This scene is a precursor for the entire war, the story, everything - without it, the narrative falls apart. It is very easy to justify this violent scene in the 'context' of the storyline, and reduce the impact from 'high' to 'strong' because of the context. what the hell? How did it get classified. If you think that both of these points are a 'YES' then the game should be RC even if there was an option for R18+ games.īut. The graphics are realistic and detailed, the scene is 'perhaps' cruel because innocent civilians are being 'slaughtered' by terrorists and the violence appears real (there is blood, people sit around clutching themselves because they are injured, they run away screaming). The answer to this is once again very much on the border again. But I'll say YES it does(but wouldn't that mean that it should be 'RC'? I'll explain why in a minute).ĭoes the terrorism scene provide players with a gratuitous, exploitative offensive depiction of cruelty or real violence which are very detailed or which have a high impact? My opinion is that it is VERY much on the border line here. Gratuitous, exploitative offensive depictions of violence with a very high degree of impact or which are excessively frequent, prolonged and detailed. Make the judgement - does the Terrorism scene provide the player with: It's (i) and (ii) that come into question.
Note: Below the quote talks about 'justified by context', if the violence is not justified by context to the story or events in the production then it will go RC straight away, even if the violence is tame.Ĭlick to expand.Well we can knock 'iii' of our list because there is no sexual violence. The classification board prescribes MA15+ with the following details for violence: So in order to work out where it fits we have to look at the difference in violence for MA15+ games and R18+ games. As a general rule:" the game does not exhibit any sexual violence related to incentives or rewards. In regards to the section " Interactivity includes the use of incentives and rewards, technical features and competitive intensity. Almost all of those areas gather a tick, and 'higher' does not necessitate 'high' in regards to an R18 classification in regards to the legislation. The scene is not in slow mo, but you can only walk so it is prolonged, the first person perspective puts the player in the shoes of the character killing the civilians, it is repeated frequently because the player will likely kill many civilians, the graphics are realistic and the game is interactive. The basis behind this 'assessment' revolves around the following guidelines:Ĭlick to expand.So, in terms of "Impact may be higher" MW2 ticks almost all the boxes for the first section. You can read about it in detail here - OFLC Website MA15+ is considered a title that contains a 'strong' level of impact, whereas moving to an R18+ game is considered a 'high' level of impact.
Look up Donald McDonald's history with the government. And believe me, they are very conservative people.
The difference between the MA15+ and R18+ threshold is left to the people that make the judgement on the classification - however if a game is to be rated MA15+ only the Classification Board who will review the game will make that decision.
#MY MODERN WARFARE 2 STEAM ALREADY HAD LEVELS FULL#
I'm aware of the full basis of the classification system and have been trained previously as an 'authorised assessor' and I feel that this game in no way breaches the MA15+ to R18+ threshold in terms of violence. The classification of Modern Warfare 2 is MA15+ Strong violence. IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE R18+ DEBATE YOU MUST READ THIS POST, I KNOW IT'S LONG BUT IT WILL HELP YOU TO UNDERSTAND THE TRUE POSITIONING OF MW2.
0 kommentar(er)
