Report: Dark Sector Banned in Australia

IGN Australia reports that third-person action game Dark Sector has been refused a rating by the Office of Film and Literature Classification. The move is, effectively, a ban on selling the game in Australia.

In rendering the decision, the OFLC offered its impression of Dark Sector:

…a violent and sometimes gruesome game with a sinister storyline and ominous outcome. The violence and aggression inflicted upon the protagonist is of a high level, naturalistic and not stylised at all…

[the level of violence] exceeds strong and as such cannot be accomplished in a MA15+ classification… When Hayden cuts off his opponent’s limb with the glaive, large amounts of blood spray forth from the stump and the injured person screams in agony which increases the impact.

IGN writes that Dark Sector, developed by Digital Extremes and publisher D3Publisher, is likely to be edited and re-submitted for a more marketable classification. A rep told the site:

This is (hopefully) not the end of the line for the game however, just a pretty substantial, but temporary, set-back.

Dark Sector is scheduled for release in the North American market on March 25th for Xbox 360 and PS3 and has been rated M (17 and older) by the ESRB.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    storm1987 says:


    i’m wonder why so many games were banned in Australia..up to now, 28 games were banned because of the the censorship little bit strict?? compare with that in Canada..there is no game being reference..there is a list of the game banned in Australia..

    Name Reason
    7 Sins Banned because of high impact of sexual references.
    50 Cent: Bulletproof Banned because of high impact violence and cruelty.[3] A censored version was later released.[citation needed]
    BMX XXX Banned because of sexuality and nudity in relation to incentives and rewards.[4] A censored version was later released.[citation needed]
    Dark Sector Banned because of high impact violence. A censored version was later released.
    Dreamweb Banned because of a scene of sexualized violence. However, the game was censored, and re-released with an M15+ rating in 1996 for "Medium level animated violence."[5]
    Duke Nukem 3D Censored because of violence and sexual references. Was eventually released uncut with an MA15+ rating.
    Fallout 3 Banned[6] for drug references. Subsequently edited worldwide with a removal of names of real-life drugs and resubmitted.
    The Getaway Banned because of high impact violence. A censored version was later released.
    Grand Theft Auto III Censored because of sexual violence.
    Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Had its classification revoked following the Hot Coffee controversy and sexual violence. A censored version has since been classified MA15+.
    Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Censored because of sexual violence.
    Grand Theft Auto IV Censored because of sexual violence.
    Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude Banned because of sexuality and nudity in relation to incentives and rewards.
    Marc Eckō’s Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure Banned because of high impact violence and the glorification of graffiti.
    Manhunt Was available for a while but later banned because of high impact scary violence and cruelty.
    Manhunt 2 Banned because of high impact scary violence, cruelty and high impact of sexual references.
    NARC (2005 update) Banned because of high impact violence and illegal drug use.
    Postal 2 Banned because of content (urination, high impact violence, cruelty, etc.)
    Phantasmagoria Banned because of high impact violence, cruelty, and a scene of sexual violence involving rape.
    Phantasmagoria: A Puzzle of Flesh Censored because of sexuality and nudity in relation to incentives and rewards.
    Reservoir Dogs Banned because of high impact violence and cruelty.
    Shellshock: Nam ’67 Banned because of high impact violence; however, it was re-rated MA15+ by the Classification Review Board in its uncut form, upon appeal.
    Silent Hill: Homecoming Drilling into body parts.
    Singles: Flirt Up Your Life Banned because of sexuality and nudity in relation to incentives and rewards.
    Soldier of Fortune: Payback Banned because of high impact violence. Activision has since modified the game to meet MA15+ guidelines.
    Tender Loving Care Banned because of high impact violence; however, it has since been re-rated MA15+.
    The Punisher Banned because of high impact violence; however, it has since been re-rated MA15+.
    Voyeur Banned because of a scene of explicit sexual dialogue.
  2. 0

    The OFLC, our glorious Mini-truth comrades determine Dark Sector to be double-plus-ungood, sickle and banhammer dropping ensues!…

    It looks like this is the year of the banhammer once more for Australia again, last year it was the controversial Manhunt 2 and the visceral mediocre-ware Soldier of Fortune 3… now it’s Digital Extremes’ Dark Sector.

