Those ******* Aussies.

I've scoured the whole Internet, from Wikipedia to Yahoo! to the Australian Ratings board, and I am finding incredibly wide gaps in the consistency of Australian censorship. Apparently, it's OK to broadcast The Osbournes uncensored and have full frontal nudity in their SOAP OPERAS as long as you don't show someone's head exploding in a video game. Their music industry has three different "obscene" ratings, yet F-bombs are just fine on TV, as long as it's after 8:30 p.m.?! Ridiculous. And it's alright to have porn, as long as you import it. It's illegal to buy it in the country. Plenty of games are banned, too, then later reinstated after a particular bit is removed or edited (see: any GTA game). But they don't remove all the offensive stuff, just enough to make it a M15+ game. Like in GTA IV, you can pick up a hooker, but you can't swing the camera around and look in the windshield to see what she's doing. But it's still completely fine to chase her with a baseball bat and beat your money out of her afterwards.

There are so many weird things to get censored for in Australia. Fallout 3 was banned because it blurred the line between sci-fi drugs and real drugs. Bethesda took out the word "morphine" (it's called Med-X in the game) and removed the shooting-up animation and Fallout 3 was reinstated. It was also edited for Japan (they don't like atom bombs much over there) and it was not released in India at all (there are two-headed cows).

The average gamer in Australia is 30 years old. If they are going to censor TV, video games, movies, books, music, and all other art forms, both passive and immersive, the Aussies need to find a more consistent method of going about it. If you don't want boobies on TV destroying their child's innocence, fine. Get rid of them from everywhere. Picking and choosing where it's OK to see them just confuses children, grown-ups, and foreigners like me. I'm getting mixed messages, Australia! Can I swear and see violence/nudity or not? It seems that I can, as long as I stick to the appropriate format. Network TV, here I come!

Denied!

Wal-Mart recently told Green Day that, unless they offer a censored version of their new album, 21st Century Breakdown, they would not stock it at all. Green Day said, "Fine, but we're not going to censor our music. Don't stock our album then." Wal-Mart is the biggest music retailer in the country (and maybe the world... not sure on that). Green Day debuted at #1. Hmm.

There are no "edited versions" of games... yet. Will there be? I don't think so. Game companies won't make games that would receive an AO rating because major retailers refuse to sell them. However, the M rating is being stretched further and further, much like the MA rating on TV. Ever since South Park used "the S word," it has seeped into other networks like FX (see: Nip/Tuck and Rescue Me). Nip/Tuck is also practically softcore porn! It seems like nowadays the only thing you can't say on cable TV is the F-bomb and you can show most of the butt, just no nipples or full frontal. But that will change eventually. Our society is degrading at a rapid pace, and it's taking us all down with it. I think South Park would love to be the first show to use the F word - it'd be like receiving an Emmy for them.

Games have swear words, yet it doesn't make them more "adult." It just makes them more vulgar. Remember GTA III? Not a single F-word. GTA: Chinatown Wars? F this, F that... it's the only word these pixelated gangsters seem to recognize. And then there's House of the Dead: Overkill... sigh. Without Wal-Mart editing our art, who's going to save us from our fragile, vile selves? Our parents? Nah, they had their chance. Maybe the government should step in! Weeee!

Ha.

I want to play a funny game. When things are humorous in real life, it's because I made light of whatever bad/normal/good situation I was in. I enjoy watching Comedy Central Presents, and comedy movies are fun once a year or so, so you have time to forget the gags and punchlines. There have been a few attempts at funny games in recent memory (Penny Arcade, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Armed & Dangerous), but it was always humor, then gameplay, then more humor, then more gameplay. I want comedy and good gameplay to be entwined in a way that one would not succeed without the aid of the other. Sure, it would be tough because not everyone has the same sense of humor, but no art has ever been created with the intent of pleasing every last person in the world. Grand Theft Auto caters to mature gamers exclusively, and it sells reasonably well (except on the DS, apparently). I want funny people to write funny things for funny games. The Daily Show: Stewart's Revenge, now on Xbox Live! Something like that. There are lighthearted games (Mario, anything on Wii), and there are serious games (GTA, Call of Duty, anything on 360 or PS3). In the middle, there are games that try to be funny. Even if they are clever, I have rarely, in my entire life as a gamer, laughed aloud at something that happened in a game. Movies and TV... all the time. Why? The Harvey Birdman game was just like the show, only without the need to laugh, ever. I enjoyed it, despite it's obvious flaws as a game, but I didn't laugh. And that's sad. Why is it so hard?

New old games

Sometimes, game companies create new IPs. See: Mirror's Edge, Mass Effect, any Tim Schafer game. Usually, though, they realize, "Hey, we're a game company." Then they let the purpose of a company (to make money) get in the way of the creative part of game creation. They see that Madden consistently sells millions upon millions of copies each year despite the fact that changes to the game from one season to the next are mostly superficial. They see that Psychonauts and Okami do not sell despite near-universal critical acclaim. Maybe it's the funny names. Maybe consumers just don't have as much money as they used to. Maybe Average Joe fears change. Barack is president now; maybe his inauguration can be the turning point for the game industry as well as the economy. Maybe people will start trying new things because the old things are boring. The old things don't work anymore. Change, as they say, is good.

Then why do game companies continue mining the past for ideas instead of looking to the future?

Space Invaders Extreme. Galaga Legions. Geometry Wars. (It's Asteroids in Technicolor. Zip it.) Halo Wars/Recon/ODST/4/5/6. DDR Super Max Ultimate Extreme Hyper Fighting II: The World War Road Warriors. Once-fresh ideas are now being re-hashed so continually and consistently that whole generations are now being robbed of the initial "wow" factor of a new game or a new technology. When GTA III was released and instantly popularized the sandbox world genre, people were amazed. They said things like, "Now I expect so much more from my games." Flash forward through Vice City and San Andreas and you have GTA IV - more polished, but basically the same game. Is it still fun? Most definitely, but not as exciting, fresh, or new.

Which brings me to my question: is the amount of fun you have with a game related to the amount of innovation in it? Are remakes (Prince of Persia, Bionic Commando, Ninja Gaiden) fun because the source was so pure and undiluted? How long can you milk a concept or franchise before it becomes obsolete and unplayable? Square Enix has made each new Final Fantasy game a fresh take on the classic RPG formula to varying levels of success, while the Tony Hawk games started to stink so bad that they finally took a year off to regroup.

Madden will always be fun despite the lack of substantial updates. Mario will continue to charm gamers the world over with each new adventure. Game developers will continue mining the past as long as there's money to be made (*cough*Sega*cough*). Still, as long as there are people that are not content to merely rest on their grandad's NES laurels, the future still has a future. And maybe it all doesn't have to be in the past.