A Rhode Island Bill that proposes fines and possible jail time for retail employees that sell Mature(M) or Adults Only (AO) rated games to underage consumers has drawn backing from the Parents Television Council (PTC).

S.2156 (PDF) proposes to label it a misdemeanor to sell “M” rated games to anyone less than seventeen years or “AO” rated games to someone less than eighteen years of age. Fines of up to $1,000 and jail time of “not more” than one year are the bill’s proposed penalties. The bill is sponsored by State Senators Frank Ciccone (D), Paul Jabour (D), Beatrice Lanzi (D) and Michael McCaffrey (D).

In urging the Rhode Island legislature to pass the bill, PTC President Tim Winter stated:

This legislation empowers parents by enforcing the industry’s voluntary guidelines which, far-too-frequently, are not followed.  And the measure would accomplish its noble goal without infringing on the ability of an adult to purchase the mature-themed product.

Winter also stated that recent Iowa State University research into violent games should serve as “a wake up call for lawmakers and industry leaders,” as the research “proves that playing adult video games can lead to increased aggression and aggressive thoughts.”

PTC Rhode Island Chapter Director Marcia Weeder added:

Half of the retailers our chapter visited responded with contempt when it was pointed out that they weren’t following the ratings when selling adult games to children.  Obviously, penalties are needed to enforce what should be a simple thing for retailers to control.  If we can prohibit the sale of tobacco, alcohol, and pornography to minors without restricting the rights of adults, we can do the same with adult games.

Gamers4Croydon, the Australian political party formed with the goal of knocking incumbent South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson out of office, recently revealed a handful of new candidates.

Kat Nicholson, the group’s candidate for Croydon, and Gamers4Croydon President Chris Prior, who is running for Legislative Council, were the first two candidates to emerge from the group, back in January of this year.

The latest political hopefuls to be unveiled include:

• Tom Birdseye – Candidate for Adelaide and Deputy Treasurer of Gamers4Croydon. A Mechatronic Engineer, Tom is described as “an advocate for parental responsibility, government transparency, and common sense legislation ahead of vested interests.”

• David Egge – Candidate for Norwood and Deputy President of Gamers4Croydon. Egge is an R&D Engineer and believes in “accountability, responsibility, liberty, and putting people before politics.”

• Matt Allpress – Candidate for Light and Deputy Registered Officer of Gamers4Croydon. Allpress is owner of an IT consultancy group.

• Ben Ernst – Candidate for Mawson and a Civil Engineer and Software Developer. Ernst hopes “that his future children deserve to grow up in an Australia where they can be assured of their freedoms, where legislation is sensible and where government serves the people.”

The group’s policy section also appears to have recently been filled out. Among the measures Gamers4Croydon supports are: opposition to mandatory Internet filtering, a ban on political advertising that uses public funds, a repeal of legislation that restricts the display of R18+ DVDs and marriage equality.

Gamers4Croydon also supports measures that would make it illegal for politicians to “lie about matters of public importance.” To that end the group stated:

Your freedom of choice is being eroded each and every time a politician lies, bends the truth or is creative with the facts. Politicians need to be judged on what they can deliver, not the tales they can tell. Legislation to punish politicians for deceiving the public would go a long way toward making that a reality.

Does it sound like they are referring to anyone in particular?


Thanks Ryan!

The Virginia Production Alliance (VPA) is a key factor behind two bills passing through the state’s legislature that would see tax credits for movie productions filmed in the state.

While the measures started out as incentives solely for motion picture development, it appears the videogame industry made its way into the talks in a bid to get some backing in the state for game developers. A note on the VPA’s Facebook page stated that the film incentive bills “have been essentially co-opted by the videogaming industry.”

The VPA continued:

The video game industry has injected itself into the incentive conversation this year. This is the first time we have ever heard from them. They are attempting to be included without providing any data or studies as to the Return on Investment or how they may work given the current incentive plan discussions.

The VPA cautioned that they needed more time to learn about interactive entertainment developers and added that, since the bill was designed first for film makers, that group has “earned the right to be the first recipient of incentive dollars.”

A measure was added to the bills that would see game developers able to receive tax breaks in 2013.

The VPA added, “Our world changed today with the addition of digital interactive media to the family. We need to reach out to the gaming industry and make this new relationship mutually beneficial for all.”

Virginia tax credits for film makers would begin in 2011.

A law introduced last year that would ban violent videogames and toys in Venezuela was enacted last Wednesday, according to various news sources.