  3. 0
    Untouchable ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Francesco D.

    Unfortunately, Australia seems pretty much arse backwards when it comes to censorship and that is being said by an Australian.
    We produce one of the most gruesome horror movies in years (Wolf Creek) which is far more impressionable than a game like Dark Sector yet it is the ‘interactive media’ that gets banned.
    There is also a huge double standard with Getting Up and a game like Need For Speed Underground. We Australians have huge problems with hoons and street racers yet it is the game involving the far less dangerous incident of graffiti gets banned?

  4. 0
    Brandon ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    You know, I’m glad that I live in the states where this doesn’t happen very often. >.>;;; Unless Hillary gets elected, then it’ll probably happen all the time.

  5. 0
    Francesco D. says:

    The game description sounds like most movies, such as the movie “Kill Bill”. Is “Kill Bill” banned in Australia? NO! Why? Because IT’S A MOVIE and not REAL and doesn’t effect ANYONE.

  6. 0
    turokwarrior1 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    All of this stupid nonsense about banning in the US.

    No games could get banned just given a certain rating by which a couple had stuff cut out so they could get the game on the consoles right away for the money.

    If a game producer was so eager to have us play the full uncut version of a game that got the AO rating they would go out of their way to pursuade the console makers to allow AO rated games or for there to be a new system in place so adults could at least play any uncut violent games yet they do not because they just care about getting the money in as fast as possible by making cuts.

    Everyone needs to stop the ignorance about banning because no game gets banned in the US just sometimes rated wrong.

    The worst that could happen with graphically violent games is that they are made even harder for children to play not banned because people would be all over the government about the Amendment and all the other problems in the country.

  7. 0
    NovaBlack ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    damn im in the uk and i REALLY want rule of rose now.

    anyone know where i can get it, its not on any internet retailers. It looks really interestin, n reviews say the story is great. looks like lord of the flies in a different setting.

  8. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Mad_Scientist: Good question. That I don’t know. I’ve ordered stuff over the net from EB other Online stores and unless they open the package there is no indication as to what it is. And if it’s a digital download, I can’t see any way they could stop you.

    Essentially what happens in the OFLC refuse to classify a game. That means it cannot be SOLD in Australia. It doesn’t mean it can’t be owned. It’s not a restricted publication. The word BANNED is bandied about, but it’s not really banned …. it just means you can’t buy it over here. People need to understand that distinction.

  9. 0
    Mad_Scientist ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    Of course the US has it’s flaws, but this site is Gamepolitics, so most of the time issues discussed here are related to games. Still, you’ll find plenty of criticism of US politics and government in general in the comments sections for some news posts.

    As flawed in some ways as the ESRB and the current US rating system is, I do prefer it over Australia’s system. I think many people here do. That doesn’t mean that we are trying to imply that it makes the US “better” than Australia or that there aren’t other things that Australia handles better than the US. But the fact that Australia apparently has a very nice health care system isn’t really related to this current article, nor does it change the fact that many people here really don’t want the US adopting controls on game content similar to what Australia has, but some politicians and other people are hoping to do so. (And if the US did do that, it’s not like it would fix our health care system. We’d have a bad health system and a bad game censorship system.)

    One other thing. You said that if you really wanted a game, you’d just buy it over the Internet, because the rating system doesn’t effect Internet sales. But if I recall correctly, in the case of Mark Echo’s Getting Up, didn’t the government try to stop even Internet sales?

  10. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Zerodash: And while I’m thinking of it …. media? When was the last time you could order kiddie porn or snuff in the US without hte government intervening. Or perhaps the Anarchist Handbook. Or all obtain the interest of the FBI on any number of books or publications that fall awry of the Patriot Act. I’m sure they’d really be interested if you ordered a copy of “Why the Christians are wrong” by that Muslim cleric who’s name escapes me ….

    … Do you REALLY think you are free? Freedom is only the fence you cannot see.

  11. 0
    Necromancist says:

    I can agree with him on one point: the violence is kinda excessive, but not for a game of its genre. I think that excessive violence in games is there to make the player feel discomfort at his own actions, which might be the case with stories revolving around a “reluctant hero/villain”.

