Saints Row IV Refused Classification in Australia (Again)

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Saints Row IV Refused Classification in Australia (Again)

image

Saints Row IV was refused due to "drug use related to incentives and rewards."

Saints Row IV, which was originally refused classification last month, has once again been refused, this time by the Australian Classification Review Board. "In the Review Board's opinion, Saints Row IV could not be accommodated within the R 18+ classification as drug use related to incentives and rewards is not permitted," said the board in an official statement.

Saints Row IV being refused classifciation would normally not be a big deal, as Australia has a long history of banning games that don't fall under its strict guidelines. Except that earlier this year, a new R 18+ rating was introduced specifically to prevent these kind of bans.

It should be noted that this is not the edited version of the game that was playable at PAX Australia, but rather a re-assessment of the original, unedited game. The next step from developer Volition will be to re-submit the watered-down version of the game to the Classification Board, and hope for the best.

The original refused classification report cited "interactive, visual depictions of implied sexual violence which are not justified by context," an obvious reference to the game's "Rectifier" anal probe weapon. The "elements of illicit or proscribed drug use related to incentives or rewards" statement was also included in the original report.

Either way, its a good thing we have the government trying so hard to make sure adults aren't subject to naughty things like this, or God knows what would happen to our society. I believe the Mad Max films were based on a version of Australia where the censorship board didn't ban violent video games. Slippery slope people.

Source: Australian Classification Board

Permalink

I've said it once, I've said it twice, I said it over three damn times. This is why Oz Game Shop gets my money and not my local EB Games. Seriously this is supposed to be played by people who are over the age of 18, if an 18 year old cannot define whether or not a drug is bad for them, they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Because a mature adult with no existing drug problems will develop them due to seeing glamorization in a game that is 98% self parody? No.

Everything is justified by context in Saint's Row. That's the point.

Australia, you so crazy.

Their banning is totally justified. After playing "Saints Row: The Third", I fell on bad times, pushing drugs, while being carted around in a gimp-suited-guy-drawn carriages, shooting at people and laughing as they were devoured by sharks.
It was only the prim and properness of the saintly people at the Australian Classification Board who managed to turn me from my criminal ways, before I started blowing up sky-carriers.

And of course people are going to bitch because they can't play some stupid piece of shit game.

I think it's important to remember that it's not just the ratings system that is the problem, the Australian Classification Board just plain sucks at its job.

I believe after being confronted with the fact that Left 4 Dead was more violent than the censored version of Left 4 Dead 2 they responded with something to the effect of each game being judged independently of all others which is just mindbogglingly stupid.

All games should be judged to the exact same standard which means comparing ratings that were given previously. What's the point of a rating system if Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 can be given the exact same rating despite having very different levels of violence?

Would they refuse a game classification if the main character was a cancer patient and their reward for completing missions was a dose of chemotherapy drugs?

And now we see how the anti-R18 group is retaliating against it being introduced - they're simply ignoring it.

The original refused classification report cited "interactive, visual depictions of implied sexual violence which are not justified by context," an obvious reference to the game's "Rectifier" anal probe weapon.

Since when did we need any kind of context for anal probes?

This is a mistake that needs to be "Rectified"
Also they should give the game a damn rating!

Steven Bogos:
I believe the Mad Max films were based on a version of Australia where the censorship board didn't ban violent video games. Slippery slope people.

Mad Max was not a film series. It was a documentary of the future as told by the mad prophet Fairdinkumessia.

Do not mock the prophecy!

TheEvilCheese:
Because a mature adult with no existing drug problems will develop them due to seeing glamorization in a game that is 98% self parody? No.

Everything is justified by context in Saint's Row. That's the point.

Australia, you so crazy.

I like the fact that they're okay with running around shooting random people in the nuts for no reason, but drug use is wrong.

CriticalMiss:
Would they refuse a game classification if the main character was a cancer patient and their reward for completing missions was a dose of chemotherapy drugs?

I doubt cancer treatments are considered "proscriptive." Even still, I doubt giving a cancer patient chemo would count as "proscribed use."

Blitzwing:
And of course people are going to bitch because they can't play some stupid piece of shit game.

Saints Row IV should be not played because it's a stupid piece of shit game, not not played because it offends some puritan censorship board.

