsey:

Mr Xangi, meet Mr Dictionary.

Silly you indeed.

In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

If they'd meant archaic and antiquated they'd have said it.

Arcane makes sense in the sentence it was used, there's no reason to assume they meant otherwise.

In common speech

Good job "reading" that post, now I have to copy part of my last post again so you can "read" it too.

In common speech, the letters "lol" indicate that a person finds something funny, but I doubt you'd find that defined as a word in any reputable dictionary.

Oh, I'll put one more example, just because that's too easy to refute. The word "Derp", in common speech is usually said to indicate stupidity, either on behalf of the speaker or another person. Is THAT in a dictionary? What is said and what words are defined as are often not the same thing.

Also, just in case you were in the vegetarian thread I posted in earlier, I'll refute that argument right now. "Disingenuous" is not a commonly spoken word, and it does mean what its definition is, there is no alternate interpretation due to context or corruption from usage. Nice try though, if you were going to try to sue that.

EA tells australia to get bent?

Well EA you now have more respect from me.

I have no respect for anyone that censors artwork or speech (unless they own it of course, i respect property rights)
Thats why if SOPA passes, im rebelling.

Xangi:

Woodsey:

Xangi:

In common speech, the word archaic, when referring to a law, means that it is antiquated or a relic of a time which is no longer needed. Arcane, in common speech, means magical.

If they'd meant archaic and antiquated they'd have said it.

Arcane makes sense in the sentence it was used, there's no reason to assume they meant otherwise.

In common speech

Good job "reading" that post, now I have to copy part of my last post again so you can "read" it too.

In common speech, the letters "lol" indicate that a person finds something funny, but I doubt you'd find that defined as a word in any reputable dictionary.

Oh, I'll put one more example, just because that's too easy to refute. The word "Derp", in common speech is usually said to indicate stupidity, either on behalf of the speaker or another person. Is THAT in a dictionary? What is said and what words are defined as are often not the same thing.

Also, just in case you were in the vegetarian thread I posted in earlier, I'll refute that argument right now. "Disingenuous" is not a commonly spoken word, and it does mean what its definition is, there is no alternate interpretation due to context or corruption from usage. Nice try though, if you were going to try to sue that.

OK, this seems to have gone far enough. And you should know that those examples are new enough to become categorized yet, just like the word arcane was over 2000 years ago. But somehow you say its meaning has been changed? Although so far you have only based that on the hearsay of a perhaps select group of people. Anyway, you seems you've become rather invested in seeing how deep you can dig yourself, so that's why for me the debate ends here.

Farther than stars:

Xangi:

Woodsey:

If they'd meant archaic and antiquated they'd have said it.

Arcane makes sense in the sentence it was used, there's no reason to assume they meant otherwise.

In common speech

Good job "reading" that post, now I have to copy part of my last post again so you can "read" it too.

In common speech, the letters "lol" indicate that a person finds something funny, but I doubt you'd find that defined as a word in any reputable dictionary.

Oh, I'll put one more example, just because that's too easy to refute. The word "Derp", in common speech is usually said to indicate stupidity, either on behalf of the speaker or another person. Is THAT in a dictionary? What is said and what words are defined as are often not the same thing.

Also, just in case you were in the vegetarian thread I posted in earlier, I'll refute that argument right now. "Disingenuous" is not a commonly spoken word, and it does mean what its definition is, there is no alternate interpretation due to context or corruption from usage. Nice try though, if you were going to try to sue that.

OK, this seems to have gone far enough. And you should know that those examples are new enough to become categorized yet, just like the word arcane was over 2000 years ago. But somehow you say its meaning has been changed? Although so far you have only based that on the hearsay of a perhaps select group of people. Anyway, you seems you've become rather invested in seeing how deep you can dig yourself, so that's why for me the debate ends here.

Translation: You weren't arguing against what you thought, but you have to save face. Anyone who knows anything about language knows that word meanings change frequently, and therefore definitions only go so far. Derp is not new enough to not have been categorized, as it has, by online sources only. It hasn't been formally categorized yet, but again, a formal categorization does not always cover every meaning.

I did not base my debate on the "hearsay" of a select group of people, I made my points based on 2 decades of personal experience with 2 provinces and a US state worth of people, and you did not counter them adequately.

The debate does end here, but because one of us has been beaten, and it was not me.

Raiyan 1.0:
Oh maaaaaaaaaaaaaan!

I was waiting for Yahtzee to tear the game apart!

He can get it through import.

OT: EA, fighting Australia's censorship, and supporting SOPA!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here