    Still, outright banning the game is overreacting. I still don’t know why people in power aren’t actually researching what they’re trying so hard to ban/censor”whatever.

  12. 0
    Baggie ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Eh, I’m not too woried about this one, but if they ban GTA 4 they’re in for trouble.

    BTW the current goverment party in office makes such a minuscule impact on these ratings it isn’t worth mentioning.

  13. 0
    Zerodash ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ Michael

    You state you are agreeing that a government in a democracy can deny their citizens the right to choose what media they consume. Am I missing something?

  14. 0
    Andrew Eisen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I also thought Leisure Suit Larry was funny. Not that great of a game but pretty damn amusing in places.

    Anyway, I wanted to add that the crap games that have been banned in Australia (BMX XXX, 50 Cent, Narc, Postal 1 and 2) weren’t crap because they were violent.

    They were crap because of poor gameplay, lousy control, and/or they were just plain not fun to play.

    Violence and sexuality does not make a game good or bad.

    Andrew Eisen

  15. 0
    Andrew Eisen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The following were banned or censored:

    GTA III and San Andreas
    Mark Ecko’s Getting Up
    Rule of Rose

    Yes some of Australia’s banned games are terrible but the above are good to great (or in the case of Getting Up and Rule of Rose, at least worth a look). Getting Up isn’t even particularly violent.

    Why do game companies think that unnecessarily gratuitous violence is the perfect substitute for ACTUAL game content?

    It’s not a substitute for game content, it is the game content. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. Simple. But it should never, ever be censored or banned because someone out there wants to play and enjoy it.

    Manhunt has substance. It has a story. It has social commentary. It’s also very violent. If that turns you off, you don’t have to play it.

    Andrew Eisen

  16. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Zerodash: If I REALLY wanted a game, I’d buy it over the internet. The rating system doesn’t stop me from getting any games if I really want them.

    Who am I to say what is unnecessary? I am ME. I have an opinion. I express it. Who are YOU to say I’m not allowed to express my opinion. Are you trying to censor me? Your argument is making no sense to me.

    What you still fail to understand is that I am doing nothing apart from voicing my opinion that I agree with the government’s position in THIS PARTICULAR CASE! I have on many occasions taken an anti-government position as well. But I don’t enforce government policy, so I have no idea why you seem to be making me out to be the villain. *boggle*

    As for games WITH substance, I’ve yet to see a single one get banned perhaps with the exception of GTA:SA … but that was pulled AFTER Hot Coffee and put back on the shelves after it was patched, which was much the same as happened in the US.

  17. 0
    Zerodash ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    Who are you to say what is unneccessary? What makes you trust the government to decide what is appropriate for YOU? Keep in mind that plenty of games with real depth and “merit” are just as easily banned for so-called objectionable content. BioShock was plenty violent, and there were voices calling for it to be banned.

    Why should someone else have to decide for you what is best for you?

  18. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Black Patriot: Totally agree. A reform of the OFLC is definitely in order. It is definitely an organisation that is out of touch right now. Unfortunately they are one of the most organisationally stagnant as well.

  19. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Zerodash: I’m not helping the government do anything. They are already doing it without my help.

    I’m simply voicing my opinion, which I have every right to do. As soon as governments cross that line of what I believe they should do, I’ll voice my opinion just the same. I just happen to agree with them … and I think that it’s simple not cost effective or financially responsible policy to spend millions of dollars of tax-payer money introducing an R-Rating (especially in our current political/financial climate) that affects less than 20 games in as many years (most of which were crap anyway).

    Why do game companies think that unnecessarily gratuitous violence is the perfect substitute for ACTUAL game content? And why is the younger generation so keen to lap it up? As an older gamer (I’m in my 40’s), I prefer substance over shock value.

  20. 0
    Black Patriot ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ Michael

    You’re right, that it would cost a significant amount of time and money, and with the Labor government trying to increase the budget surplus in order to hopefully reduce inflation it’s not likely.

    However, we can still hope…
    Besides it is a step in the right direction. I think a better step would be to fire the current staff of the OFLC and replace them with 1/3 representatives of the Video Game industry, 1/3 Gamers and 1/3 members of the general public, and on top of that require a 66% vote minimum on ratings. So the gamers can make a decision based upon their past experience with video games (not to mention that it makes it more likely that they’d be able to actually play and finish the games in time to make a rating), the industry people would be able to have their say, and the general public would be able to have an opinion. THEN, on top of that, you make the process transparent to the public at large, and make any decision appeal able with a sufficient signature collection campaign.

