Starting this week.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/19870126

The Australian Government has announced changes to the way video games are classified in Australia. Starting from September 22nd, 2024, two new rules will apply to games that include “in-game purchases with an element of chance,” such as loot boxes [now M], and games that feature “simulated gambling,” like casino games [now R18+].

  • Strayce@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    17·
    2 个月前

    Be cool if they could do something about the amount of gambling ads attached to sports. But no, it must be video games that are bad.

    Tbh I’m glad they’re recognizing loot boxes as a problem, but this feels backwards. Like, a single, completely optional slot machine in an RPG that only takes and pays out in in-game currency gets you an R rating, but a predatory real-money gatcha mechanic is only worth an M.

    • eurekaEnglish
      1·
      2 个月前

      Be cool if they could do something about the amount of gambling ads attached to sports. But no, it must be video games that are bad.

      Yes. And on the other hand, the video game loot boxes are gambling itself, ads are bad enough.

  • brisk
    13·
    2 个月前

    Simulated gambling in video games: R18+

    Actual gambling in video games: M

    …what?

  • PetulantBandicootEnglish
    6·
    2 个月前

    Pokemon Red and Blue being R18+ if they ever re-released would be funny as hell.

  • TassieTosser
    5·
    2 个月前

    Good. The next step would be taxing and regulating loot box rubbish like casinos. Published and audited odds, fixed payout ratios, etc.

  • ZagorathEnglish
    33·
    2 个月前

    and games that feature “simulated gambling,” like casino games [now R18+]

    So Pokémon Sapphire would be an R18+ game if released in 2025, then? That’s fucking absurd. Gambling with in-game currency to win in-game currency or items in a single-player game should not have any impact on its rating. It gets more complicated if there are inter-personal dynamics, and obviously if real money is involved that completely changes the equation. But as that quote explains it, it’s absurd.

    • NaevaTheRat [she/her]@vegantheoryclub.orgEnglish
      8·
      2 个月前

      Why?

      Put aside your nostalgia for the game for a minute. Wouldn’t it be better if the game didn’t feature the slot machines? They’re

      a) not important mechanically, narratively, or artistically.

      b) presenting something socially harmful and addictive with absolutely zero context as to those harms.

      c) Potentially some of a generation’s earliest exposure to gambling, and presented as an annodyne game with some mechanical benefits to playing.

      The goal isn’t to keep Pokémon out of the hands of kids, it’s to encourage people to not include this stuff in children’s games. Imagine if you could just light a ciggy at some point in the game to give your Pokémon 5 experience points or whatever, it’s a completely gratuitous and possibly harmful.

      • TassieTosser
        4·
        2 个月前

        Iirc the slots got you rare pokemon and skills as prizes. Including one exclusive pokemon. So it’s actively detrimental since it conditions kids to accept gambling as normal.

      • C126@sh.itjust.works
        22·
        2 个月前

        Thank you government for protecting our children from Pokémon slots. I for one, can trace back my life going downhill to the exact moment I played slots in Pokémon red to get a Porygon. I often wonder what my life would be like if I hadn’t been introduced to such contemptible content at such a young age. Thanks to strong government oversight, our children won’t have to suffer these horrors.