But a spokeswoman for the Minister for Home Affairs, Bob Debus, confirmed the issue of "whether or not to allow an R18+ classification" for games would be discussed by censorship ministers at the next Standing Committee of attorneys-general (SCAG) meeting on March 28. It will be the first time the issue is discussed since November 2005. Claire Bowdler, spokeswoman for the Classification Board, said 18 games had been banned since 2001. Eight of the games had their bans lifted after they were modified and resubmitted.

The most recent game to be axed by the board was the sci-fi themed shooting game Dark Sector, which was refused classification this month. The reason given by the Classification Board was that it contained graphic violence including "decapitation, dismemberment of limbs accompanied by large blood spurts, neck breaking spurts, neck breaking twists and exploded bodies with post-action twitching body parts". Last year, Blitz: The League was banned because it contained drug use related to incentives or rewards, while Soldier of Fortune: Payback was banned for excessive violence. The ban on the latter was lifted after content changes by its publisher, Activision.

Other recently banned games include Mark Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure (for promoting graffiti), BMX XXX (for sexual content) and Reservoir Dogs (for high levels of violence including the ability to shoot the heads off of hostages during a bank heist). After learning of the ban on his game, millionaire New York fashion designer Mark Ecko said: "... to blame gaming for everything that is inherently wrong in our homes, in our schools and on our streets is much easier to do than to actually figure out ways to fix the systemic problems that exist within our culture."

The games industry has long argued that the censorship regime is unnecessarily draconian and prevents adults from making their own decisions as to the type of content they consume. It has called for the classification system to be harmonised across all types of media. Research conducted by Bond University in Queensland for the industry body, the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia (IEAA), found that the average age of Australian gamers is 28 and over 50 per cent of gamers are over 18. Another survey of 1601 Australian households, conducted by the university in 2005, found 88 per cent of Australians supported an R18+ classification for games.

Bond University associate professor Jeffrey Brand, who authored the research, said Australia was the "only developed democracy" that did not have an adult classification for games. He said the lack of an R18+ rating meant some games deserving of adult classification were being let through by the Classification Board as MA15+. And Australians who wanted to obtain banned games could easily source them from the internet or overseas, he said.

"These games are entering the marketplace despite the classification restriction, and so very often parents, who in some cases are the least savvy in the household about games, are unaware that this adult content exists," Dr Brand said. But Angela Conway, spokeswoman for the Australian Family Association, said even M-rated games currently on the market had "concerning" levels of violent and sexual content. "We would be opposed to the adoption of an R-rated category because we believe that research is pointing to the fact that these games actually do impact behaviour and psychology more easily than a film," she said.

"Our big concern is that there is a continual [positive] reinforcement for players actually acting out violent and sexual impulses ... this sort of technology has actually been used to desensitise soldiers ... and retrain them and break down their defences against killing." Ron Curry, CEO of the IEAA, said it would be up to states and territories and games retailers to ensure those under 18 could not purchase R18+ games. He said he would "absolutely support" compulsory ID checks by stores.