it continues: Manhunt 2 given AO rating in the U.S.

[Apossum]

Manhunt 2 and the AO rating:
http://gamepolitics.com/2007/06/19/breaking-manhunt-2-rated-adults-only-by-esrb/

This just in from Take Two Interactive, publisher of the embattled Manhunt 2:

The ESRB has issued an initial rating of AO (Adults Only) for Manhunt 2.

We believe the process of rating videogames is to help people make informed entertainment choices and not to limit them.

Manhunt 2 was created for mature audiences and we strongly believe it should receive an M (Mature) rating, aligning it with similar content created in other forms of media. We are exploring our options with regard to the rating of Manhunt 2.

Beyond that, T2 isn’t talking. It is unknown exactly when the AO was assigned to Manhunt 2, but it would have to have been less than 30 days ago, based on earlier comments by ESRB president Patricia Vance.

GP: For a video game publisher, the economic impact of an AO rating cannot be overstated. It means that major retailers like Wal-mart, which by itself accounts for about 25% of retail games sales, will not carry Manhunt 2. There is an appeal process available to game pubilshers who wish to dispute rating assignments.


http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=25909


"To issue a certificate would involve a range of unjustifiable risks, to both adults and minors"

The BBFC has rejected Rockstar's Manhunt 2, banning the controversial title from sale anywhere in the UK.

Both PlayStation 2 and Wii versions of the game have been banned, with the BBFC unable to recommend cuts or removal of content to make it suitable for public sale.

"Where possible we try to consider cuts or, in the case of games, modifications which remove the material which contravenes the Board’s published Guidelines. In the case of Manhunt 2 this has not been possible," revealed David Cooke, director of the BBFC.

"Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing.

"There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game," he continued.

The BBFC has stated that the sequel to Manhunt is far more brutal and bleak than the original title, which was granted an 18 rating in 2003.

"Although the difference should not be exaggerated the fact of the game’s unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying and the sheer lack of alternative pleasures on offer to the gamer, together with the different overall narrative context, contribute towards differentiating this submission from the original Manhunt game," added Cooke.

"Against this background, the Board’s carefully considered view is that to issue a certificate to Manhunt 2, on either platform, would involve a range of unjustifiable harm risks, to both adults and minors, within the terms of the Video Recordings Act, and accordingly that its availability, even if statutorily confined to adults, would be unacceptable to the public."

The last game to be banned by the BBFC was Carmageddon in 1997. Publisher Rockstar has the right to appeal against the BBFC's decision.

Rockstar was not available at the time of writing.



The game does look beyond tasteless, but banning stuff sucks.

[benjamouth]

Last game banned in the UK was Carmageddon eh, I wouldn't say the Uk is one of the stricter european countries either, there's no way this'll get through in Germany.

I wonder if they can make changes and re-submit it.

[anomynous]

the controversey train starts rolling

[daroga]

Ah, Carmageddon. What a stupid, yet, silly-fun-for-high-school game.

[schuerm26]

This isn't really news. The original Manhunt was banned in several places. Not exactly sure where but I know if you try to list it on ebay with International shipping they don't let you list it. I don't know which areas you have to remove exactly to get it to work.

[mrchainsaw]

Good. I don't see how Manhunt can be fun at all and it definitely isn't doing any good.

[Zen Davis]

Cowards. Yet another reason Children of Men applies all the more to the UK.

[vherub]

this is 2007, and yet there is still censorship of books, movies, music and games
insane

[Zen Davis]

At the same time, Rockstar knew this game would be banned in a lot of places. Hence why they never invested in a PS3/360 version of the game. It's easier to make money on a Wii/PS2 production cost in limited markets than HD versions.

[willardhaven]

I disapprove of your crappy game, but I will defend to the death your right to play/publish it.

This kind of activity is scarier than the stuff that happens in the Manhunt games.

[schuerm26]

I disapprove of your crappy game, but I will defend to the death your right to play/publish it.

This kind of activity is scarier than the stuff that happens in the Manhunt games.

What's even scarier is this kind of activity going on with Harry Potter books.

[Brak]

I thought the UK was a beacon for Liberalism. Same with Australia.

... yet they always ban films, video games, music and other forms of art.

[benjamouth]

I thought the UK was a beacon for Liberalism. Same with Australia.

... yet they always ban films, video games, music and other forms of art.

I think the UK generally cuts a good balance between censorship and the "anything goes" attittude of some other european countries.

The Uk used to censor a lot more than it does now, especially with art and films back in the 70's/80's. These days I think it gets things about right.

[PR Mega X]

Good. I don't see how Manhunt can be fun at all and it definitely isn't doing any good.

First: am I the only one here that really enjoyed the first Manhunt? That game was crazy tense.

Second: I don't see how censorship can do any good...

[CAG 79]

I loved the first Manhunt and I'll definitely pick up the sequel once I get my Wii.

[camoor]

I thought the UK was a beacon for Liberalism. Same with Australia.

... yet they always ban films, video games, music and other forms of art.

In America the Dems are seen as liberals but I think we can all agree that they are moderately hostile to violent video games. These days liberal is typically taken to mean favoring big govt - IMO it follows that big govt would eventually start becoming nanny govt if unchecked by the people.

My theory is that Americans associate censorship and morality police with conservatives because of the recent administration.

[Apossum]

I disapprove of your crappy game, but I will defend to the death your right to play/publish it.

This kind of activity is scarier than the stuff that happens in the Manhunt games.