Under the law, importers, producers, distributors or sellers of the banned toys and games could face fines and jail time ranging from two to five years. In a story dated March 3, Prensa Latina reported that the law had been passed.

The law, when initially proposed to Venezuela’s National Assembly, proposed that the country’s consumer protection society be granted full power in determining what games and toys were deemed violent, though no indication was given into what criteria might be used to judge the goods.

As it was drawn up, the law also featured provisions for teaching crime prevention classes in school, public campaigns to warn about the dangers of videogames. A government campaign to promote games that taught children “respect for an adversary” was also included, though no word on if this, or any, additional provisions were a part of the new law.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is apparently not a big fan of videogames as witnessed by an outburst earlier this year in which he labeled the PlayStation as “poison.” The ban on violent games and toys is apparently seen as a way to somehow combat crime and violence in the country.

An Overseas Security Advisory Council report on Venezuela had this to say about the country's level of violence:

The U.S. Department of State has rated Venezuela a critical threat country for crime.  The capital city of Caracas has been named murder capital of the world by many experts and that violence extends to the entire country.  Murder, kidnappings, armed robberies, carjackings and residential break-ins occur with impunity and perpetrators are rarely brought to justice.

While officially banned, handguns are readily available and a common sight throughout Venezuela.  Armed robberies occur in broad daylight including areas frequented by tourists.

|Via SlashDot and Cheater 87|

As reported by Adelaide Now, the discussion over whether to add an R18+ ratings category for videogames in Australia has been scheduled for an undisclosed date in April.

The timing of the discussion means that it will take place after state elections in South Australia and Tasmania on March 20. South Australia is, of course, home base for anti-game Attorney General Michael Atkinson, often fingered as the lone holdout among his fellow AGs when it comes to backing an R18+ rating category.

In related R18+ news, the Australian website GoldCoast penned an editorial backing the addition of an adult videogame rating category, stating that it should be up to parents to decide what their children view.

The editorial offered:

…banning a game does not in any real terms restrict its availability -- long gone are the days of being able to keep something out of the public's hands simply by keeping it off the shelves.

Banned games can be downloaded over the internet and shared -- circumventing the classification system. What is concerning is that if children are downloading these games, parents may not be aware of the content.

An R18+ category would at least allow them to be aware of the content of a game and its rating, and make an informed decision on whether their children should be exposed to it or not.

We do, after all, give parents that responsibility when it comes to DVDs and books.

Lastly, Gamers4Croydon posted a recent image that shows off the unbelievably fortuitous placement of one of their ads on the cover of the Adelaide Independent Weekly.

Thanks HarmlessBunny!

A story on GameSpot features the opinions of Electronic Arts and Aliens vs. Predator developer Rebellion as related to the R18+ videogame rating discussion ongoing in Australia.

The Aliens vs. Predator game was originally Refused Classification by The Classification Board before successfully winning an appeal and an MA15+ rating. Rebellion producer Paul Mackman spoke to GameSpot about Rebellion’s position that it would not modify the game to appease censors:

This was important to us and something Sega agreed with, and I think they handled the appeal process very well. It reached a successful result and you guys get to play the game and that's the important thing. The politics aside, [it’s] really not for me to comment on.

Mackman indicated that keeping the game true to the film source was Rebellion’s top priority, “…it's fair to say these are fiendish monsters from outer space and they do commit violent acts. Those are all represented in the films, so I don't think we would be true to the licence if we didn't portray that.”

Electronic Arts, who most recently clashed with the rating board over Left 4 Dead 2, provided a statement on their backing of an R18+ rating category:

Government policies that refuse to rate mature content effectively censor the content that adult players want to play. This shows a poor understanding of exactly who plays interactive games in Australia. The spectrum of gamers is as wide as the viewership of television, movies, theatre, and the readers of books.

A government policy that keeps our games out of stores and forces developers to rewrite code is censorship. Age rating systems are designed to help people make appropriate content choices for the right age groups.

In a related article, GameSpot notes that both the Australian Sex Party and the Pirate Party Australia have thrown their weight behind the introduction of an R18+ videogame rating category, while more traditional parties, such as the Greens and The Federal Coalition, have adopted a wait and see attitude.

Greens Senator Scott Ludlam did offer his take on South Australian Attorney general Michael Atkinson however:

I think the position he took to block the rest of the country from moving forward was really unhelpful, and I don’t think he necessarily provided the arguments to back up the position he took.

