Atari have confirmed that the Office of Film and Literature Classification have refused classification for their title Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure - which means it is effectively banned in Australia:

Wednesday 15th February 2006 - On February 15, the Office of Film & Literature Classification Review Board announced it had determined that Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure should be refused classification. This decision overturns the OFLC's original MA15+ rating given in November 2005.

Atari Australia who is the official distributor of Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure strongly disagrees with the Office of Film & Literature Classification Review Board's decision and defends the original classification by the OFLC as a title that attracts a rating of MA15+.

The press release has more information, including Atari's plans to appeal. The OFLC's official statement is also available. Here's an excerpt:

In the Review Board's majority opinion, Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure warrants refused classification as it promotes crime. Some factors contributing to this promotion include:

. the realistic scenarios whereby the central character Trane acquires his knowledge of graffiti tips, techniques and styles - including meeting with five real graffiti artists who pass on details of tips and techniques
. the reward for and positive reinforcement of graffiti writing on public buildings and infrastructure, and
. interactive biographies of 56 real graffiti artists, with details of their personal tags, styles and careers. The game detail states that all these artists began their careers performing illegal graffiti on public buildings and infrastructure and that some continue with this practice today.

Update: They're talking about this on TripleJ's Hack this afternoon, so tune in at 5.30pm AEST.

Good

what a dumb anti-social idea for a game anyways. i'm glad the government has banned it.

why would a responsible company produce a game which glorifies the destruction of public property?

*golf clap*

Why it was created really isnt the issue here IMO. I'm more inclined to question why it is completely banned for sale, raising the whole no R rating for games debacle again.

The main difference this time (unlike BMX-xxx, manhunt et al) is that the game that got banned is actually supposed to be pretty decent. 70% from 1up, 87% from Gamespot.

?why would a responsible company produce a game which glorifies the destruction of public property?

*golf clap*

Why would a responsible person play the game and then go out and commit the acts depicted in the game?

Once again, bringing up the violent video games etc. debate.

regardsless of the actions of the individual, look at the actions of the corporation in this instance.

i agree the violent video games argument is pointless, but still why must massive brand name companies persist in developing this rubbish.

I find it funny that some people think its great that this game was refused classification due to the silly gameplay but make a big deal out of GTAs etc. being banned or content removed.

i agree the violent video games argument is pointless, but still why must massive brand name companies persist in developing this rubbish.

That's true and I see your point.
What about fishing games etc. Are they not rubbish because they don't have illegal themes?
GTA:SA was full of illegal activities as well (and even had tagging?)...

I was trying to get to the official site to learn more about wtf the game is -exactly- about but after the intro all the loading bars sat on 0% for me..

I did find this screenshot elsewhere - so it appears as though there might be some sort of "story" beyond just randomly spray painting?

Although the game and idea still does look like complete rubbish.

Based on their decision if in a game like "America's Army" the image used to train you was a of a real army sniper trainer, and you are then sent on an illegal mission to assinate someone outside of a warzone (a crime), and other snipers that had committed similar crimes (like Lee Harvey Oswald, or the guy that assasinated that guy that led to WW1) have their biographies listed in the game, then the game would be banned in Australia.

I think they have set a horrible precedent.

Criterion's Black for XBox and PS2 looks like a case in point:

The game casts players as an unstoppable, unaccountable and untraceable covert operative fighting a perilous overt war against Terror in Eastern Europe, and delivers unprecedented, intense Hollywood-style action and destruction.

Sounds like a crime simulator to me, requiring banning, but it only got an M for 'Moderate violence'.. seems they missed the fact you are training for and fighting in illegal wars.

last edited by natslovR at 18:45:03 15/Feb/06

Blue skies in games

oh yes it's highly analogous, illegal urban grafitti vs. covert government-sanctioned operations. i see your point.

what

i dont care about this particular game but dont understand why an adult cant play a game of his choosing on his own pc in his own house. rediculous.

if its about the kids then introduce the R-18 rating. easy, sure daddy might buy the game for them but would they rather everyone download it? which kids are perticually good at doing anyways.

kimbo do you chrome paint at all?

haha... funny that they ban a game where you paint a wall but let though thousands of games where you kill people.

uhh, you'll have to excuse me if I can't find a meaningful word to identify your post; so I'll just refer to you as 'the post above this one'

By the looks of your handle, you've been out for a hard night on the spray paint can chroming with your mate Kimbo, brainstorming for your eventual meaningless post on this board.