Totally agree with the first statement. If parents were more on top of regulating what their kids play, this wouldn't be necessary. It's being banned because many parents are lazy as hell. (It's possible for parents to use the ESRB or EU equivalent-- my nephew asks his parents first whenever he wants to try a game over E.)

but i dunno...I'm more scared of having balls and one of my vertebrae ripped off by fireplace tongs :lol:

[camoor]

What's even scarier is this kind of activity going on with Harry Potter books.

Hmm - care to explain?

[Zoglog]

It's retarded whenever any government tries to legislate anything based on Decency.

[Brak]

In America the Dems are seen as liberals but I think we can all agree that they are moderately hostile to violent video games. These days liberal is typically taken to mean favoring big govt - IMO it follows that big govt would eventually start becoming nanny govt if unchecked by the people.

My theory is that Americans associate censorship and morality police with conservatives because of the recent administration.
Both sides do it equally, if not entirely different from one another.

Essentially, they both ban things that offend their side of the fence.

I'd be so bold to say that the American Liberals are more censorship-crazy than the Right.

[NWgamer666]

So, can't they still get an M rating in the states and import it to the UK? Is the Wii region locked between U.S. and U.K. to prevent this? If this game gets good reviews, it could convince me to buy a wii.
Side note: will we be offered plastic 3rd party broken bottles and shivs to insert our Wiimotes into ala tennis racket and golf accessories, in order to heighten the realism of killing a bum so he doesn't alert nearby guards?

[prmononoke]

Good. I don't see how Manhunt can be fun at all and it definitely isn't doing any good.
Censorship/government intervention is never good. What does it matter if the game doesn't do any good? The idea of that something is only valid if it's beneficial to society is draconian, and is the first thought that triggers a violation of our freedoms. Obviously the game won't be banned here, but in a country that is supposed to be free, this sort of act is simply unacceptable.

[benjamouth]

This is a genuine question, I'm not just trying to stir things.

How far should "freedom of speech" or not censoring/banning some content in games go, would people be so up in arms if "Child Rape Simulator 2" had been submitted to a ratings board and subsequently not given a rating. Doesn't a line need to be drawn somewhere ?

Oh and I could be wrong about this but I believe the BBFC is not a government agency, again I could be wrong on that.

EDIT - Apparently the Carmageddon ban was over-turned on appeal.

[Xevious]

I enjoyed the first game so I'm buying the 2nd one. Censorship be damned!

[willardhaven]

I would think Sony or Nintendo would not approve a child rape game... They have the final say in what gets published I think. I am not sure that is correct though, it's just what I assume is the case.

[whoknows]

Guess the PSP version will be the top selling version in the UK :-P

[Reality's Fringe]

This is a genuine question, I'm not just trying to stir things.

How far should "freedom of speech" or not censoring/banning some content in games go, would people be so up in arms if "Child Rape Simulator 2" had been submitted to a ratings board and subsequently not given a rating. Doesn't a line need to be drawn somewhere ?
.

The protection of speech wasn't put in the constitution to protect that which is popular, it was out in there to protect the fringe "crazy" stuff. So yes, all that racist, sexist, insane tripe should be allowed. Period. "Child Rape Simulator" is different from child pornography; Child Porn isn't protected under the 1st amendment because it is causing harm to another(contrast with ..."regular"...porn.)

[fart_bubble]

I'd be so bold to say that the American Liberals are more censorship-crazy than the Right.

Not really that bold when you look at the history of censorship in America. Only when you get to these moronic Neo-Cons (that have taken over the Right) that it starts becoming a wash

[dragonreborn23]

First: am I the only one here that really enjoyed the first Manhunt? That game was crazy tense.

Second: I don't see how censorship can do any good...

Hrmm... my mind might be changing a bit when it comes to violent games. At least where the Wii is concerned. You know that retail outlets aren't gonna follow the 'M' rated rules about not selling to minors so censorship might be the only option. I've been thinking about this ever since that politician mentioned being able to do the actual arm and hand movements of slitting someone's throat with the Wii controls.

Videogames have always been more immersive than other forms of entertainment, but actually being able to simulate the physical movements of brutal murder over and over for a 10 to 15 hour game might be too much.

[camoor]

Not really that bold when you look at the history of censorship in America. Only when you get to these moronic Neo-Cons (that have taken over the Right) that it starts becoming a wash

I generally agree with this statement.

[Chris in Cali]

Good, then they won't have to pay $50 for a crap game.

[camoor]

Hrmm... my mind might be changing a bit when it comes to violent games. At least where the Wii is concerned. You know that retail outlets aren't gonna follow the 'M' rated rules about not selling to minors so censorship might be the only option. I've been thinking about this ever since that politician mentioned being able to do the actual arm and hand movements of slitting someone's throat with the Wii controls.

Videogames have always been more immersive than other forms of entertainment, but actually being able to simulate the physical movements of brutal murder over and over for a 10 to 15 hour game might be too much.

Actually, I don't know that retail outlets are going to ignore the 'M' rated rules. I would concede that there will be a few isolated cases, but for the majority of the time I believe that the kids getting this game will be recieving it as a present from an adult.

I think the game is tasteless and I don't see the appeal. However your assertion that the game is "too much" smacks of truthiness (however if you have a scientific opinion that you can source, I'd like to see it)

[dopa345]

I'd be so bold to say that the American Liberals are more censorship-crazy than the Right.

It's the truth. That's why political correctness is so rampant now. Both the far right and left are dangerous to freedom of expression.

[MarioColbert]

Rockstar answers (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/06/19/rockstar-we-emphatically-disagree-with-uks-manhunt-2-ban/).

Shame on anyone here who expressed support for the ban. Whether you find the game in question "entertaining" should be the last thing on your mind.