Thanks Ryan!

A former member of Australia’s Classification Board has submitted an incredibly well-written and reasoned response to the government issued Discussion Paper, regarding the topic of adding an R18+ rating category for games.

The 17-page response (PDF) was crafted by Paul J Hunt, who served as Deputy Director of the Classification Board and as a senior executive with the Office of Film and Literature Classification. He also lists himself as a “parent of teenagers who play computer games and a child of “Seniors” who play computer games.”

Hunt begins his argument by imparting first-hand knowledge into the current problems with the rating system:

When I made a decision, or participated in a decision, that a computer game was unsuitable for minors, I was forced to refuse classification for that game. It was not because I thought that the game depicted, expressed or otherwise dealt with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that it would offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults. It was simply because the game was not OK for kids.

Not being able to restrict computer games to adults was an impediment to my ability to reflect Australian community standards.

Hunt offers another real example of how the lack of an R18+ rating affects gamers, comparing the rating of the movie Hannibal (rated R18+) and Grand Theft Auto III (which was Refused Classification). Hunt notes that, in the example, “…two products received different results, but both were assessed as suitable for the same adult audience. That the result does not reflect community standards is evident in the massive number of complaints… received by the OFLC regarding both the RC decision.”

A few more choice points from Hunt:

Some parents are irresponsible with the management of their children’s behaviour. If the reason for excluding an R18+ classification for games is to limit the access of the children of incompetent or irresponsible parents, then we should ban R18+ films, restricted publications, alcohol, cigarettes, etc. from our society.

There have been suggestions that an R18+ classification would include “sexual abuse, criminal activity, and extreme violence”. The guidelines do not permit their existence in the R18+ category.

Hunt addressed some of his responses directly to South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson’s claims that nobody cares about the R18+ issue, except for gamers:

Of even greater concern is the fact that Mr. Atkinson does not understand that most Australians are gamers, and therefore the majority of the population is familiar with game content.

 

All responses, including those from gamers, are responses from the Australian community. Whilst Mr. Atkinson may wish to marginalise gamers, and put down the knowledge of all Australians, I trust the Government will accept all submissions at face value as representative of the Australian community’s feelings on this issue.

Hunt concludes by using Atkinson’s own words against him:

There is a need to follow South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson’s advice on a recent similar issue regarding the rights and freedoms of Australians – an attempt to restrict political comment on the internet: "When one gets public opinion wrong, as I did, one has to change one's mind."

Hunt is now Principal Consultant for MLCS Management, a company that offers assistance with "classification services," such as pre-classification advice and help with the management of appeals.

Thanks Ryan!

Following the latest round of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) talks in Mexico, internal documents leaked from the Dutch delegation have offered additional insight into the closed proceedings.

From the documents we’re given a look at what countries back the idea of making ACTA negotiations more transparent, a growing concern given growing criticism over the secret meetings. The document claims that Poland, the United Kingdom, Austria, The Netherlands, Finland, Ireland, Hungary, Estonia and Sweden are all in favor of transparency.

Germany has apparently not yet decided on its stance on transparency, and was joined by Belgium, Portugal and Denmark as being unconvinced “that complete transparency has to be achieved.” Denmark was further labeled as “not very flexible.”

Korea and Singapore flat out oppose the release of documents. The U.S. has remained silent regarding its stance on transparency, which apparently has unnerved other countries, such as France, who indicated “they were concerned about the position of the USA.”

Part of the movement for transparency seems to be to address “unwarranted criticism” from the public over fears that ACTA would contain measures for searching personal belongings or a feature a three-strikes type of anti-piracy law. The Dutch document expressed that those types of measures are not a part of ACTA.

Michael Geist notes that full transparency of the ACTA proceedings would require a unanimous agreements among all parties involved.

The document also reveals that the U.S. wrote the ACTA section on the enforcement of Intellectual Property pertaining to the Internet, to which Computerworld said, “This is something critics have feared for some time, since leaked versions indicate strong similarities between parts of the treaty and the U.S. law, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.”

The 8th round of ACTA talks are scheduled for April 12-16 in New Zealand.

A story on Monday detailed the submission to the Australian government of an EB Games and Grow Up Australia sponsored petition advocating the addition of an R18+ rating category.

