Australian Classification Board Revisits We Dare Rating

June 16, 2011 -

The Australian Classification Board said this week that it will rethink the current PG (Parental Guidance) rating for Ubisoft's We Dare, a game which received heavy criticism earlier this year for its adult content and sexually suggestive mini-games. The review will be carried out on June 17 and will be conducted by the Classification Review Board. The re-review is the result of a formal complaint filed by Federal Minister for Home Affairs Brendan O'Connor. Chances are it will result in a higher rating for the title.

In March the board took some heat from the public over its decision to give the Ubisoft-published adult party game for the Wii a PG rating for "mild sexual references." A number of early media reports blamed the board for inappropriately rating the game, because of the trailer, which showed two couples engaged in some saucy and suggestive situations inspired by the game's mini-games.

In Australia, the Classification Board of Australia rated We Dare PG, ignoring Ubisoft's recommendation that they give the game an M rating. When the publisher says its game needs an "M" rating, it seems wise to heed such advice.

O'Connor tells GameSpot that media reports about the game led him to contact the Classification Board about We Dare:

"I asked the Classification Board to review We Dare following media reports that the game's PG rating may be inappropriate. I believe that this game is unsuitable for children and I look forward to the outcome of the Classification Board's review of its PG rating. I share the concern of many parents that children may be inadvertently playing games that are more suited to adult gamers."

Source: GameSpot by way of Andrew Eisen.


Comments

Re: Australian Classification Board Revisits We Dare Rating

$20 says the only thing O'Connor knows about the game is what he read in the paper and didn't bother to actually do any research on it before deeming it "unsuitable for children" and necessary to review for reclassification.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Australian Classification Board Revisits We Dare Rating

That or he was shown the game trailer and screamed "won't somebody think of the children?!?!"

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameAndrew: Im not sure Im the one to be explainging this really, Im not sure im articulating it right07/31/2015 - 9:20pm
Big PermI got to around 30 in tera before giving up. I liked my sorc, but I need better motivation to grind07/31/2015 - 9:14pm
Andrew EisenAh TERA. I made a video about TERA censorship. One of my more popular ones. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO26h9etTbw07/31/2015 - 8:52pm
Goth_SkunkI've been playing TERA all day. Just took a break to barbecue some chicken. :3 And Andrew: I'm using Cabal to suggest a group of people secretly united in some private views or interests within a community.07/31/2015 - 8:50pm
Andrew EisenI'd love to but I'm at work. But once I get home... I'm going to work out for a while. But after THAT... I'm going to shower. Then eat. Then prep tomorrow's meals. And THEN play video games! YEAH!!!07/31/2015 - 8:38pm
Big Permlol, ya'll are still going back and forth? Take a break and play some video games07/31/2015 - 8:37pm
Andrew EisenGoth - Are you using "cabal" to describe a group of writers or to suggest they all worked together in secret to publish those articles?07/31/2015 - 8:30pm
Andrew EisenMatt - That doesn't disprove the general premise of the various articles as that's not what they're about. Unless, again, he's talking about a different batch of articles.07/31/2015 - 8:28pm
Goth_SkunkThe difference between one voice being offensive and a cabal being offensive.07/31/2015 - 8:22pm
MechaCrashFunny how "you're offended, so what" flips into "we're offended, retract everything and apologize."07/31/2015 - 8:18pm
MattsworknameIts not the only argument he points out ,its just one of them07/31/2015 - 8:06pm
Mattsworknameidea that Gamers as the articel puts it, the "White male sterotype are dead, essentially was compltely false07/31/2015 - 8:03pm
MattsworknameThe video actually shows that the shaw study actually disproves the Premise of the artices by showing that the "Gamer" dentity, has no actual meaning to thsoe who use it other then "I play games", its not connected to race, gender, or orientation. So the07/31/2015 - 8:01pm
Andrew EisenWith the exception of a brief mention in Golding's Tumbr post. Even so, he's talking about gamer identity, not desire for diversity in gaming.07/31/2015 - 7:50pm
Andrew EisenI'm not calling his examination of the Shaw study into question. I haven't read the study nor seen his video. All I'm saying is that it has nothing to do with the Gamers Are Dead articles I've been referencing for the last year.07/31/2015 - 7:49pm
MattsworknameSome times sargon just goes off on tangents but in this case he was pretty direct and went through teh research in detail, did the whole first video about the shaw study itself07/31/2015 - 7:45pm
Andrew EisenWell, unless it's disingenuous twaddle but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.07/31/2015 - 7:42pm
Andrew EisenGotta be. The argument you describe makes no sense otherwise.07/31/2015 - 7:40pm
MattsworknameThat is a possibility, they looked like offical articles but its possible they are different from the articles you mentoin07/31/2015 - 7:28pm
Andrew EisenNot unless he's referring to a completely different set of Gamers Are Dead articles.07/31/2015 - 7:19pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician