In the first of three articles, here is an extensive list of the games that have been Refused Classification or never submitted for classification in Australia. You decide whether these games should have been banned, whether children should be protected from such material and whether it would have even been appropriate under an R18+ classification.
If you haven’t done so yet, you might want to consider signing the petition backed by PALGN, EverybodyPlays and GAME, supporting the introduction of an R18 classification. If you don’t agree with some of the classification refusals, you may have more incentive to do so.
Head to the new Everyoneplays website here.
Find your nearest GAME store by clicking here.
Games Refused Classification in Australia
Title: Blitz: The League
Year: 2006
Platforms: PlayStation 2, Xbox
Status: Refused Classification due to drug use
Overview: Blitz: The League is part of an American Football/Gridiron game franchise that not only allows players to play the game like a sports simulation, but allowed players to partake in a ‘darker’ side of the need to win. This included betting on games and the use of illicit drugs. However, none of the in-game drugs were named after real life drugs and there were no scenes showing the drugs actually being taken. The NZ Office of Film and Literature Classification acknowledged that even though the game did allow these acts, their effect was minimal. In their words, “While it improve(s) a player’s team’s performance, (it) is a component of the game it is not a particularly significant one”.
Doing what it takes to win?
Title: Crimecraft
Year: 2009
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to drug use
Overview: Crimecraft was a little known Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) game that shot to attention after it was refused classification. The general purpose of the game was to mix a popular set of multiplayer modes, with single player missions that had players creating their own gangs and increasing their skills. However, it was the “Interactivity (that) includes the use of incentives and rewards, technical features and competitive intensity. As a general rule:...material that contains drug use and sexual violence related to incentives or rewards is Refused Classification” along with the ability to manufacture, trade and use drugs and medicines. While all of the in-game drugs were fictitious, it was their beneficial use and “insufficient delineation” to real-life drugs that influenced the board’s decision.
How much would we have heard about Crimecraft if it wasn't banned?
Title: I Touch
Year: 2003
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to erotic content
Overview: I Touch was a collection of mini-games, some of which were deemed to have erotic content, and to offer depictions of nudity “as an incentive or reward to interactive gameplay”. These came in the form of amusement machines containing numerous games including quizzes, puzzles and card games. Some of the games included sexually orientated trivia and puzzles that would reward the player with a sexually suggestive picture.
Title: Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude
Year: 2004
Platforms: PC, PlayStation 2, Xbox
Status: Refused Classification due to sexualised content
Overview: The Leisure Suit Larry series started off as a point-and-click adventure game in 1987, where a dorky forty-something businessman would unsuccessfully try and woo attractive women in various high-flying scenarios. The game’s original creator, Al Lowe, was no longer involved by the time Larry was taken back to college in Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude. The Board didn’t approve of the “extra curricular activities that Larry participate in, where he’d attempt to woo, have sex and play sexualised mini-games with female characters”. Furthermore, the game was said to contain “obscured and/or implied sexual activity and partial nudity involving stylised, animated characters” and the Board took particular note that during some of these sequences “sucking sounds could be heard”. The 2009 follow-up, Leisure Suit Larry: Box Office Bust was passed with an MA15+ rating with “frequent sexual references and course language”.
Banned for bad taste?
Title: Manhunt
Year: 2003
Platforms: PC, PlayStation 2, Xbox
Status: Originally released with MA15+ rating, later Refused Classification
Overview: Following on from the several controversies caused by the Grand Theft Auto series, Manhunt was an even more audacious effort from publisher Rockstar. Players were thrown through a gauntlet of madmen and improvised weapons, as you were filmed by a sadist director, keen on recreating films driven by extreme violence. Despite the heavily mature and confronting content, this was found to be in context and passed with an MA15+ rating. However, Manhunt has the distinction of being the first game to be banned in New Zealand. Despite being initially passed, the game later caused controversy when it was blamed for the murder of a 14-year-old British boy Stefan Pakeerah by 17-year-old Warren Leblanc. In the subsequent media storm and controversy that followed, the rating was reviewed and Manhunt was eventually Refused Classification. However, it was found that Leblanc never actually owned the game and that the police and judge found that drug-related robbery was the primary motive of the murder.
Banned following an appeal. But the game is still available for purchase outside of retail.