Well, it turns out that a larger number was missing from that story, as over 30,000 people hand-signed the petition in EB Games retail outlets reports Adelaide Now. Combined with the 16,000 plus who virtually signed the document online, the petition was submitted with over 46,000 citizens backing it, a rather significant figure that hopefully Australian politicians will have to think twice about before dismissing.

Steve Wilson, Managing Director of EB Games, stated:

This groundswell of support has proven in no uncertain terms and once and for all, that there is not just a minority calling for this change, but rather everyday Australians.

Thanks HarmlessBunny!

As the window closes for public responses to the Australian government’s Discussion Paper on the subject of an R18+ rating category for games, where does each territory’s Attorney General stand on the issue?

GameSpot, which has been all over the subject, offers up just such a recount for us, noting that as of a year ago, two Attorney Generals were publically in favor of adding the rating category. That number has now dwindled to one, Australian Capital Territory AG Simon Corbell, who states:

The ACT Government supports the introduction of an R18+ classification for video games, similar to that of films and television. This position has been conveyed at meetings of commonwealth, state and territory ministers on a number of occasions.

Victorian AG Rob Hulls previously supported the measure, but has recanted, saying that he would not “pre-empt the consultation by announcing a position on this issue.”

Outside of South Australia AG Michael Atkinson, whose position on the matter is not exactly a secret, and Northern Territory AG Delia Lawrie, who declined to comment, the remaining AG’s buried their take on the matter in rhetoric:

New South Wales AG John Hatzistergos, through a spokesperson:

The position of Censorship Ministers on this issue should therefore be informed by views of the broader community. The consultation process now under way is an important step in achieving this.

Tasmanian AG Lara Giddings, through a spokesperson:

We are currently working through the discussion paper, weighing up the arguments for and against the classification, and intend to lodge a submission before the closing date of 28 February 2010.

Queensland AG Cameron Dick:

We are currently finalising our position in relation to the issues raised in the discussion paper.

Western Australian AG Christian Porter:

Ministers will make a decision on this matter after they have had time to consider the discussion paper and any submissions.

Again, submissions to the Discussion Paper are due by February 28.

Thanks Ryan!

The partnering of advocacy group Grow Up Australia and retailer EB Games has resulted in strong backing for the addition of an R18+ rating category for videogames in Australia.

GameSpot reports that the pair’s initiative has resulted in 16,055 signatures on their pro R18+ petition, which will now be sent to the Attorney General’s department. EB Games had called attention to the movement via in-store signage and with links and images on its website.

South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson, often identified as the lone holdout against adding an R18+ category for games among Australian Attorney Generals, has said repeatedly that the R18+ issue is one that only gamers care about.

Public responses to the Discussion Paper are due by February 28. Following the submission period, responses will be compiled into a report for Minister of Home Affairs Brendan O’Connor and other state and territory Attorney Generals.


Thanks Ryan and Magic!

The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) is in the midst of electing new members to its Board of Directors.

The election features 23 candidates in the running for five seats. Terms are three years long. The election is now open and will run through February 28.

So, IGDA members, who should you vote for? Macguffin Games founder Scott Macmillan may be able to help you further shape your opinion.

While the IGDA website features position statements and answers to a series of common questions from each candidate, Macmillan feels that members of the IGDA should take it a step further and “read these statements, come up with questions, and get the candidates to answer them.”

So, this is exactly what he did; Macmillan’s blog offers his personal opinion on each of the candidates. He writes:

I realize that my assessments could be considered tough on the candidates, but I think that we simply must have a conversation about this stuff, and that we need to set a high bar.  I apologize for any personal discomfort it might cause to the candidates.

Additionally, some candidates have responded to Macmillan’s personalized questions with their own answers.

Macmillan notes that the IGDA has “had its share of wounds in the last two years.”  As a game developer himself—and IGDA member—he is obviously interested in the proceedings and hopes that his contribution will result in the election of “non-asshats.”

The topic of violent and adult-rated games has once again bubbled up in Switzerland.

MCVUK and TechEye both report on a resolution that passed unanimously in the Commission for Legal Affairs and would make it illegal to sell games rated PEGI 16 or 18 to under-age minors. Swiss parliament will now have a chance to vote on the measure, which was originally introduced by Christian Democratic Party member and National Councillor Norbert Hochreutener in 2007.

TechEye writes that Hochreutener believes the law is needed to “enforce ratings and make sure kids cannot play what are called 'killer games' in the German-speaking part of Europe.”