It would be wise to remember that the same people who would stop you from listening to Boards of Canada may be back next year to complain about a book, or even a TV programme. If you can be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you can be told what to say or think. Defend your constitutionally-protected rights. No one else will do it for you. Thank you.

[Apossum]

nice Boards of Canada quote...I always found that track to be pretty ominous and I guess this is exactly what it's referring to.

[MarioColbert]

Since people are starting all kinds of new threads for the same discussion...

GamePolitics.com just reported that Manhunt 2 gets AO rating. LINK (http://gamepolitics.com/2007/06/19/breaking-manhunt-2-rated-adults-only-by-esrb/).


We are exploring our options with regard to the rating of Manhunt 2.
It's safe to say that an appeal is forthcoming.

[Halo05]

It's the truth. That's why political correctness is so rampant now. Both the far right and left are dangerous to freedom of expression.

Word

[dragonreborn23]

Rockstar answers (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/06/19/rockstar-we-emphatically-disagree-with-uks-manhunt-2-ban/).

Shame on anyone here who expressed support for the ban. Whether you find the game in question "entertaining" should be the last thing on your mind.

Au contraire, Colbert! It is Rockstar who should feel shame. All game developers should start being more responsible about their game content. Videogames are not the cause of all our societal problems, but they are much more interactive and repetitive than any 1-2 hour movie. Whether we gamers like it or not, causing the death and destruction yourself is different than watching it unfold. How much different? No one really knows, but saying I should feel shame for wanting to ban an interactive experience that no one really knows the full effects of is ridiculous.

[Dr Mario Kart]

Whats this about no one knowing the effects? I thought most connections were discredited by now.

[happy]

All this means is more American kids buying what will probably be a pretty crappy game because it's getting great free publicity.

I don't think video games lead to violent behavior, but companies should at least be expected to have some sense of taste when creating them. More importantly I'd like to see actual enforcement of the ratings system, which I think would kill a majority of the market for this type of game (assuming it really is as tasteless as it would appear).

[MarioColbert]

No one really knows, but saying I should feel shame for wanting to ban an interactive experience that no one really knows the full effects of is ridiculous.

So you would rather ban something, despite your addmitted ignorance of it and its effects? Based on what, exactly do YOU make your claim? Because the game preview did not appeal to you?

I'm glad you trust the goverment to separate the good games from the bad ones. Especially since you admit that they are doing guesswork just as the rest of us do, since "no one really knows the full effects of (violent video games)." There is a fine line between AO rating (limited cencorship which does not prohibit interested parties from obtaining a title) and a "ban."

[jer7583]

Basically, there needs to be a legitimate Ao rating so that the M rating can be more defined and so that developers have more room for Adult content that isn't sexual in nature. It's so stupid that such a huge amount of the games on the shelf are M rated, and the Ao is so rarely used. M for the Halos, MGSs, Ninja Gaidens, Ao for the GTAs, Manhunts, and Fallouts.

[Apossum]

Updated the OP

Au contraire, Colbert! It is Rockstar who should feel shame. All game developers should start being more responsible about their game content. Videogames are not the cause of all our societal problems, but they are much more interactive and repetitive than any 1-2 hour movie. Whether we gamers like it or not, causing the death and destruction yourself is different than watching it unfold. How much different? No one really knows, but saying I should feel shame for wanting to ban an interactive experience that no one really knows the full effects of is ridiculous.


"causing death and destruction" :rofl:


yeah, there's a rowdy group of gamers outside my apartment ripping people's balls off as we speak. Guess I'll skip that trip to Walgreen's :roll:

[Dr Mario Kart]

Someone on the INTERNET had an interesting comment, on why there isnt a legitimate AO rating:

AO is for whatever the ESRB feels would harm the industry. The primary purpose of ESRB is to prevent government regulation of content, and their only tools are the M and AO ratings. M is meant to give an aura of responsibility on the part of retailers and publishers. AO is meant to straight-up censor via economic sanction.

The text descriptions of the ratings have nothing to do with it.

[DesertEagleXIX]

I guess Manhunt 2 it's it's current form will never see the light of day. Sad...

[Apossum]

no surprises there. That could completely backfire and Rockstar is just the company to turn this controversy into a point of purchase.

after all, they just got $50,000,000 richer...why would they give a fuck? :lol:

[ryanbph]

I guess Manhunt 2 it's it's current form will never see the light of day. Sad...

has take 2/rockstar come out and said that? There is a ton of potential customers on the wii craving for a new game, and not all of them are kids. I am sure they could do fine financially by selling it as an AO game. Yes, they will lose some sales due to walmart not carrying it, but IMO, it could make them some money by selling it as an AO game. I am sure other boards are talking about the rating on the game, and it will sell due to the curiosity of people to see why it was an AO game.

[MarioColbert]

has take 2/rockstar come out and said that? There is a ton of potential customers on the wii craving for a new game, and not all of them are kids. I am sure they could do fine financially by selling it as an AO game.

I think you should do some research. Nintendo Publishing Policy explicitly prohibits AO games on the system. In other words, NO AO MANHUNT ON THE WII.

AO is a sentiment of "extreme offense" that should be marketed to a very small group of "special interest" persons (very much like legal pornography). I will not argue for or against the AO rating - it is completely up to ESRB. While many may argue that it is "cencorship via economic sanction," it is a perfectly legitimate affair because that's the service ESRB is intended to serve.

The game's contents and the extent of violence expressed within are unknown at the time, and I do not believe that anyone can judge ESRB. I will say, however, that I'd much rather have ESRB rating versus a government regulated ban. Once again this is a reminder why we should embrace and support ESRB and not trust any federal regulation regarding rating and regulation on video games. Free enterprise and market economy regarding interested parties obviously takes care of this well on its own.