Title: Manhunt 2
Year: 2007
Platforms: PlayStation 2, Nintendo Wii
Status: Never submitted for classification
Overview: Before the sequel to the controversial Manhunt was even submitted in Australia, it was firstly banned by the British Classification Board, and then given a rating of ‘AO’ by the ESRB in the USA. Later, a modified version was reportedly submitted and it was passed for sale. However, conspiracy theories emerged that publisher Rockstar had made the game excessively violent on purpose or that only one of two minor changes were ever going to have to be made, all in order to stimulate interest in the game. Possibly pre-empting a refusal in classification, Manhunt 2 was never submitted for classification in Australia.
Staged controversy or scapegoat?
Title: Mark Ecko’s Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure
Year: 2005
Platforms: PlayStation 2, Xbox
Status: Originally to be released as MA15+, only to be Refused Classification
Overview: Backed by the well-known graffiti artist, Getting Up had originally passed classification with an MA15+ rating. However, Federal Attorney-General of the time, Phil Ruddock later used his power to appeal the decision, since the game was deemed to glorify graffiti art and gang violence. In an unprecedented move, several local councils in Queensland and the premier at the time, Peter Beattie, called for the game to be banned, given the costs and troubles they had in the past with graffiti and gang violence. Unfortunately, it has never been established whether there is any link between playing video games and vandalism.
Has anyone ever considered that some would be too busy playing this to graffiti?
Title: NARC
Year: 2004
Platforms: PlayStation 2, Xbox
Status: Refused Classification due to drug use
Overview: A re-imagining of a 1988 arcade game, NARC was receiving bad press even before it was released in Australia, for supposedly glorifying drug use. Playing as two drug detectives, players had a choice to confiscate the real-life drugs that they found on arrested criminals, or keep them for future use. While some benefits could come from using the drugs, such as increased weapon accuracy, drug use could also be debilitating, causing addiction, blackouts and loss of health and reputation. Referred to the Victorian House of Assembly, Jude Perera of the Labor Party said "A video game supposedly coming into the USA market shortly will involve the taking of drugs, showing how drugs can create blackouts, drug addiction, job loss and, finally, overdose and death. These types of games glamorise drug addiction and could be triggers for psychotic behaviour". Eventually the Board Refused Classification for NARC because it was deemed that the drug use was related to an incentive or reward.
"A video game supposedly coming into the USA market shortly will involve the taking of drugs, showing how drugs can create blackouts, drug addiction, job loss and, finally, overdose and death. These types of games glamorise drug addiction and could be triggers for psychotic behaviour". Really?
Title: Phantasmagoria
Year: 1995
Platforms: PC, Sega Saturn
Status: Refused Classification due to depictions of sexual violence
Overview: Not the shadow puppet show, but a horror game named Phantasmagoria was at the time a product of the computer games industry's top designers and largest companies, and was one of the most expensive CD-ROM based interactive movies ever made. The intricate story lasted over a century, involving a haunted house and a woman trying to protect herself from her possessed husband. The game was refused classification in Australia due to a non-interactive scene, where the wife is raped by the possessed husband, and the Board of the time did not have any guidelines regarding justified context. This scene was noted above all the other scenes depicting horror and evil in the game. The 1997 sequel, Phantasmagoria 2: A Puzzle of Flesh, was passed with an MA15+ rating as the ‘original’ but it was actually a modified version, where three sex scenes were censored.
They don't make these kinds of games anymore. CGI models complain less.
Title: Postal
Year: 1997
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to high impact violence
Overview: Postal was a mixture of an isometric and first person shooter, that ran with the premise of ‘going postal’, or the American slang for going on a killing spree. Players were tasked with killing a certain percentage of ‘hostiles’ and innocents, while quitting the game was done by committing suicide. Furthermore, given the communal and neighbourhood settings within the game, the level of violence was deemed unacceptable by community standards by the Board.
Going too far?
Title: Postal 2: Share the Pain
Year: 2003
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to high impact violence
Overview: The sequel to the controversial Postal, Postal 2 originally wasn’t submitted for classification because it didn’t have a publisher in Australia, though some players imported the title, and counterfeit copies popped up for sale as well. When a publisher was found in 2005 though, the game was refused classification, again, on the basis of high impact violence and unacceptable themes.
Definitely going too far.
Title: Pro Surf Executive
Year: 1998
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to a depiction of simulated intercourse
Overview: Despite being a relatively small and unknown surfing simulation title with low detailed graphics, Pro Surf Executive was refused classification because there was a scene that depicted simulated intercourse. This ban was justified as the scene warranted a Refused Classification in accordance with the computer games classification guidelines which do not permit "simulated or explicit depictions of sexual acts between consenting adults”.