A second, and more troubling motion, would call for a complete ban of violent and adult-themed videogames within the country. This motion passed too, though with a closer vote of nine to three, and will also head off to parliament for vote. One of the backers of this proposal is Social Democrat Evi Allemann (pictured).

Allemann’s website offers some of her thoughts (translated) on the banning of such “killer” games:

Such games do not make each one a killer, but they increase the willingness of those who are already vulnerable. A blanket ban on such games therefore seems appropriate and proportionate, especially since they do not have any worth protecting cultural and social content and there are thousands of other exciting games that work without such extreme violence.

One way to implement the motion lies in the operationalization of Article 135 of the Criminal Code. This prohibits the display, manufacture, importation, storage, promotion, etc. of sound and visual recordings of cruel violence.

Another country to keep an eye on in the future.

Edit: Fixed the link for the translated section of Alleman's website.

A former Canadian politician might have to do some creative dancing around following a probe into improper spending.

Former cabinet minister Len Goucher’s spending habits between 2006 and 2009, when he was Minister of Immigration, have come under scrutiny following a Nova Scotia probe into government expenditures. It’s claimed that Goucher spent $9,238 on electronic technology during the three-year span, including the purchase of a copy of Dance Dance Revolution Universe for the Xbox 360, reports the Canadian Press.

The inquiry has already resulted in the resignation of Nova Scotia House of Assembly member Richard Hurlburt, who reportedly used around $11,000 of public funds to purchase a generator and television.

The Church of England has issued a call for tighter regulation of videogames.

The Church, which perhaps still has a bad taste in its mouth from the use of Manchester Cathedral in Resistance: Fall of Man, addressed the issue of violent games in a meeting of its general synod on Thursday night.

Following an introduction, in which speakers were cautioned not to mention the names of specific games because “there is a risk of legal proceedings,” Tom Benyon (pictured), a former MP, took the microphone.

Benyon labeled the Byron Report “good in parts,” but said that it “did not go far enough.” He proceeded to read a poem by Oliver Wendell Holmes which he felt “encapsulates the essence of what we are about today in the matter of violent and sexual DVDs.”

God's plan made a hopeful beginning. But man spoiled his chances by sinning. We trust that the story will end in God's glory. But, at present, the other side's winning.

He continued:

A bubbling sewer of gratuitously violent and sexual pornography in DVD games are washing all around us. Byron relied on the proposition that parents have a liability or are interested in controlling what their children do. We think, sadly, that that is optimistic and a prize hope.

Benyon went on to recount the story of a “family member” who “saw one so-called game some years ago and had nightmares. He was a teenager. He was an innocent and he was profoundly shocked. The damage that he suffered was substantial. The images remained with him for months.”

Benyon also had a compilation of violent games on CD that he was going to show, but he decided not to ruin the “evenings or supper” of attendees by showing it.

He added, “I know that the Devil is said to have all the best tunes. Without any question of doubt he has the monopoly of violent and pornographic videogames.”

The Archbishop of York offered analogies to Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King, selecting a quote from the latter, that “law cannot legislate for morals, but it can actually regulate it.” He added, “On this great day of celebrating 20 years since Mandela came out of prison, can we help our young people to come out of the prison of these awful, awful videogames.”

Full audio of the hour-long meeting can be listened to here.


Via The Guardian

While it should be no surprise that Australian videogame retailers support the addition of an R18+ videogame rating category, as it would help to fill their coffers, some merchants have gone a step further and offered to display R18+ rated games in whatever fashion suits the government.

If an R18+ category was enacted for videogames, both GAME and Gametraders expressed to GameSpot their willingness to setup a separate section in stores for the adult-rated games. The pair also said that, if need be, they would follow the path of how R18+ movies are now merchandised in South Australia—housed in plain, generic covers.

Gametraders’ Marketing Director Chad Polley:

If it has to be done we will do it, but it would be our preference to place them in their appropriate platform section, up high, out of the view of minors. This is, of course, providing that the cover art is not deemed inappropriate for general public viewing.

A GAME spokesperson agreed, saying that although the plain wrappers would not be an “ideal solution,” they would acquiesce to any new legislation that the government enacted.

EBGames, who has shown their support of the addition of an R18+ rating category by plastering their stores with signage and inviting customers to sign a petition, was a little more reserved when it came to discussing how they would display adult titles if the time came, saying that the focus first should be on getting R18+ introduced before divulging any future plans.

Gametraders has since joined EBGames and also added a section to its website that urges people to voice their opinion to the government over the R18+ matter.