    Bear in mind, i am making up this idea as i type and there are probably more holes in it than i realize, but thats why I’m posting it here and not elsewhere…

  21. 0
    WORLD_THREAT says:


    Australia has banned way more games than the UK has. The only 2 games I can think of that are banned in the UK are Manhunt 2 and (I think) Rule of Rose.

  22. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    In the absence of an R-rating, there are some games that should be banned for needlessly gratuitous violence. Usually you find companies use needlessly gratuitous violence to make up for a complete lack of content, story or gameplay. I can’t see a single game on that list I’d WANT to play.

    Note that I say “In the absence of an R-Rating”. Personally I think we should. But if you think it’JUST a matter of slapping a sticker on the box and that’s it, your very much mistaken. Industry needs to be consulted, legislation must be drafted and approved, laws written, appropriate punitive measures put in place and it has to be communicated to all retail outlets that sell game and that information being filtered all the way the the checkout people. It’s a long and complicated process which will cost the max payer a lot of money …. and you wonder why they haven’t bothered yet? We’ve just got a labor government that’s slashing services in an effort to save money.

    Short term. Not going to happen.

    But you still have the option of playing those games. You just can’t buy it over the counter. I consider the R-Rating to be those games you HAVE to purchase over the internet.

  23. 0
    Father Time ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    If we banned 1/4 of all M games it would still be a small percent compared to all the other games out there.

    Although still one game banned purely because people found the violence offensive is one game too many in my opinion.

  24. 0
    Andrew Eisen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    What are you getting at?

    Are you saying that it’s acceptable for an organization to refuse Australians the option of playing certain games as long as the number of restricted titles pales in comparison to the total number available?

    Andrew Eisen

  25. 0
    Twixn says:

    Well, I hope that the game is revised to get an M rating (as an AO
    rating would have the same, pseudo-ban, effect).

    If not then I’ll have to settle with importing it. Will probably end up
    cheaper that way anyway. As no doubt the PS3 ver will be $110AU
    (which is about ~$100US with the current good exchange rate) if bought
    at EB or GAME.

  26. 0
    Petros says:

    Well the US version only has an “M” rating, and it’s still scheduled for a 2/26/08 release date.

    I’d give you 20:1 odds there’s an “option” to tone down the blood-spattering, though I’m sure almost all of you will ignore that … 😛 I’ll probably get a copy in March. (Have kinda run low on “expendable” funds this month!)

  27. 0
    Andrew Eisen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    That would be a second-person narrative. Not used very much. Off the top of my head I can’t think of anything except some of the Choose Your Own Adventure books.

    Andrew Eisen

  28. 0
    mogbert ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    You know, I’m almost tempted to do an experiment. I would write a book entirely in… I don’t know if it would be called first person, or third person, but the book would refer to the protagonist as “you”, as in “You walk down the dark street”. Then I would have this protagonist, the reader, follow a downward spiral, breaking every law, commandment, and moral. The protagonist wouldn’t be characterized as amoral, they would instead know what they was doing was wrong, but do it anyway. It would be extremely graphic, disgusting, horrible, and horendous (pull up theasaurus, add more adjectives to taste). I’d probably have to get a couple of ghost writers because I don’t think I have enough darkness in my soul for it.

    Afterwards, I’m sure I could get someone to publish it. And any country that DOESN’T ban this book, would have no moral ground to stand on for banning videogames. I’m sick that books can have the foulest things possible under the sun and moon, and everyone knows in their bones you can’t ban them, but as soon as a videogame flashes a little blood or nipples, they are swinging the ban hammer like John Henry.

  29. 0
    Andrew Eisen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I should probably point out that although Soldier of Fortune has an MA15+ rating, dismemberment was removed and blood was toned down to get it.

    In other words, the version of SoF in Australia is censored.

    Also, despite what I said earlier, Manhunt is also currently banned. It was originally MA15+ but that rating was pulled 13 months later after it had been on the shelves.

