Australian Game ClassificationImplied Sexual ViolenceGambling-Like Elements

Hunter × Hunter Game Refused Classification Due to “Implied Sexual Violence”

全职猎人游戏 因暗示性暴力而被拒绝分级

January 20, 2026
7 views

Summary

This article analyzes the refusal by the Australian Classification Board to grant an age rating to Hunter × Hunter Nen × Impact due to implied sexual violence content. By examining the Board’s reasoning, past enforcement cases, and Australia’s evolving classification framework, the article highlights the country’s stringent approach to game content regulation and underscores the compliance risks faced by game developers and publishers entering the Australian market.

Hunter × Hunter Nen × Impact was refused age classification by the Australian Classification Board due to the inclusion of “implied sexual violence” within the game. The game has now been postponed to 2025 and is expected to be released on Nintendo Switch and PlayStation 5.

Although the Australian Classification website did not disclose specific reasons for the refusal, merely stating that further details would need to be obtained through direct contact, the publicly available classification outcome indicates that certain content in the game “exceeded generally accepted community standards,” and even surpassed the thresholds of Australia’s most restrictive classifications, R18+ and X18+.

(Image source: Internet)

Subsequently, in a response by the Australian Classification Board to Polygon, it became clear that the primary reason for the refusal was the presence of “visual depictions of implied sexual violence within the game, including scenes in which adult males expose themselves to minors under the age of 18.”

The Board noted in its report that, due to the absence of any resolution to such conduct within the game’s narrative, the implied sexual violence was effectively presented as acceptable behavior, without reasonable contextual justification. The Board’s official statement further stated:

“Implied sexual violence is not permitted to be depicted in a visual manner, to be interactive, to lack reasonable contextual justification, or to be associated with incentives or rewards.”

(Image source: Internet)

In October of this year, Sony issued an apology to Australian players after Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number continued to be made available on PlayStation in Australia despite having been refused classification. Although the game had controversially failed to obtain classification from the Australian Classification Board due to themes of sexual violence, it had been available for sale over the past 12 months through PlayStation Plus Extra and the Hotline Miami Collection. Upon becoming aware that the game had not been classified, Sony took measures to remove it and issued refunds to users who had purchased the game during that period.

(Image source: Internet)

Australia has long been known for prohibiting games it considers to contain extreme content. In 2012, the Australian Parliament approved the introduction of the R18+ classification, which was applied one year later to Grand Theft Auto V. The primary reasons included the game’s depiction of “high-impact drug use” as well as strong themes, language, sex, violence, and nudity.

Australia maintains relatively strict standards for game classification, and many games have encountered obstacles during the Australian rating process. Last year, Bethesda’s upcoming space role-playing game Starfield received a restricted classification in Australia.
In September this year, Australia updated its classification standards by introducing new policies for video games containing gambling-like elements. These include games featuring “in-game purchases with chance-based elements” (such as loot boxes) and games that simulate gambling activities (such as casino-style gameplay).

Australia’s game classification review process remains stringent. When assessing games, the Australian Classification Board considers factors such as themes, levels of violence, sexual content, language, drug use, and nudity. Game companies planning to release products in the Australian market must therefore exercise heightened caution in evaluating game content to ensure compliance with local classification standards, so as to avoid classification refusal due to content-related issues.

中文原文

《全职猎人 Nen x Impact》(Hunter x Hunter Nen x Impact)因游戏内包含“暗示性暴力”而被澳大利亚分级机构拒绝进行年龄分级。该游戏已推迟至 2025 年,预计将在 Nintendo Switch 和 PlayStation 5 上推出。

虽然澳大利亚分级网站没有给出具体的原因,只是说明拒绝分级的原因需要与其联系。但根据分级网站公布的分级结果来看,这表明游戏中一些内容“超出了普遍接受的社区标准”,甚至超出了澳大利亚最严格的R18+和X18+的标准。

(图源网络)

随后在澳大利亚分级委员会回应Polygon的评论,可以看出该款游戏被拒绝分级的主要原因是游戏内包含“暗示性暴力的视觉描述场景,其中包括成年男性向18岁以下的未成年人展示暴露”。

“委员会在报告中指出,由于游戏叙事中缺乏对这一行为的解决,隐含的性暴力被默许为适当的行为,而且没有上下文的合理解释,"委员会的官方声明补充道。委员会的官方声明补充道:“不允许以直观方式描述、互动、没有上下文合理解释或与激励或奖励相关的隐含性暴力”。

(图源网络)