[DesertEagleXIX]

has take 2/rockstar come out and said that?

No, it was speculation. Although I don't see any major chains carring this game. Why? the bad publicity could hurt them. If Gamestop sold the game, it could bite them in the ass later. They are a pretty conservative company, and I don't think they risk a bit of money against a huge media uprising (which could happen, look at the whole, idiotic Hot Coffee coverage).

[DesertEagleXIX]

Once again this is a reminder why we should embrace and support ESRB and not trust any federal regulation regarding rating and regulation on video games. Free enterprise and market economy regarding interested parties obviously takes care of this well on its own.

Not to mention the first amendment of the US Constition.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/06/03/technology/games_firstamendment/

[Scrubking]

I think you should do some research. Nintendo Publishing Policy explicitly prohibits AO games on the system. In other words, NO AO MANHUNT ON THE WII.

AO is a sentiment of "extreme offense" that should be marketed to a very small group of "special interest" persons (very much like legal pornography). I will not argue for or against the AO rating - it is completely up to ESRB. While many may argue that it is "cencorship via economic sanction," it is a perfectly legitimate affair because that's the service ESRB is intended to serve.

The game's contents and the extent of violence expressed within are unknown at the time, and I do not believe that anyone can judge ESRB. I will say, however, that I'd much rather have ESRB rating versus a government regulated ban. Once again this is a reminder why we should embrace and support ESRB and not trust any federal regulation regarding rating and regulation on video games. Free enterprise and market economy regarding interested parties obviously takes care of this well on its own.

Why should we embrace the ESRB when they have clearly pandered to the same politicians and watchdog groups that are trying to censor videogames and continue to do so?

The ESRB is actually hurting the videogame industry it was created to protect by fostering the idea that videogames shouldn't be too violent or have any type of sex because of the kiddies. They should be working to advance the perception that the industry isn't just for kids anymore instead of banning any game that goes against that idea.

How long do we have to wait before games like Manhunt 2 are finally treated like all the sex filled, gore fest movies and given the appropriate rating (17+), instead of a ban?

[Dr Mario Kart]

The idea is that the ESRB does a slightly more reasonable job than a government agency would do. So its lesser of two evils. Until the government can be more reasonable, we'll have to have this intermediary to quell it, even at a cost.

[-Never4ever-]

Why should we embrace the ESRB when they have clearly pandered to the same politicians and watchdog groups that are trying to censor videogames and continue to do so?

The ESRB is actually hurting the videogame industry it was created to protect by fostering the idea that videogames shouldn't be too violent or have any type of sex because of the kiddies. They should be working to advance the perception that the industry isn't just for kids anymore instead of banning any game that goes against that idea.

How long do we have to wait before games like Manhunt 2 are finally treated like all the sex filled, gore fest movies and given the appropriate rating (17+), instead of a ban?

Well, think of it this way; the ESRB are our only line of defense from the crazy soccer moms, retarded politicians and just general bigots that feel the need to shap the world into their narrow-minded image. So what would you rather have; the ESRB or complete censorship (and destruction) of the VG industry?

As for this whole ordeal, I really want to know exactly what warrented giving a game a AO rating, essentially the equivilent of an NC-17. If it's the fact that you rip balls off, well then that's complete and utter bullshit compared to Hostel II where (BIG SPOILER) They clearly show a man get fully castrated, followed by the man's genitals getting eaten by a dog a dog (very clearly and realistic) and yet it only got an R rating.

[CoffeeEdge]

Ugh. I call shenanigans. I seriously wouldn't put it past Take Two's smarmy little PR department to have orchestrated this whole thing, intentionally submitting footage that they knew for sure would get stamped AO, but didn't necessarily intent to include in the game anyways, just to get the press on the story (no press coverage is bad press coverage), only to later claim that they made "the minimal necessary cuts" to achieve an M rating, when that's what they had in mind all along. Bullshit, seriously.


Why should we embrace the ESRB when they have clearly pandered to the same politicians and watchdog groups that are trying to censor videogames and continue to do so?
What is the ESRB pandering to, exactly? They're rating games, nothing more.

The ESRB is actually hurting the videogame industry it was created to protect by fostering the idea that videogames shouldn't be too violent or have any type of sex because of the kiddies. They should be working to advance the perception that the industry isn't just for kids anymore instead of banning any game that goes against that idea.
Okay, that's some straight-up bullshit right there. The ESRB rates games. They don't say what should be in games and what shouldn't be in games. They just rate games based on what's in them, and guess what? Manhunt 2 just happened to (supposidly) fall under it's AO category. Why should they be "working to advance the perception that the industry isn't just for kids anymore"? If you weren't stupid, you'd know that that's the ESA's job, not the ESRB. As their name CLEARLY states, they're the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, not the Videogame Public Relations Committee. That job belongs to the ESA. And lastly, the ESRB doesn't ban anything!! No one does! They age rate games, for crying out loud! This stupid word people use, "ban," ugh...I think you mean to say "certain stores won't carry," right? That's very different from a "ban." Again, if you weren't totally ignorant, you'd know what the ESRB and it's responsibilities really are, but you don't, so stop mucking up this discussion.

How long do we have to wait before games like Manhunt 2 are finally treated like all the sex filled, gore fest movies and given the appropriate rating (17+), instead of a ban?
Uh, they're treated the exact same. MPAA R = ESRB M. Each requires that the person buying the item/admission be at least 17 or accompanied by a guardian/adult. Where ths fuck is this shit about banning that you keep babbling about? Again, neither the ESRB or anyone else ban anything, not in the US anyways.

