Recently, an anonymous member of the Australian Classification Board gave an interview with AustralianGamer for all of the gaming world to see - Australia has been known for their game rating system, and their ability to completely deny sales of a game they deem inappropriate for the public. Recently, they forced Valve to remake Left 4 Dead 2 without all the blood and bodies, forcing the company to spend serious time reprogramming so they would be allowed to sell it in Australia.

Crikey, let’s take a gander as the Classification Employee tells us about their job:

During the interview, the classifier also took the liberty to explain the actual process of how games apply to be rated in the Country, and what steps they have to take to do so:

AustralianGamer: Can you state for me what your position title is and what your job entails?

Classifier: I’m a Senior Classifier as one of the roles defined in the Classification Act, that is part of the Classification Board. My job is to control production in terms of applications that come through to the Board and decisions lead by the Board. Also to ensure we have consideration to standards and our decisions are well written, justified and consistent. Apart from leading that I also part take in classifying films, games and publications.

AustralianGamer: Can you explain the purpose or role of the Classification Board plays with regards to videogames?

Classifier: The Classification Board are an independent statutory body, so we don’t effectively answer to anybody. Our job, in relation to games, is to classify games upon application.

The interviewer decided to touch on a more interesting topic to games - especially in Australia - of the process of appealing the Classification Boards decision, if possible - and the answer, to say the least, was surprising:

What happens is the Board receives a valid application through the Act, in a nutshell the application consists of at least a copy of the game, a fee and the necessary paperwork. Some games are submitted with gameplay footage or reports that detail content. We’re actually separate from the Classifications Operations branch that do all the general admin and receipting of applications. The application comes to the board who then consider the application by either playing the game or reviewing the application using comprehensive footage. We play games from start to finish fairly often. Under certain conditions we have games demonstrated to us by the applicants. The forms distributors fill in are very detailed. The Board then considers the application in relation to legislation which are the Classification Act, the National Classification Code and the Classification Guidelines.

So, the Board technically never reverses a decision - their decision is merely overruled by a separate board. Another interesting part of the interview - which I’m sure developers jotted down on their notebooks - are the things that make the board tick, and lean towards rejecting a game completely.

This is getting to the heart of what we aim to communicate to the wider audience. Once the Classifications Board makes a decision, that decision stands. The Board don’t deal with that game or application from then on. An appeal is actually an application of review to a different statutory body and they independently classify that game. The difference between us and them is that they effectively sit above us if you consider it a hierarchy. The appeal is to them and the things that they consider are the Classification Board’s initial report as well as inviting submissions from interested parties. To my understanding it has usually been a representative of the applicants that comes in to argue the point of why the Classification Board’s decision was wrong. We are effectively different statutory bodies, we do not meet in any way and to be honest I have worked here 6 and half years and have never met a single member of the other statutory body. In other words an appeal is reviewed by a separate statutory body from us here at the Classification Board.

AustralianGamer: That is a very interesting fact. I’m sure most people never actually knew an appeal goes to a statutory body that is separate from the Classification Board.

Classifier: Which is one of the most frustrating things about working in the Classifications Board. You will commonly see media that publishes headlines like “Board does backflip”. This is untrue, the Board’s decisions stands. It has simply been reviewed by the Classifications Review Board (a seperate body within the Board) and has been awarded a new classification. Sometimes the decision is the same.

It’s interesting to think that if there was a serious drug scene where someone overdosed as opposed to a serious drug scene where they just got high, the serious drug scene with the overdose would seem to have less of a change of a harsher rating, since it discourages drug use. There’s always a fine-line with differing opinions in the business of rating games, but at the end of the day each and every game in Australia has to go by these guys, and their views. (or is that re-views? ba-dum-dum-tish)

There are some very precise parts of the guidelines as to why a game may fall out of the MA15+ rating and move into the RC classification. Two of the key things are, as a general rule, accepting material that is restricted to adults, nudity and sexual activity which must not be related to incentives and rewards. What this means is if a game contains nudity or sexual activity, that is connected with incentives or rewards, that game falls out of the MA15+ category. Also material that contains drug use and sexual violence that is connected to incentives or rewards falls out of the MA15+ classification. Those are the clear cut rules however there are some generalized rules that we classify under. The six classifiable elements are themes (social issues), violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity.

AustralianGamer: So it’s basically the categories you see when you see a rating explained?

Classifier:  Yes. It’s also to do with the repetition, frequency, level of detail, whether it is stylized or realistic, whether it encourages interactivity, or whether the scenes are prolonged.

What do you think of the Australian Classification Board? What do you think of some of the words said in the interview?

Source: AustralianGamer