Blitzwing:
And of course people are going to bitch because they can't play some stupid piece of shit game.

So glad you are the person who decides which games we may and may not play. Oh great Blitzwing, please, please give us your opinion on every game ever, so we may know which is good and which is bad without ever playing it for ourselves.

Zachary Amaranth:

CriticalMiss:
Would they refuse a game classification if the main character was a cancer patient and their reward for completing missions was a dose of chemotherapy drugs?

I doubt cancer treatments are considered "proscriptive." Even still, I doubt giving a cancer patient chemo would count as "proscribed use."

So I can finally release my hit Indie game 'Grand Theft Chemo' in Oz? Brilliant!

CriticalMiss:

So I can finally release my hit Indie game 'Grand Theft Chemo' in Oz? Brilliant!

As long as you don't use an anal probe on anyone (beating them to death with a dildo is fine, though).

Cecilo:

Blitzwing:
And of course people are going to bitch because they can't play some stupid piece of shit game.

So glad you are the person who decides which games we may and may not play. Oh great Blitzwing, please, please give us your opinion on every game ever, so we may know which is good and which is bad without ever playing it for ourselves.

I don't need to the board does it for me.

I just don't see the point in complaining about this the board has made their decision and they aren't going to change it so just accept it and move on.

Fuck off my country, let us adults have our fun.

As someone living in Australia, it's actually amazing there's apologists supporting this second banning of something that doesn't take a fucking government to dictate to the common man in terms of restraint and control.

It makes me sick that I'm in the same country with such sheeple.

Zachary Amaranth:

TheEvilCheese:
Because a mature adult with no existing drug problems will develop them due to seeing glamorization in a game that is 98% self parody? No.

Everything is justified by context in Saint's Row. That's the point.

Australia, you so crazy.

I like the fact that they're okay with running around shooting random people in the nuts for no reason, but drug use is wrong.

Personally, I applaud their decision.

I don't know about you, but nothing changed in me after I killed a bunch of bandits with a Flamethrower in Fallout 3. The second I found out that Med-X is actually Morphine, however, BAM! Suddenly I'm hooked on Heroin turning tricks under a bridge!

Video game drugs are a serious thing. I mean, I don't even live near a bridge! Where the fuck did it come from? It just appeared out of nowhere! Hell, I don't even know any drug dealers and I'm somehow addicted! WHAT IS THIS SORCERY? WHAT HAVE VIDEO GAME DRUGS DONE TO ME?

All they have to do is rename the drugs Fallout style.

Come on, that has TONS of bowdlerization and "if you know what I mean" potential! I'm staunchly anti-drug, but I'd still play a game where you deal "You Know, That Stuff".

So sick of hearing about banned games. Anyone with half a clue just buys them online from overseas sellers anyway due to the price gouging. I have zero sympathy for anyone dumb enough to still be buying from EB or JB Hi Fi.

Ratings board is utterly irrelevant.

lacktheknack:
All they have to do is rename the drugs Fallout style.

Come on, that has TONS of bowdlerization and "if you know what I mean" potential! I'm staunchly anti-drug, but I'd still play a game where you deal "You Know, That Stuff".

That is actually a REALLY good idea! I love the Fallout Games and I though the renamed drugs kinda helped towards the world building.
Besides, they could lampshade the fuck out of it.

"So Pierce, what are we selling?"
"Ummmm...Some Clarky Cats, some Yellow Bentines, Bit of Triple Sub and come Cake."
"Cake?"
"Yeah, Cake. It's a Made up Drug."
"What?"
"Made up of CHEMICALS."
"ohhhh..."

(Cookie for Referance)

Blitzwing:
[deleted] I hope your copy gets lost in the mail

Nope, I've never had a problem with ozgameshop.com, actually got my next game cheaper because of reasons. Don't get all pouty because your mum won't let you use your credit card on the internet.

I think Volition should create Saints Row IV: Pretty in Australia Edition where the gangs push vitamin C supplements and all guns fire rainbows that cause people to giggle when hit. I'm not sure if that would actually get a point across, but I'd probably buy it just for the novelty.

CriticalMiss:
Would they refuse a game classification if the main character was a cancer patient and their reward for completing missions was a dose of chemotherapy drugs?