    Andrew Eisen

  30. 0
    Thomas ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I understood, when they banned Manhunt. I understood, when they banned Manhunt too. I was irritated, when they banned Soldier of Fortune..

    Now I’m just mad, I was looking foward to this game, it was on my list of game that I was goig to get when I get a 360…

    We REALLY need an 18M rating here.. this is just ridiculous.. for once, I actually think I might get the whole idea of “slippery slope” people keep talking about >.

  31. 0
    Mad_Scientist ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    It’s been said time and time again, but until an R18+ for games is used in Australia, this is just going to keep on happening again and again.

    Imagine if the ESRB didn’t have an M rating (the equal of an R) and instead just gave anything with content beyond that of a T rating an AO rating, causing the game to be unable to get a license. That’s essentially the way things are in Australia now, except they seem to have more tiers for their ratings so it’s not as bad, as a lot of things can slide under the M15+ rating they have. Still, not everything can.

  32. 0
    JustChris says:

    Why not create an MA17+ rating? The notion that the Australian game ratings board maxes out their ratings at 15 years of age suggests that teenagers are the oldest group of people that actively play video games. MA15+ sounds like “T and a half” in American ESRB terms.

  33. 0
    Andrew Eisen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Games rated MA15+ by the OFLC:

    God of War PSP
    Condemned 2
    GTA IV
    Soldier of Fortune: Payback

    And, yes Todd, all the Mortal Kombat games (some are actually M instead of MA15+)

    Andrew Eisen

  34. 0
    Andrew Eisen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    “[the level of violence] exceeds strong and as such cannot be accomplished in a MA15+ classification…”

    So? Use the R18+ rating you silly widget!

    Andrew Eisen

  35. 0
    NovaBlack ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ jack

    yeah they like it to be not sylized… but only if its stylized. *head explodes with paradox*. It is pretty nonsensical how they change their minds.


    yeah its well unfair. I cant understand how movies have it n games dont. bloody stupid. didnt realise australia had such a daft ratings system, i thought the uk was bad!

    i really dont get it overall though, you chop of somebodies arm and they scream… errr doesnt that happen in a lot of games and films?

    HELL it happens on TV!!! anyone seen 24 or prison break has seen an arm get chopped off! (are those shows banned over there?), and which is more realistic. Human actors, or polygonal models with “large amounts” of uber squirty blood that “sprays forth”…

  36. 0
    BlackIce, Dragunov Marksman ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    “But you see, movies can be made for adults, whereas video games are just for kids and adolescents.”

    How many more people are going to say that?

  37. 0
    Adaptor ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Same country that only a week ago apologized to the aboriginees for all the atrocities against them and ’till 1967 had them classified as wildlife.. Maybe irrelevant but to me it says something.

  38. 0
    BlackIce, Dragunov Marksman ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    “When Hayden cuts off his opponent’s limb with the glaive, large amounts of blood spray forth from the stump and the injured person screams in agony”

    Which is what I expect to happen. Bloody hell..

  39. 0
    I AceSpartan I says:

    wtf is next they are going to ban here in Australia i am sick to death as a gamer seeing good games getting banned or edited it’s not that god dam hard for the Rating system to bring a adults only rating for video games

  40. 0
    Mr.Skidster says:

    What is the storyline for the game even i havent heard to much about it all I know is that he used to be a Soldier then he got mutatated or something?

  41. 0
    Muninn ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ discombobulator
    yeah, you crazy brits see someone get an arm lopped off in a video game, all of a sudden it’s the cool thing to do, and it’s all flesh wounds and “I’ll bite your kneecaps off!” and everyone runs around armless.

  42. 0
    Muninn ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I know that an AO is a death sentence for a game, as consoles won’t license it, and stores won’t stock it, but at least we have a rating for “banned”, as opposed to just not rating the thing. it’s a minor point of etiquette, but it seems better to at least rate it something.

  43. 0
    Void Munashii ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    An AO rating is the equivalent of refusing to rate a game in the Us though, as none of the console makers will allow it on their systems, and none of the major retailers will carry it. That’s basically the same thing as banning it since no one beleives Americans are capable of making mature decisions about what to expose themselves to.

    All in all, the game sounds promising. I just hope it’s fun to play.

