Australia: Nanny State again

[Asher]

This is Kenobi-esque

Indeed.

[Asher]

I'm just sayin...


Pot is "legal" in Portugal if it is decriminalized to possess it. But the same thing happens to ~20 games in Australia and they are termed "banned". Is that consistent?

I'm just wondering if Asher is one of those "pot is legal in Portugal" people.

I don't know if pot is legal in Portugal on the grounds that I don't give a **** about Portugal.

I bet GTA is legal there, though.

[Ecofarm]

The vast majority of M-rated games that would have been exported to Australia either are not submitted for classification (because the publisher knows they will be denied classification) or are censored so that they are no longer M-rated.

Citation required.

[Ecofarm]

For Australia:

GTA III

Originally banned because of sexual violence involving prostitiutes. A censored version was later released. PC version was released uncut with MA15+.

GTA IV

Pre-censored before submission because of sex scenes involving prostitutes. An uncut version was later released for the PC with a MA15+. A patch was later released to completely uncensor the PS3 version and the 360 version. All expansions are unedited with a MA15+.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games#Australia

[Asher]

If your point is that Australia is a sensible non-nanny state, have to say you are not making it convincingly.

[Ecofarm]

My point is that your statement is totally "chicken little".

Only 20 games are banned and only 20 unclassified. And GTA is legal there, even uncensored.

[Asher]

My point is that your statement is totally "chicken little".

Only 20 games are banned and only 20 unclassified. And GTA is legal there, even uncensored.

It was banned, whether they reversed it later or not is inconsequential

And as Kuci said, it's very well known in the video gaming world what Australia will classify or refuse classification to. Publishers don't waste time and effort submitting games they know won't pass.

We will not do your homework if you do not believe it.

The fact that they've "only" effectively banned 40 games that've been submitted more than makes my point about them being an unacceptable nannystate. I'm not wasting any more time on you.

[Ecofarm]

~20 games banned and ~20 games unclassified (and GTA being legal uncensored), is long, LONG way from:

They've banned all games rated M for Mature, including GTA.

There's no way around that. Have a nice day.

[Asher]

Logic puzzle: Refusing to create a classification for "M for Mature" and banning the sale of games without classification leads to what result?

[DanS]

This thread has strayed from the perfectly interesting and stimulating topic of Aussie nannies with A cups.

[giblets]

It's like Ben, but more arrogant and with a more inconsistent set of beliefs.

[Ecofarm]

For the record: I don't agree with banning those games, but let's not go "chicken little" on Australia.

[Kuciwalker]

~20 games banned and ~20 games unclassified (and GTA being legal uncensored), is long, LONG way from:

You are a ****ing moron who doesn't understand the idea of a biased sample.

[giblets]

No one said the sky is falling. Asher is just pointing out Australia's stupid nanny state tendencies.

[Kuciwalker]

We are concerned with the conditional probability that an arbitrary game given an M rating in e.g. the United States would be permitted in Australia if submitted for classification uncensored. Taking the proportion of games submitted for classification in Australia that have been banned or denied classification is 1) not an estimator of that probability and 2) would be a biased estimator even if you fixed it to be proportion of M-rated games submitted!