Wasn't Dead Rising 2 about something like that? Getting anti-zombification drugs for your guys daughter?

Appleworks:

CriticalMiss:
Would they refuse a game classification if the main character was a cancer patient and their reward for completing missions was a dose of chemotherapy drugs?

Wasn't Dead Rising 2 about something like that? Getting anti-zombification drugs for your guys daughter?

The key point is that they weren't "real" drugs. As other people have mentioned, fallout renaming morphine to "med-x" was perfectly acceptable by the board.

Shanicus:
[
I don't know about you, but nothing changed in me after I killed a bunch of bandits with a Flamethrower in Fallout 3. The second I found out that Med-X is actually Morphine, however, BAM! Suddenly I'm hooked on Heroin turning tricks under a bridge!

Morphine: it leads to heroin AND bridge building!

XD (good post, seriously!)

Hm? ...... What? Sorry was I supposed to be surprised? I can't, Australia isn't going to surprise anyone unless they release a game called "donkeyf***er's murdertime extravaganza"

Australia, the country that forced Bethesda to rename morphine as med-x worldwide. There times I can't help but wonder if it makes sense, business wise, to keep dealing with Australia because of the shit they put developers through. Not just with them, but the effect they have on the neighboring countries.

JoshuaMadoc:
As someone living in Australia, it's actually amazing there's apologists supporting this second banning of something that doesn't take a fucking government to dictate to the common man in terms of restraint and control.

It makes me sick that I'm in the same country with such sheeple.

You have my sympathy. You'd think that the citizens of a country founded by convicts would be a bit more on the ball in realizing when their government is fucking them over.

Oh come on, just look the the Board Members. It's like a private school parent-teacher conference. Only two of them are even under 40 for pete's sake, one's a 27 year-old law and communication studies (???) guy and one's a 33 year-old former school psychologist. Hell, the average age of that whole Board is 48.

You'd get a saner rating and better representation of the gaming community by substituting the whole board with Statler and Waldorf.
image

Shall we make a list of things that are and are not okay according to classification board using previous Saints Row games (Mostly SR2 because that's the one I remember best)? Off the top of my head:

A-Okay!:

Not okay!:
Real drugs references
Strongly implied anal probing

Seems a bit of an odd place to draw the line.

Shanicus:

Zachary Amaranth:

TheEvilCheese:
Because a mature adult with no existing drug problems will develop them due to seeing glamorization in a game that is 98% self parody? No.

Everything is justified by context in Saint's Row. That's the point.

Australia, you so crazy.

I like the fact that they're okay with running around shooting random people in the nuts for no reason, but drug use is wrong.

Personally, I applaud their decision.

I don't know about you, but nothing changed in me after I killed a bunch of bandits with a Flamethrower in Fallout 3. The second I found out that Med-X is actually Morphine, however, BAM! Suddenly I'm hooked on Heroin turning tricks under a bridge!

Video game drugs are a serious thing. I mean, I don't even live near a bridge! Where the fuck did it come from? It just appeared out of nowhere! Hell, I don't even know any drug dealers and I'm somehow addicted! WHAT IS THIS SORCERY? WHAT HAVE VIDEO GAME DRUGS DONE TO ME?

Hear, hear ... I got started on "Bottled-Fairy" and "Shroom" as a kid, you know the light stuff. It was only a short time before I descended into Valkyrie in 2001 and could be found doing "favors" in alleyways for a taste of Phoenix Down.

Quaxar:
Oh come on, just look the the Board Members. It's like a private school parent-teacher conference. Only two of them are even under 40 for pete's sake, one's a 27 year-old law and communication studies (???) guy and one's a 33 year-old former school psychologist. Hell, the average age of that whole Board is 48.

Oh god lord, you know you're on your way to progress when a generations newest media is being filtered by people from bygone era with conflicting values and moral opinions. Good job Australia way to keep it fresh.

God I hate this government.
I just want to punch Kevin Rudd, Julia Gilard and Tony Abbot right in there smug faces.
The rest of them too.

CriticalMiss:
Would they refuse a game classification if the main character was a cancer patient and their reward for completing missions was a dose of chemotherapy drugs?

I want Crank the Video Game now

 Pages 1 2 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