In recent years, features like loot boxes have been an increasingly controversial part of the gaming landscape. Designed to offer players random rewards for either spending in-game currency or real-world money, they’ve come under fire from everyone under the sun, with gamers, advocacy groups and governments alike comparing them to unlicensed gambling.

As a result of this, many countries have decided to regulate them the same way. Belgium and the Netherlands banned them outright, Germany decided to change age ratings for games using them, and various others have reviewed their laws and gambling regulations as well.

And that’s where today’s story comes in too. Why? Because now the Australian rating system requires all games with loot boxes (and other such gambling elements) to be rated M at the minimum, and R+ 18 if they had actual simulated gambling.

It’s a big move for the country, and one which could have all sorts of effects on the industry.

Unfortunately, not all of these effects could be welcome ones. Since while loot boxes guarantee at least an M rating, and gambling games are restricted even further, the country’s idea of what ‘simulated gambling’ entails has been found to be rather… broad to say the least.

With the main reason being that simulated gambling (according to both the Interactive Games and Entertainment Association and the Australian ratings board) meaning literally anything that simulated gambling in any way whatsoever, in game benefits and story purposes be damned. For example, a casino area where you gamble in-game currency in an RPG would apparently fall under the same rating restrictions:

Q: If the simulated gambling element is a minor part of a broader video game (e.g. an RPG) which is not the focus of the video game, does this still meet the definition of ‘simulated gambling’?

1. Yes, this would likely meet the definition for simulated gambling. The definition of simulated gambling applies to any interactive activity within a video game and does not consider how much of the game consists of simulated gambling

In other words, anything with an interactive slot machine would be considered gambling. As would any sort of interactive casino area in a video game.

And that’s a very broad category of games indeed. In fact, do you know what series would be really badly affected by this?

Pokémon.

Because under these guidelines, it seems the Game Corner in the first four generations would warrant any and all rereleases of those games to get an 18+ rating in Australia. In other words, old school Pokémon could be outright banned for minors in the country.

This leaves Nintendo and the Pokémon Company in a really bad situation.

Cause you see, these age ratings don’t technically apply to older games. They’re not retroactive, and wouldn’t affect any games already on sale.

But they would affect future rereleases. As a result, any attempt to put them on the Switch’s Game Boy app would require the whole app to receive an R18+ rating.

So yeah, they either have to edit the games outright (to remove the Game Corner entirely), restrict access to them in the region, or simply refuse to distribute the original versions of those games ever again.

And Pokémon wouldn’t be the only one affected here either. No, in addition to that series and its classic games, we’ve also got:

• Slot machine mini games in Super Mario Bros 2, Super Mario Land 2, Yoshi’s Island and Super Mario Odyssey
• The Hotel Delfino casino in Super Mario Sunshine
• The Pianta Parlour in Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door
• Luigi’s mini games in Super Mario 64 DS
• Gambling/chance mini games in numerous Legend of Zelda titles
• Glittertown and Neon City in Wario Land: Shake It
• Goomba’s Greedy Gala in Mario Party 4
• And many, many other elements of the Mario Party series and spinoffs

Add this to numerous Sonic the Hedgehog levels, Cuphead’s final world and all manner of video games we can’t remember off the top of our heads…

And well, numerous video games could end up stuck in rating hell over in Australia. Fictional gambling games and casino settings are extremely common in games both old and new, and make up a huge part of any number of fan-favourite video games.

So, what’s the way forward here? Will companies refuse to sell games in the region? Doubt it, there are probably enough players in Australia to justify a release there.

Hence, they’ll either have to edit these games, or refuse to redistribute them at all.

And that could be quite the challenge. You see, as awkward as removing the Game Corner was in classic Pokémon, it’s not exactly that far out of the realm of possibility on a technical level. They already got rid of it in the European versions of Pokémon Platinum, and the Korean versions of all three gen 4 games.

But that’s still a minor and somewhat inconsequential part of the whole experience. As bad as losing the Game Corner might be to some fans, the stories still work fine as a result. Pokémon Let’s Go Pikachu and Eevee and Pokémon Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl prove that.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case with many other examples listed above. Super Mario Sunshine has an entire mission where you need to win two slot machines to access a bonus game in a casino, plus a boss whose entire gimmick is fighting you with a slot machine on a roulette wheel.

How the hell do you change that?

What about the Wario Land Shake It levels in world 3’s Las Vegas pastiche? The whole setup involves using slot machines to get the items necessary to solve puzzles and make progress:

That’s at least an edge case, since the slot machines are clearly skill based here.

But it’s still arguably simulated gambling, especially with the one on the return journey that has you win enough coins for a high score. Add this to the blatantly casino themed setting here, and well, it’s pretty clear they were at least going for the Vegas aesthetic, if not the mechanics.

Other difficult to edit examples would be the older Mario games (where at least one of the main bonus games is blatantly a slot machine, and almost all of them have a luck aspect), the casino themed boards and mini games in the Mario Party series, as well as Luigi’s whole mini game collection in Super Mario 64 DS:

So, it’s a really difficult situation. There are too many gambling sections in games to easily remove them, and those games are some of the most beloved titles of all time to boot.

And it gets even harder with the modern gaming landscape, existence of the internet and Nintendo’s localisation practices. Put simply, the company doesn’t really seem to like changing games all that much content wise anymore. With the exception of text changes, basic textures and voice acting, pretty much every modern game is identical in every region.

That’s fine if your changes are minor, like removing the skull and crossbones from Mario’s pirate outfit in the Chinese version of Super Mario Odyssey:

But it makes things rather tricky if the game’s actual design is illegal in a particular region. Removing a whole level, boss or mini game is going to be impossible, or at least heavily controversial among fans and critics.

So, there’s a chance we might have to see any future rereleases heavily edited going forward, at least if Nintendo has any plans to sell them in Australia in addition to Japan, North America or Europe. Or worse, that popular games might be entirely blacklisted from Virtual Console like services due to said content.

It’s a depressing situation for sure, and one we’re sure the writers of these new laws haven’t thought about in the slightest.

And it’s also a situation that could be avoided with some common sense too. Because for whatever reason, ratings boards seem to completely fail to understand the simplest solution to loot boxes and other predatory mechanics:

Rate games more restrictively if the mechanics use real money, rather than in-game currency.

Is that really so hard to define? If the game lets you gamble with real money, or you can buy in-game currency with real money (and then gamble that), then it gets an instant 18+ rating. If you can only use in-game currency with no way to buy it or cash out, then it doesn’t get an instant 18+ rating.

By doing that, you’ve fixed just about every problem we’ve got with exploitative games right now. Loot boxes? Virtually useless, since you can’t market a game to kids if it features them. Gacha systems? Same deal, they now make a game adult only. Battle Passes and allegedly free games? Again, same.

That would drastically change the gaming world for the better. FIFA, Madden, Fortnite, and any number of mobile games would have to be redesigned to avoid losing younger audiences forever. The mobile market would probably crash and burn spectacularly, given how many abusive games are raking in money by exploiting kids and ‘whales’ with these mechanics. The industry would literally be put back a decade or two, without affecting any normal games in the process.

But yeah, that’s how we’d handle these situations anyway, and how a fairer ratings system could fix gambling in games while not ruining innocent ones for simply having casino themes.

Regardless, what do you think? Are you happy to see the Australian ratings changes for gambling in games? Or do you worry what sort of effects it could have on rereleases and retro games going forward?

Leave your thoughts in the comments below, on social media, or on our Discord server today!

Source:

Australia tightens in-game gambling rules, casino mini-games mean automatic 18+ rating (Eurogamer)