Re:Very bad for children (Score 1)

The G, PG and M15+ are guidelines. The MA15+, however, is not: it is a category explicitly intended to block access by certain portions of the population. The difference is that if I get caught selling an M15+ game to a 10 year old, the most I'll get is a dirty look or two; if I sell the MA15+ game to that same 10 year old and get busted, I cop a fine, and potentially jail time. That the category hasn't actually managed to block access effectively does not change the fact that it's intended to do so.

Classifications/ratings are great, or would be if all we had were ratings. What we have in Australia instead is a classification system that pulls double-duty as a censorship regime. Material suitable for young children is classified. Everything else is subject to censorship. This is an approach that's not only insulting to the adult population, but unsustainable in the long run as the amount of content being introduced increases, and the various, previously separate forms of media converge. Moving to true classification system, administered by industry, with strong governmental oversight, is the only practical way forward.

Finally, removing the MA15+ category has other repercussions beyond stopping teens from playing age-appropriate content: it actually has the potential to hobble the effectiveness of the R18+ rating itself. Currently the R18+ rating is the one rating parents understand as being Not For Kids At All (they constantly conflate the M15+ and MA15+ ratings, and often by MA15+ games when they should, at most, buy M15+). However, once you start adding content for older teens to the rating, you're providing those same teens with a fully justified argument in favour of access to the R18+ rating, be it content that's actually R18+ or just MA15+ with the wrong label on it.