  44. 0
    Muninn ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    well, having 15+ as the highest rating sort of lends itself to this sort of problem. should all 15 year olds have this game? maybe not, at parental discretion, but if they had another rating to give to it, then this wouldn’t be an issue. in the US, at least we have an AO rating beyond M. not that I don’t have my own host of issues with the ESRB system.

  45. 0
    AgnostoTheo ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Oh no. violence depicted in games isn’t cartoony enough? when you sever an enemy’s arm rainbows don’t pop out? When you kill someone the Lollipop Guild doesn’t showup and dance?

    Whatever will we do?

  46. 0
    koku ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    if we bann everything avalible that when you chop of somethings arm, it cries out in pain, your gonna need to hook us up to a psudo matrix and ban real life.

  47. 0
    Eville1 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I understand the whole “it’s interactive therefor it must be worse than movies!” Line but still..come off it you censoring wet naps. When you can freeze frame SAW III and see the bloody stump of a woman’s head after it was shotgunned, or a woman’s rib cage ripped apart..and you’re worried about a little pixelated blood?

    I’m waiting for the day when the whole world wears blazers, white shorts and penny loafers and carries around lollipops. We’re headed there.

  48. 0
    Bern00b says:

    I posted this on destructoid , and am copy/pasting here( with a few edits).

    I can’t say i was awaiting Dark Sector with baited breath, but outright bannination is a joke. Seems kind of ridiculous to me , as from what I’ve seen of the game, it doesn’t appear to be any more violent than say, Gears of War.

    I really hope the OFLC pulls their collective heads out of their collective arse and realise an R (restricted to 18+ for our international friends) rating for games is needed. Not only do we have crap like this happening, but there’s also the occasional game that slips through with an MA (15+) rating when it probably should have been rated R.( The original Manhunt springs to mind.)

    Without wishing to get on the soapbox, I urge everyone in Australia who’s bothered by this to write a letter (not email) to the OFLC.

    Office of Film and Literature Classification
    Locked Bag 3

    Keep it civil, concise and respectful.

    Consider that the game development community in Australia is thriving at the moment and IIRC has been pushing for the introduction of a R rating for a while now. If enough pressure is applied by both the developers and consumers, it will be enough to facilitate change.

    You might not care about not being able to play Dark Sector, but what about Ninja Gaiden 2 ? Silent Hill V ? GTA 4 ? If we keep acquiescing to censorship, shit like this is going to continue unabated.

  49. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Zerodash: If you think YOU have the right to choose, why don’t you go over to your next door neighbour and kill them in their sleep? Or why don’t you fly down to Columbia, buy three hundred kilograms of cocaine and sell it on the local streets? Surely in a democracy, you have the right?

    Yes … my examples are ludicrous, sure …. but ok why doesn’t your government provide a subsidised health care system? Why is your country have one of the highest rates of poverty in the OECD? If all I’m missing out is a lousy couple of games compared to that, I think we’re doing pretty well … :p

  50. 0
    Simon Roberts ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The OFLC gave No More Heroes an M (“mature” but unrestricted) rating. The description they give for Dark Sector could almost be applied letter-for-letter, except for the “naturalistic” part — NMH hyperintensifies its violence by using what could be considered a surrealist touch to its environment, which I guess makes it okay to body-slam a foe into the ground and then impale them on an electrified sword while they whimper. There’s only two conclusions that I can come to: either Dark Sector uses the most advanced technology ever devised for a videogame in order to bring the realism to a level where it could actually be confused with reality, or somebody in the land down under needs to take a second look at this decision.

  51. 0
    ChrowX ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Way to go Australia! You’ve officially started the fail-train. Aren’t you just the coolest nation with an overly protective and out of touch with society Censorship Board in the world?

    I seriously hope we don’t get other nations doing the same thing and quoting how awesome Australia is for doing it first.

  52. 0
    Michael ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Addendum: And as for difference between the US and Australia, I wouldn’t trade a country with a robust government backed health care and social security system for what you guys have at all.

    Our two counties are quite different. I could make comment on the poverty levels in the US as an glaring indictment on your government’s policies … but I won’t. All countries have fault. Utopia does not exist.

Leave a Reply