just got to "http://www.play-asia.com/" for unrated games if you're playing on computer it doesn't matter about the pal setting and even if you only buy one game + postage it's still cheaper than getting retail in australia and because it's just unrated it's not illegal to import it.
This just in: some Australians are confused
- Thread starter Per
- Start date
welsh
Junkmaster
Its interesting, but there is a rule in the US regarding free speech that when the government seeks to restrict a form of speech it should do so in the least restrictive way. Regulations that are overly broad will normally get knocked down until the government comes up with a restriction of speech that is narrowly tailored to fit the government's specific purpose.
(That is, unless you're saying things that might suggest you're a terrorist, and then they send you to Syria to get tortured into confessing or just to satisfy their personal jollies).
Anyway- the regulation here is probably overly broad and should be more narrowly tailored. While I can understand the government acting in a way that seeks to prevent what it perceives as a danger to society, it has to balance that against the right of individuals to express themselves and acquire information.
Furthemore, the government is not supposed to regulate specific content (like the words of a speech) compared to the type of content. So the government should be able to ban snuff films or restrict pornography but should do so consistency. All porno mags get the same restriction, all snuff films get banned.
That said, however, there is a big difference between someone making a speech and a game designer selling a game.
From what we've seen so far Fallout 3 has been hyping elements of violence and drug use to appeal to gamers. While I don't have a problem with adults playing this, there should be restrictions for kids. So a rating system isn't a bad idea. Afterall, video games are competing with movies as a profit making enterment industry. Why not subject games to the same standards?
To be honest, I am not sure if a rating system wouldn't be a good thing. Sure, there have been films rated NR-17 or X that were quite good, but the great majority are simple porno flicks. It might also raise the question of how far we should go to regulate sexual content and how tolerant we are of violence.
Frankly, everything we've seen on Bethesda's marketing emphasizes the violence. They've been showing off all the cool ways bloody mess works. Imagine, "hey kid, you can use bloody mess to blow away that kid on the playground, just like you'd like to with the little shit next door!"
Honestly, I think there is something inconsistent between allowing a game to vaporize a town with a nuclear weapon and not allowing someone to put a shotgun to a 10 year old head. Realistically, you're doing the same thing. But in terms of the visceral experience, it is different.
ANd if Bethesda feels a bit of pain for creating a shoddy Fallout product that empahsize personal exposure to violence over the story structure of early Fallout 1 and 2, well... I'm just a little bit more happy.
(That is, unless you're saying things that might suggest you're a terrorist, and then they send you to Syria to get tortured into confessing or just to satisfy their personal jollies).
Anyway- the regulation here is probably overly broad and should be more narrowly tailored. While I can understand the government acting in a way that seeks to prevent what it perceives as a danger to society, it has to balance that against the right of individuals to express themselves and acquire information.
Furthemore, the government is not supposed to regulate specific content (like the words of a speech) compared to the type of content. So the government should be able to ban snuff films or restrict pornography but should do so consistency. All porno mags get the same restriction, all snuff films get banned.
That said, however, there is a big difference between someone making a speech and a game designer selling a game.
From what we've seen so far Fallout 3 has been hyping elements of violence and drug use to appeal to gamers. While I don't have a problem with adults playing this, there should be restrictions for kids. So a rating system isn't a bad idea. Afterall, video games are competing with movies as a profit making enterment industry. Why not subject games to the same standards?
To be honest, I am not sure if a rating system wouldn't be a good thing. Sure, there have been films rated NR-17 or X that were quite good, but the great majority are simple porno flicks. It might also raise the question of how far we should go to regulate sexual content and how tolerant we are of violence.
Frankly, everything we've seen on Bethesda's marketing emphasizes the violence. They've been showing off all the cool ways bloody mess works. Imagine, "hey kid, you can use bloody mess to blow away that kid on the playground, just like you'd like to with the little shit next door!"
Honestly, I think there is something inconsistent between allowing a game to vaporize a town with a nuclear weapon and not allowing someone to put a shotgun to a 10 year old head. Realistically, you're doing the same thing. But in terms of the visceral experience, it is different.
ANd if Bethesda feels a bit of pain for creating a shoddy Fallout product that empahsize personal exposure to violence over the story structure of early Fallout 1 and 2, well... I'm just a little bit more happy.