Thanks Ryan!

Responses to the Australian Discussion Paper—designed to foster public conversation on whether or not an R18+ rating category for games should be created—have been overwhelmingly in favor of adding the new category.

A Copyright and Classification Policy Branch member, as reported by GameSpot, claimed that as of February 1, 2010, 6,239 responses to the Discussion Paper had been received. While only 1,084 of those had been processed so far, just 11 responses out of the 1,084 were against adding an R18+ category.

South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson has been vocal in his position that only gamers care about this specific issue, perhaps setting himself up for a win-win situation as he can now say he saw this coming and that all the pro-R18+ responses were from the gaming population.

Responses to the Discussion Paper are being accepted until February 28.

Adding the R18+ rating category would require a unanimous vote in favor of the action by all Australia’s Attorney Generals.

The U.K.’s Digital Economy Bill may have been dealt a setback as one of the reports main backers and authors has announced his intention to resign from Parliament.

 Labour MP Sion Simon (pictured), Junior Minister for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport will leave his post during next week's February recess according to the Financial Times.

Simon plans to become a city councilor in Birmingham and hopes to eventually run for Mayor reports the Birmingham Post, if he can convince the town to adopt an elected mayor system. He stated, "It has become clear to me that the answers to Birmingham’s problems do not lie in Westminster and Whitehall. We need to take back control of our own city."

The videogame industry may also be losing a supporter within Parliament, as Simon has often demonstrated a level-headed approach to dealing with game critics like Keith Vaz. Simon had also endorsed fellow MP Tom Watson’s pro-gamer Facebook group (Gamer’s Voice),  leaving the following message for the group:

The government understands the importance of video games. we make games better and play games more in this country than anywhere else in the world. It’s an important industry and an important part of millions of people's lives. But it's a very young industry which is still finding its voice. I think this group is an important step in that process, and I’m glad to be a part of it.

The Digital Economy Bill proposed adopting the PEGI system as the sole means of classifying games in the U.K., and was also designed to strengthen the region’s digital backbone, thorough programs such as universal broadband. The bill also proposes a tough three-strikes law to deal with Internet pirates.

Australia’s largest videogame retailer has joined the movement to add an R18+ rating category for interactive entertainment Down Under.

EBGames is promoting its pro R18+ stance in all 350 of its Australian storefronts, where it will display signage (picture at Kotaku) and offer shoppers the ability to sign a petition. The retailer is also promoting the cause on its website and linking to a virtual petition for those in favor of adding the adult rating category to sign online.

Kotaku reports that EBGames did its due diligence in advance of publically supporting the issue; the company polled its customers on the issue and found that 84% were in favor of the addition of an R18+ rating category.

EB Managing Director Steve Wilson offered:

With the release of the Government’s discussion paper, we knew as a company that we needed to act on this issue as it continues to cripple our industry and cost local jobs. We did however want to be sure that our customers were as passionate about the matter as we are.

He continued:

This is not a call for violent video games, but rather a call for a better classification system that brings Australia in line with the rest of the world and other Australian entertainment industries, such as films.

Thanks Andrew!

With time continuing to wind down in advance of the 2010 South Australian state elections (scheduled for March 20), candidates from the Gamers4Croydon party took time out to answer questions from Kotaku Australia readers.

Participants included Kat Nicholson, who is taking on current South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson directly, and Chris Prior, who is running for the Legislative Council.

Nicholson was asked if she thought the name of the G4C party was alienating:

… the name was chosen back when the G4C founder was still running around getting enough people to sign up. I don’t think it will alienate voters – we’re visibly more than just a one-policy party. Although our name might give that initial impression, our actions during the campaign will prove otherwise.

Prior on the chances of a live debate with Atkinson happening:

Obviously, we’d love to have Mr Atkinson out from behind his media minders and be able to confront him live. Given that he’s demonstrated he wants to play dirty, and would rather demonise us than engage with us, we don’t like the chances of that happening. That doesn’t mean we won’t try our hardest though.

Next, Prior was asked, if Gamers4Croydon fails, as Atkinson predicts, would such a loss further empower Atkinson and the anti-R18+ movement?

He has said he expects we’ll not get more than 1% of the vote. We will, and that will haunt him. In the event that he retains his seat, it is almost certain it will be despite a (significant) swing against him, something that will put him on unsteady ground when it comes to ‘the people have spoken’ type rhetoric.

Many more questions are answered by the pair over at Kotaku.