[Monsta Mack]

AO is fine with me but since Nintendo won't allow AO games I'm worried about my pre-ordered Wii version :(

[RAMSTORIA]

I see no problem with an A/O rating for the game

[Zen Davis]

PVance@esrb.org

Patricia Vance

I believe this is the woman at the ESRB who got the title rated AO. As mature gamers, please write to her in a respectful manner and ask her to stand up for mature gamers and not censorship. I'm not 100% sure that the e-mail will work, but the message I sent her hasn't bounced back yet so I'm assuming it works. Let her know your stance and please for god's sake, be mature about it.

Please do the right thing and give Manhunt 2 an M rating. Hostel, Saw, and various other films never received the dreaded NC-17 rating so I don't understand why Manhunt 2 has to go through this indignation.

Prove to the people who are this industry's livelihood why you stand up for them and not the special interest groups whose only goal in life is a hypocritical 'think of the children!' mentality. If they were doing their jobs as parents, Manhunt 2 would never end up in their hands to begin with and Ms. Vance, you know this to be true.

Please all you're doing is punishing the adult gamers this title was aimed for by essentially having the game blacklisted from the market and it's pretty much a backhanded manner of censorship. Please don't do this.

Thank you and take care.

Zen Davis

[Scrubking]

Stupid shit.

1. An AO rating is a BAN. No one will sell it and no console company will publish it. IE it's a ban.

2. Hot Coffee came about because the ESRB decided to pander to all the politicians crying murder at GTA:SA. They caved and re-rated the game for bullshit reasons ie because the politicians wanted them to.

3. Since Hot Coffee they have bent to the will of said politicians and watchdog groups tightening their ratings and even going as far as rating inaccesible content on game discs

4. The ESRB does more than rate games. They are there to voluntarily give peace of mind to the public and give the perception that the industry is responsible via the ratings they give.

[whoknows]

I'm sending this:

Deer Patricia,

That is a stoopid name. Who would be mean enough to name their ugly child Patricia? You're parents, that's who.

Stop being a dumb dumb about that one game that got an AO rating. It makin people feel sad and turn Emo.

I'd appreciate if you being a dumbass.

THANX

[MarioColbert]

Ugh. I call shenanigans. I seriously wouldn't put it past Take Two's smarmy little PR department to have orchestrated this whole thing, intentionally submitting footage that they knew for sure would get stamped AO, but didn't necessarily intent to include in the game anyways, just to get the press on the story (no press coverage is bad press coverage), only to later claim that they made "the minimal necessary cuts" to achieve an M rating, when that's what they had in mind all along. Bullshit, seriously.


Doubtful, though possible. It is not as easy to do this sort of thing as one would suspect. Games aren't like books, where you search for a bad sentence and nuke it. Granted, could have been a texture of NUTS that could have been removed.

To the conspiracy enthusiasts, it should be noted that according to Patricia Vance the game publisher knew about this rating 30 days ago, and could have changed things.

Where ths fuck is this shit about banning that you keep babbling about? Again, neither the ESRB or anyone else ban anything, not in the US anyways.

If you're going to tell someone else that they are "mucking up the discussion" at the very least you can bother yourself with READING THE CONTENTS OF THIS THREAD.

I'd appreciate if you being a dumbass.

Well said, dumbass.

[Scrubking]

PVance@esrb.org

Patricia Vance

I believe this is the woman at the ESRB who got the title rated AO. As mature gamers, please write to her in a respectful manner and ask her to stand up for mature gamers and not censorship. I'm not 100% sure that the e-mail will work, but the message I sent her hasn't bounced back yet so I'm assuming it works. Let her know your stance and please for god's sake, be mature about it.



Just emailed her. More people should do the same.

[PyroGamer]

I do hope the ESRB doesn't become a scurge to videogaming like the MPAA has to film.


In other news: I'll definitely be playing Manhunt 2 now.

[MarioColbert]

Just emailed her. More people should do the same.

And say what?

Dear Patricia:

I haven't played Manhunt 2, but after reading some things on the internet about it, I bet it can't possibly be that bad. Granted, I know dick from shit about the content of the game, and I have not the slightest clue as to what the fuck I am talking about. I do know, however, that by emailing you I feel like I'm finally sticking it up to the man and to the ESRB, who ruin the good name of family-friendly cop-killing ball-yanking video game industry as we know it. We all know that when we say "rate games" we really mean "M" would suffice for everything violent and offensive.

Please ignore the detailed document on your desk outlining the ESRB rating policy about why Manhunt 2 should be rated AO. Just re-rate it as M for Mature, because that would be a very MATURE thing to do. (LOL!) Rockstar and I would really appreciate not messing up with my chances to play this totally awesome title.

Looking forward to MATURE ball-yanking by Christmas,


MarioColbert.

I'll definitely be playing Manhunt 2 now.

Not on a Wii you're not.

[RAMSTORIA]

And say what?

Dear Patricia:

I haven't played Manhunt 2, but after reading some things on the internet about it, I bet it can't possibly be that bad. Granted, I know dick from shit about the content of the game, and I have not the slightest clue as to what the fuck I am talking about. I do know, however, that by emailing you I feel like I'm finally sticking it up to the man and to the ESRB, who ruin the good name of family-friendly cop-killing ball-yanking video game industry as we know it. We all know that when we say "rate games" we really mean "M" would suffice for everything violent and offensive.