Title: Reservoir Dogs
Year: 2006
Platforms: PC, PlayStation 2, Xbox
Status: Refused Classification due to high impact violence
Overview: Based on the cult Quentin Tarantino movie of the same name, Reservoir Dogs, the Classification Board released a statement detailing why the game was banned in 2006, which was an unusual move at the time. The key point of contention was that the game exceeded the acceptable level of high impact violence for an MA15+ rating. In particular, a sequence were hostages and police could be shot and executed, and the torture sequences that involved burning eyes with cigars and cutting off fingers were cited. There was no edited version made for resubmission. Despite having an adult classification, New Zealand banned the game as well, citing it as “objectionable”.
OK for movies, but not for games?
Title: Risen
Year: 2009
Platforms: PC, Xbox 360
Status: Refused Classification due to depictions of drug use and sexual references
Overview: A fantasy action role-playing game, Risen was at the receiving end of a Refused Classification on two fronts. Firstly, the game allowed players to engage prostitutes at a brothel in lengthy dialogues and eventually procured their services. While the actual sexual activity was merely implied and never depicted on screen, it was ruled that using the prostitute’s service in the game could help the player’s progress. An example was given where a prostitute could be used to distract a guard. Secondly, an in-game drug called ‘Bruggleweed’ is often referred to as ‘weed’ or ‘reefer’ in the game. Being able to trade, sell and use this drug was ruled to mirror the terminology, use and depiction of a real-world drug.
Don't do it! You'll get banned!
Title: Shellshock 2: Blood Trails
Year: 2009
Platforms: PC, PlayStation, Xbox 360
Status: Refused Classification due to depictions of post-mortem damage
Overview: Unlike like its Vietnam war prequel, Shellshock 2: Blood Trails was never released in Australia. This first person shooter never had the details of its classification refusal revealed, but it was suspected that the potential for post-mortem damage and high impact violence were behind this decision.
We still don't know why this was banned...
Title: Single – Flirt up your life
Year: 2004
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to sexualised content
Overview: There is little known about this dating simulation that apparently played a lot like The Sims. Even though the main purpose of the game is chat up individuals of the opposite gender, the process of doing so is apparently very ‘routine’. Just like Leisure Suit Larry, the game was refused classification for sexual activity for incentive or reward. The US version of the game had all nudity censored.
The socially awkward and inept are left to resort to the Internet.
Title: Strip Poker
Year: 1993
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to depictions of incentive driven nudity
Overview: A computer game that obviously had players taking part in Strip Poker, which showed female actors bare breasted when the player won. The Board guidelines of the time stated that that material depicting "nudity, including genitalia" would be refused classification "unless there is a 'bona fide' educational, medical or community health purpose".
Title: Voyeur
Year: 1994
Platforms: PC
Status: Refused Classification due to sexually explicit content
Overview: A CD-ROM strategy game, Voyeur uses full motion video and contains a conversation between two adult actors, who had been identified earlier as uncle and niece. During the scene, the woman recalls the uncle's sexual abuse of her when she was 14 years old and “uses sexually explicit language during the conversation”. The guidelines of the time stated that sexually explicit language is to be refused classification. The incest context was supposedly taken into consideration by the Board at the time.
Here is a list of smaller and unknown games that were banned over time:
- Casino Royale/Virtual Casino
- Digital Dancing: The Erotic Challenge
- Gals Panic/Gals Panic 2/Gals Panic 3
- Peep show: The Girlie Game
- Immoral Combat
- Immoral Cumbat
- Jo Guest in the Milk Round
- Lady Killer
- Miss World ‘96
- New Fantasia
- Adult Film Cameraman
- Private Investigator
- Seymore Butts Interactive 2: In Pursuit of Pleasure
- Sorority House
- Strip Blackjack
- Texas Table Dance
- Vida X
- Wander Lust
Are there any of games that you can remember that have been banned? Do you think that an R18+ rating would have allowed these games to pass into the Australian market? Let us know in the forums.
PALGN would like to acknowledge that the majority of the information that has been found for this article was found at Refused Classification, which in turn gets a lot of information from the Classification Board. PALGN does not at any stage claim this information as it’s own, but merely as a summary of what is available.
Loading...