今年10月,Sony曾因《迈阿密热线 2:错误号码》(Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number)在澳大利亚被拒绝分级后仍在PlayStation上提供事件而向澳大利亚玩家道歉。尽管因性暴力主题而备受争议地未能获得澳大利亚分级委员会的分级,但在过去 12 个月中,该游戏一直在 PlayStation Plus Extra 和 Hotline Miami Collection 上发售。目前Sony获悉该游戏未获得评级,已采取措施将该游戏删除,并向在此期间购买该款游戏的用户进行退款。

(图源网络)

长期以来,澳大利亚一直以“禁止其认为极端内容的游戏”而闻名。2012年澳大利亚议会批准通通过了R18+的分类,一年后该分级标准就在《侠盗猎车手5》体现,主要原因是《侠盗猎车手5》游戏中包含“高影响药物使用”和强烈的主体、语言、性、暴力和裸露。

澳大利亚对游戏分级审核比较严格,不少游戏在澳大利亚分级时碰壁。去年Bethesda即将推出的太空角色扮演游戏 《Starfield(星空)》在澳大利亚被评级为限制级。(插入文章超链接:《澳大利亚游戏分级,毒品元素谨慎使用》)。今年9月,澳大利亚更新了分级标准,对含有类似赌博内容的电子游戏实行新的分级政策,包括“带有机会元素的游戏内购买”(例如战利品盒)的游戏和具有“模拟赌博”功能的游戏(例如赌场游戏)。(插入文章超链接:《澳大利亚游戏分级引入新标准,类赌博内容将影响评级》)。

澳大利亚在游戏分级审核方面较为严格,澳大利亚分级委员会在对游戏分级时考虑游戏的主题、暴力程度、性、语言、毒品以及裸体等元素。游戏公司在面向澳大利亚市场推出作品时,无疑需要更加审慎地对待游戏内容,确保其符合当地的分级标准,避免因内容问题而遭遇分级困境。

分享文章

相关文章

General

【Weekly Gaming Law】Lawyers Comment on miHoYo’s Anti-Fraud Actions; Infringing “Reskinned” Game Ordered to Pay RMB 5 Million

【每周游戏法】律师评米哈游反舞弊;侵权游卡被判赔500万

This weekly update examines three recent legal developments in the gaming industry: miHoYo’s anti-fraud enforcement and supplier blacklist measures; a “reskin” infringement case involving a Three Kingdoms-themed card game resulting in a RMB 5 million damages award based on unfair competition; and Roblox’s launch of AI-powered interactive content generation tools. The article outlines the legal considerations arising from supply chain compliance, the boundary between public domain materials and protectable game design, and the intellectual property and compliance implications of AI-generated interactive content within UGC platforms.

0 views
General

How to Build Official Game Payment Systems in a Compliant Manner (Part II): Overseas

游戏官方支付如何合规搭建(二)海外篇

Against the backdrop of a global economic slowdown and evolving regulatory scrutiny over major app distribution platforms, an increasing number of overseas-oriented game companies are exploring the establishment of official website top-up platforms to reduce reliance on channel commissions. Building on the prior discussion of platform policies regarding payment redirection and third-party payment access, this article reviews practical cases of official website payment models adopted by several game companies, including their login mechanisms, purchasable content, regional availability, and qualification disclosures. Based on these practices, it outlines compliance considerations that overseas game companies should focus on when constructing official website payment systems, particularly in relation to account management, price display, promotional methods, and refund policy design across different jurisdictions.

6 views
General

EU’s DMA Enforcement Push: Apple and Epic Games Reach Temporary Truce

欧盟DMA强监管,苹果与Epic Games暂时握手言和

Since 2020, Apple and Epic Games have been locked in a global antitrust dispute over App Store policies. While Epic lost its U.S. lawsuit, it continued its resistance through noncompliance, resulting in a developer account ban. However, the dynamics shifted with the EU Digital Markets Act (DMA) coming into force on March 6, 2024. Epic reported that Apple, under pressure from the European Commission, agreed to reinstate its developer account in the EU. The DMA’s provisions, especially Article 5(3) and Article 6(4), require gatekeepers like Apple to allow third-party app stores and payment systems on iOS. Apple’s attempt to ban Epic amid DMA implementation triggered regulatory attention, leading to rapid Commission intervention. This incident not only highlights the DMA’s enforcement teeth but also signals a broader shift in platform governance within the EU. For global developers and digital exporters, especially those dependent on app store distribution, DMA compliance represents a strategic inflection point. Non-compliance risks include fines of up to 10–20% of global turnover, exemplified by the €1.84 billion fine Apple recently faced. As more third-party app stores (e.g., Mobivention, MacPaw) emerge, the EU’s digital market is poised for structural transformation.

5 views