Movies about spray painting are available, one would never make anything close to the silver screen if thats what you mean because the trash tend to stay in the underground, you won't get the cavemen out of their caves without offering chrome baggies for the sniffin', which would be like giving a hand grenade to a baby disguised as a lollypop; not exactly responsible of any self respecting person.

As far as video game classifications go, the OFLC did the right thing by banning this game, because the ones that are going to want to turn to this kind of media for their entertainment probably aren't adept enough to realise that this crap should stay about as fantasy as video games are. I'm sure they realise their rating system goes literally out the door when a person walks out the door of a retailer with it, so banning it outright will at least force them to search other means of accessing it if theyre willing to spend the time and effort doing such a thing.

As for taggers, I'd love to take to some of their knees with a baseball bat for the crap they spray around the train fences in my area.

Thats it.

Trillion has a great point in this:

As far as video game classifications go, the OFLC did the right thing by banning this game, because the ones that are going to want to turn to this kind of media for their entertainment probably aren't adept enough to realise that this crap should stay about as fantasy as video games are.

I have about as much desire to play this game as used I do with heroin needles. Picture the sort've person who would play it. We badly need a R classification for videogames, as well as some new folks at the OFLC, but we don't need this game.

fyi graffiti is anti-social and illegal as it damages public and private property. should games also include tasks where the player must successfully inject/smuggle heroin?

i don't deny the artistic value of graffiti when it is done in a legal context i.e. the owner has actually asked for it to be done on their property, or as part of a council initiative.

is this game about legal graffiti? if so i apologise.

my question to you Tim is: is there content which you would ban in a game?

Thanks for those words of wisdom Tim, whatever vapid point you were trying to convey was lost in amongst the use of prof*** s*** GASH COCK-f***ING f***ER.

A normally MA-15 film or album that focused on and glorified the defacing of public property and other s***facery would also probably receive an R-18 rating under the OFLC. The issue here isn't "the man" denying you and your "niggas" the right to play such a piece of trash, they didn't neccessarily choose to outright ban it at all, it's the lack of an R rating.

Graffiti is art, "w3rD uP c***Z" on some poor bastard's shop-front is not.

lol hashy.

I wonder if this has more to do with Ataris financial dire straights than it does about making a game worthy of critical acclaim. What are the creative management at such a place thinking trying to pump this crap into the spotlight for the people who will play their games? If the game was centered around graffiti as an artform and allowed for others to critique their work and maybe even join for collaborations then I'd probably give the game a whirl. As it is this looks like it enables the player to perform exactly the kind of violence drugged out losers high out of their minds would do for kicks, and then ride on the back of the creative people they see painting interesting graffiti that happen to take place in the same bounds they like to tag and kick ass for the sake of their own entertainment.

Ban ban ban ban

What a piece of s*** idea of a game.

And the issue that this or any game incorages anyone to do anything is just absolutley ridiculous in the worst sense. Sure it "Glorifies" it, but in the same sense that James Bond movies "Glorify" shooting "Baddies".

As trillion said, the sort've people who would play this game thing "Ecko" is a quality line of clothing (the game is f***ing sponsored by ecko) due to almost nothing but advertising, "cred" and--well--"glorification". Making out how goddamn cool it is, to this game's target audience, is about the best form of encouragement you can get. Basically, 90% of people who bother to play this game will walk away with, and probably largely, a more positive view on graffiti etc. Why do we want that?

Games churned out on stupid themes like this (25 to life, 50cent bulletproof, tony hawk underground basically ruining the series) don't have the best track record, as discerning keyboard warriors we're entitled to make educated guesses on just how GODDAMN TERRIBLE HOLY CHRIST MY BRAIN "good" it's going to be.

last edited by Hashy at 17:08:56 16/Feb/06

They're talking about this on TripleJ's Hack this afternoon, so tune in at 5.30pm AEST (approx 20mins from now - brisbane people can hear it "early" if they tune into the stream, otherwise wait til 5.30pm local time to listen on the radio).

last edited by trog at 17:11:40 16/Feb/06

In one way trogs posting of the story mixed the content of the game with what Term has a very good point with and that is the classification system and its shortcomings for adults with the understanding that their choices are their right that should be given a chance to be excercised regardless of the content at the centre.

This issue of government agencies trying this on their people stems from a long running problem of mainstream politics in Australia as far as I can tell.