Please ignore the detailed document on your desk outlining the ESRB rating policy about why Manhunt 2 should be rated AO. Just re-rate it as M for Mature, because that would be a very MATURE thing to do. (LOL!) Rockstar and I would really appreciate not messing up with my chances to play this totally awesome title.

Looking forward to MATURE ball-yanking by Christmas,


MarioColbert.

[i]

Not on a Wii you're not.

brilliant

[CoffeeEdge]

AO is fine with me but since Nintendo won't allow AO games I'm worried about my pre-ordered Wii version :(
Uh, Sony doesn't allow AO games either, genius. Nor does Microsoft, and the only PC publishers that will touch it are companies that localize Japanese hentai games.

1. An AO rating is a BAN. No one will sell it and no console company will publish it. IE it's a ban.
No, an AO rating is not a ban. It's something that very few stores will choose to sell. You might call that blacklisting, but it's NOT a ban.

Doubtful, though possible. It is not as easy to do this sort of thing as one would suspect. Games aren't like books, where you search for a bad sentence and nuke it. Granted, could have been a texture of NUTS that could have been removed.

To the conspiracy enthusiasts, it should be noted that according to Patricia Vance the game publisher knew about this rating 30 days ago, and could have changed things.
Well, I'm one of the conspiracy enthusiasts who also believes that Hot Coffee was done on purpose, and that the entire Janet Jackson Superbowl/Tits thing was a publicity stunt. Again, any press is good press.

[evilmax17]

I had absolutely no interest in this game before today, but if they actually have the guts to publish it with an AO rating, I'll buy it at launch just to support them.

The ESRB made a pretty big statement today by giving Manhunt 2 an AO rating. Take-Two could make an even bigger statement by accepting the rating and publishing it anyway.

[Mr. Anderson]

The ESRB made a pretty big statement today by giving Manhunt 2 an AO rating. Take-Two could make an even bigger statement by accepting the rating and publishing it anyway.

I agree. I think we could be on the verge of seeing some major changes in the gaming industry.

[Scrubking]

And say what?

Dear patricia,

Please stop enforcing standards that no other form of media entertain you stupid bitch. If Hostel 1 and 2 can be rated 17+ why can't Manhunt 2? There are too many stupid gamers who refuse to see such a simple thing, but I hope that you will be different. So stop keeping videogames in the dark ages and get with the times.

Sincerely,

[jmcc]

I've seen it suggested elsewhere that Rockstar should put out a M version for stores, but sell an AO version online somewhere, with bonus content to boot. Seems like a decent idea to me. Work towards breaking the control retailers have on content a little.

[Apossum]

They should make an M version, but then sell the AO content for $15 as a download.

[jmcc]

They should make an M version, but then sell the AO content for $15 as a download.Why? If they were to allow a choice between versions why skew it in favor of one over the other? It could be a good experiment on whether games still need retail, but not if there's a premium cost attached to one or the other.

[Apossum]

Why? If they were to allow a choice between versions why skew it in favor of one over the other? It could be a good experiment on whether games still need retail, but not if there's a premium cost attached to one or the other.


why not? everybody's doing it. hey, it's not a premium, it's "extra content."
you can't fault them for that. they'd be going the extra mile by giving us a kick ass offer to pay for the rest of the game at no discount.

[kill3r7]

Dear patricia,

Please stop enforcing standards that no other form of media entertain you stupid bitch. If Hostel 1 and 2 can be rated 17+ why can't Manhunt 2? There are too many stupid gamers who refuse to see such a simple thing, but I hope that you will be different. So stop keeping videogames in the dark ages and get with the times.

Sincerely,

There's a huge difference between games and movies. Games are a form of interactive media (you are the one castrating that guy, or you are the one pulling someone’s teeth out) as compared to movies which are a passive/flaccid experience (the viewer watches someone else do these things). The ratings epitomize these differences.

I agree with you that censorship directly violates our constitutional rights but you have to view the issue from their perspective.

[Scrubking]

There's a huge difference between games and movies. Games are a form of interactive media (you are the one castrating that guy, or you are the one pulling someone’s teeth out) as compared to movies which are a passive/flaccid experience (the viewer watches someone else do these things). The ratings epitomize these differences.

I agree with you that censorship directly violates our constitutional rights but you have to view the issue from their perspective.


So a soldier shooting a Nazi on a big screen is rated PG, but if I press the X button it should be rated M? I agree that there is a difference, but not one that should give harsher ratings.

[PR Mega X]

Hrmm... my mind might be changing a bit when it comes to violent games. At least where the Wii is concerned. You know that retail outlets aren't gonna follow the 'M' rated rules about not selling to minors so censorship might be the only option. I've been thinking about this ever since that politician mentioned being able to do the actual arm and hand movements of slitting someone's throat with the Wii controls.

Yes, exactly. It's up to retail outlets and the government to regulate what children of today are subjected to. If only there were some other entity involved...perhaps some sort of 'parental' supervision to regulate what games children play, rather than letting the government create censorship that bans content they deem unacceptable, preventing everyone from playing :roll:

[Grave_Addiction]

I probably wouldn't have picked it up before, but now I may have to get it to see what all the fuss it about.

[Apossum]

I probably wouldn't have picked it up before, but now I may have to get it to see what all the fuss it about.


you rip off balls with pliers

[jer7583]

On the fence about the PSP version or Wii.

[ultrarobotninja]

I heard somewhere that in the rating process game companies submit their games and then the ESRB says they will rate it a certain way unless changes are made. At that point the game company has the choice to accept the rating or make changes and resubmit. Its always possible that this AO content could be the core of the game itself therefore unchangeable (without breaking the game), but I think it might be possible as well that Take Two wants to make some controversy and get some publicity.