So regardless of the content the core issue is one of rights to choose for those competent in doing so.

I think game companies need to at least be a little more aware of their social responsibilities and not go for the easy social f***tard dollar.

I mean, GTA was an innovation in gaming that we really hadn’t seen to that point. The urban landscape made a lot of sense and a lot of the s*** people cried about wasn’t the primary purpose of the game (killing hookers for your money back (which was probably a bug)). Yet, at the time, it really floated close to the line on what was socially acceptable and what wasn’t. In fact, IIRC it was changed for release in Australia.

In fact, looking at the few games that have been refused classification I’m interested to know what was so bad about it. I mean, look at the list of them, most of them are notable by their tasteless attempt at the stupid shock value.

That is definately true. If the Quessnland Premier and other ministers didn't put their noses where they didn't belong this would not have happend at all.

Why don’t their noses belong there? I’m almost certain that we elect political officials to arbitrate our society for us.

For better or worse …

#edit, forgot qgl used quotes ;p

last edited by typo at 20:31:26 16/Feb/06

Half-Life and Counter-Strike had graffiti in them, now I go around spraying pictures of doors, vents, and counter-terrorists on walls everywhere

Not in that way though. They are not their to dicate what we should and shouldn't listen to/watch/play/read. And he is the premier of QLD and shouldn't have such an effect on the whole country like that.

Do you want a tin foil hat?

The OFLC have my support on this one.

I'd like to see a game where you go around shooting graffiti artists. :-)

Turns out the game is pretty good.

I still don't mind much, but "Plufim" of the Penny-arcade forums had this to say:

From an interview today, it seems that even with an R rating, this would have been banned.

Apparently, it is in law that if a game is percieved to encourage someone to break the law (without any evidence, mind you), then a review board can ban it.

Some day, they're gonna go after the bigger games. It's time for australian gamers to prove:
a)we're not just impressionable 12 year olds
b)we aren't affected by the games we play

I don't know where he got this from, but it is concerning.

last edited by Hashy at 11:51:21 17/Feb/06

Turn out the game is pretty good.

Someone should have mentioned that in the first page of comments before everyone bagged it out. Also, more from Atari: http://www.gamearena.com.au/news/read/3514444

ok so it's a game about defacing public and private property with really good gameplay. i am gladdened to hear that.

i also ask the general question: what game content would be sufficient to warrant banning?

last edited by infi at 11:55:31 17/Feb/06

so what content should be banned?

should it be anything goes?

should we have games challenging the central character (the player) to commit pedophilia, drug manufacturing/smuggling, being a serial killer?

racing games > speeding - banned. FPS > murder - banned...

Katamari Damacy > Destruction of public property - banned. Shadow of the colossus > culling of native wildlife - banned.

There really isn't anywhere to draw the line, and I don't think there's a game under the sun that couldn't be blanketed under these not-so-clear rules on what is and what is not "encouragement to break laws". After hearing about what I quoted above (sorry if I missed that it was ever explicitly mentioned elsewhere in the thread) I've pretty much changed my mind on this whole thing. It's not just the age-old dilemma of of no R rating anymore :\

Maybe Atari havent been involved in their community as a whole over the past 2-3 years. Maybe they're just flat out ignoring events that have taken place and hiding behind their statistics, just like the guy from New Media research at Bond that was one half of the interviewee's on Hack yesterday afternoon.

'Can a Video Game Leade To Murder?'
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/17/60minutes/main702599.shtml

'Grand Theft Auto Turned Kid Into Cop Killer'
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21294

'Grand Theft Auto Cop Killer Found Guilty'
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/08/11/gta_not_guilty/

A point that the OFLC board member lady put across on the radio interview was that games unlike movies have a much higher level of interaction and therefore higher positive or negative reinforcement of the actions involved in playing them.

So when have stores started enforcing game ratings ? Personally I don't think it's worth banning a game, they should be rated properly but then the ratings should be enforced.

And not just not selling it to kids, but educating the retarded parents who buy mature rated games for their 10 year old kids and getting their soccer mum pants in a twist when it contains something they don't like.

How can people compare this to games depicting murder? No one is going to commit murder because of a computer game (unless they're massively screwed up from other things and 99% of the way there already), but grafitti is much more likely.

And Postal 2 (for example) doesn't push murder as a potential career option, with interviews with real murderers and how they got jobs as hit men and some occassionally still knocking off their annoying neighbours for fun.