[rodeojones903]

If this game releases as AO on the Wii I will buy it.

[MarioColbert]

Please stop enforcing standards that no other form of media entertain you stupid bitch. If Hostel 1 and 2 can be rated 17+ why can't Manhunt 2?

Two questions.

1. What makes you so certain that Manhunt's violence is even comparable to Hostel 2 in both the number of scenes and grotesque details?

2. What makes you think that immobile set-in-stone shots of Hostel films are comparable with a free camera of 3D environments, potentially enabling one to view a gruesome act from each and every possible angle?

No matter what you say, as long as you say "I have not played Manhunt 2 and am completely ignorant of the extent of its violent content" your claims (which I understand are in good spirit) can be distracted with an equivalent of my (2) - you can not even argue simple camera mechanics in the game, and now you have more to answer about.

As long as ESRB know more than you do about the game, your arguments will remain self-defeating.

[MarioColbert]

Repeating for the ones too lazy to read:

NINTENDO DOES NOT ALLOW PUBLISHING OF AO-RATED GAMES ON ANY NINTENDO SYSTEM.

http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/buyers_guide.jsp


Next person to say dumb shit like "AO on Wii = I'm in" gets a kick in the NUTS.

[evilmax17]

Repeating for the ones too lazy to read:

NINTENDO DOES NOT ALLOW PUBLISHING OF AO-RATED GAMES ON ANY NINTENDO SYSTEM.

http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/buyers_guide.jsp


Next person to say dumb shit like "AO on Wii = I'm in" gets a kick in the NUTS.
A small asterisked blurb on a likely-outdated sub-page doesn't mean anything.

If Take-Two decides to publish the game with the AO rating, then Nintendo would find itself in a difficult position. Don't forget, Reggie practically begged Rockstar for some Wii support. He wouldn't sever that relationship over a technicality like this.

[polly]

you rip off balls with pliers

This game sounds awesome.

[Apossum]

They could just change the blood to sweat. it worked for MK1. kinda.

http://www.yamoslair.com/pics/mkbefore.gif

[Scorch]

I'm guessing that Take-Two will probably sell it from their site or something if it doesn't come to retail.

I'll be buying it.

[Xevious]

I'm guessing that Take-Two will probably sell it from their site or something if it doesn't come to retail.

I'll be buying it.

I enjoyed the first game so I would be interested in buying this too.

They sold Leisure Suit Larry AO online....I don't see why they won't do the same thing here.

[Halo05]

I probably wouldn't have picked it up before, but now I may have to get it to see what all the fuss it about.

That's kind of the boat I'm in which lends a certain amount of credibility to the theory that Rockstar intentionally designed the game to get an AO rating. Hey, it's a bold idea, like someone else said, they just got piz-aid 50 million by Microsoft, if ever they could afford to take a chance, it's now.

[Zen Davis]

If Take-Two decides to publish the game with the AO rating, then Nintendo would find itself in a difficult position. Don't forget, Reggie practically begged Rockstar for some Wii support. He wouldn't sever that relationship over a technicality like this.
That actually makes a hell of a lot of sense. But then again, people always follow their values before common sense these days.

[CoffeeEdge]

I had absolutely no interest in this game before today, but if they actually have the guts to publish it with an AO rating, I'll buy it at launch just to support them.
Guts has nothing to do with it. They won't be allowed to publish the game if it's rated AO. Not because of their policies, but because of Sony and Nintendo's. Neither of them will allow AO games to be published on their systems, and the way they control this is by stipulating that publishers are not allowed to release AO-rated games on their consoles in the licensing agreements, which these developers and publishers signed in order to obtain SDKs for these consoles, which are necessary to develop the games. So, yeah, it's completely fucking impossible.

The ESRB made a pretty big statement today by giving Manhunt 2 an AO rating. Take-Two could make an even bigger statement by accepting the rating and publishing it anyway.
Again, there's jack shit they can do. When they were licensed to develop by Nintendo and Sony, and use their SDKs, they agreed to NOT publish AO games. Simple as that.

If this game releases as AO on the Wii I will buy it.
No you won't, because it's not coming out AO, because that's not possible, as explained above.

A small asterisked blurb on a likely-outdated sub-page doesn't mean anything.
Dude, are you fucking kidding me? What's with the grabbing at straws? Okay, so, a clear-as-day statement on the official website isn't fucking enough proof for you? Seriously? It's absolutely common knowledge that all three console manufacturers explicitly forbid AO-rated games, and will not license them, which makes it effectively possible for them to be released, because if they're not licensed, they can't use any of Sony or Nintendo or Microsoft's SDK code, whatsoever. If AO-games weren't a problem, why do you think GTA:SA was recalled after the Hot Coffee blow-up? Again, they are NOT allowed by the console manufacturers, and their word goes.

If Take-Two decides to publish the game with the AO rating, then Nintendo would find itself in a difficult position. Don't forget, Reggie practically begged Rockstar for some Wii support. He wouldn't sever that relationship over a technicality like this.
Again, they won't publish it, because they can't. They have three choices: cut and re-submit the game until it's rated M, make it a PC-only game (since there are no governing bodies over PC software, anyone can release anything they want, with or without an ESRB rating [which are required for console games only because the console manufacturer's require a rating for the game to be licensed] as long as they can manufacture it. Problem is, there still aren't any retail stores that'll carry AO PC games, which as of now, are mostly Japanese porn games and "uncensored" versions of Playboy and Leisure Suit Larry games), or completely cancel it outright. I'm pretty damned sure they'll pick door number one.

And, yes, Nintendo would tell them to fuck off, and either cut their game till it's M, or to take it elsewhere. They're not going to compromise a long-standing company (an defacto industy) policy over one game with mediocre commercial prospects. It's not THAT important of a game, strategically. I mean, seriously, any Mario Party game they release is more or less guaranteed to sell more copies in it's first week at retail than Manhunt 2 will over it's entire run, so, again, it's not something they're going to compromise that extremely important policy over.

[MarioColbert]

A small asterisked blurb on a likely-outdated sub-page doesn't mean anything.

You are right! Comapred to a totally fresh out-of-your-ass speculation on an internet forum, a blurb on the official website is nothing to pay attention to.

If Take-Two decides to publish the game with the AO rating, then Nintendo would find itself in a difficult position. Don't forget, Reggie practically begged Rockstar for some Wii support. He wouldn't sever that relationship over a technicality like this.

Do you believe that the world revolves around you, and everything that is "a technicality" to you is "a technicality" to everyone else, no matter what policies a company employs? I suppose in your little world, Reggie goes over to Rockstar and says "Pleeease make us a game?" and they say "Okay" and they go off and do it. Every once in a while they have tea together, and send each other Christmas cards.

In case you're confused: that's not how a multi-billion dollar video game industry operates.

I'd explain how it works, but CoffeeEdge beat me to it. (From the sound of his text, I think he was risking spontaneous combustion - calm down, man, this is only the internet!)

[Dark Slayer120]

I'm guessing that Take-Two will probably sell it from their site or something if it doesn't come to retail.

I'll be buying it.

Same here.

[jer7583]

Take Two removing this from the retail channel gives me even more reason to buy it immedately. Die, retail chain videogame stores, die!

[Scrubking]

1. What makes you so certain that Manhunt's violence is even comparable to Hostel 2 in both the number of scenes and grotesque details?

I'm not certain, but if the most violent videogame ever made to date that I know of IE Manhunt 1 got an M rating I don't see how part 2 will suddenly be that much worse. The ESRB has already given an M rating to Manhunt level of violence, which may be worse than Hostel. So I find the sudden change of heart suspicious.

2. What makes you think that immobile set-in-stone shots of Hostel films are comparable with a free camera of 3D environments, potentially enabling one to view a gruesome act from each and every possible angle?

Apparently you don't know that the ESRB rates games based on "set-in-stone shots" provided by the developers. All ESRB games are rated based on video footage and nothing more. So rating content in a movie and a game is more than comparable.

It's obvious that you believe graphic violence can reach an AO level. I disagree and would direct you to Manhunt 1 to prove my point. The ESRB has proven on more than one occassion that they are biased and make bad decisions so I don't hold them up as the infallible board that many portray them as.

I am convinced that all of this has to do with some type of sex or nudity in the game and not violence at all. The ESRB has shown that they are not very tolerant of sexual content after Hot Coffee and this is probably the reason this game got an AO.

[dopa345]

Banning any game outright is wrong. However I have no problem with an AO rating for Manhunt 2. Is this really the type of game that minors should have easy access to, especially the Wii version?

[Sporadic]

I wish that Rockstar would just tell the ESRB to shove it and release it Unrated.

Banning any game outright is wrong. However I have no problem with an AO rating for Manhunt 2. Is this really the type of game that minors should have easy access to, especially the Wii version?

An AO rating is a death sentence to a game.

People being upset that it was rated the way it was aren't upset because little Johnny can't get his kill on, it's because almost every retail chain won't carry it.

[jmcc]

Well, here's hoping Rockstar takes a Hitchcock approach and resubmits it in a few weeks with no changes and that the ESRB, being gullible, gives it an M.

[RedvsBlue]

I really don't have a problem with an AO rating, its a game kids shouldn't be playing anyway so they should rate it accordingly. What I don't understand is why it has to be such a stigma, same goes for R-rated movies lately (fucking Live Free or Die Hard). We're adults, there's a reason kids can't wait to be one of us...

[dopa345]

I wish that Rockstar would just tell the ESRB to shove it and release it Unrated.



An AO rating is a death sentence to a game.

People being upset that it was rated the way it was aren't upset because little Johnny can't get his kill on, it's because almost every retail chain won't carry it.

Then the problem is with the retailers and the perception of an AO rating, not the rating itself.

[Zen Davis]

Then the problem is with the retailers and the perception of an AO rating, not the rating itself.
You're an idiot. We're talking about what getting an AO rating entails. Not the fucking semantics of it.

[the3rdkey]

The protection of speech wasn't put in the constitution to protect that which is popular, it was out in there to protect the fringe "crazy" stuff. So yes, all that racist, sexist, insane tripe should be allowed. Period. "Child Rape Simulator" is different from child pornography; Child Porn isn't protected under the 1st amendment because it is causing harm to another(contrast with ..."regular"...porn.)


Thank god people still have brains!!! I <3 you!!!!

[Zen Davis]

Rapelay. Research it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapelay

[yukine]

Wow, an AO rating huh? Must be really hardcore, mommy probably wouldn't let me play the game anyway. At least I still have this copy of SpongeBob SquarePants to play.

[jmcc]

You're an idiot. We're talking about what getting an AO rating entails. Not the fucking semantics of it.So the entire business end of the game industry is semantics?

[raisin]

i want to play this game.. HEHE..

[Zen Davis]

So the entire business end of the game industry is semantics?

It's sad you even have to ask. ;)

The idea that there is nothing wrong with the rating is silly. Don't blame the rating, blame the publishers and retailers?

The fact is that they're all working together on this from the ESRB to Nintendo to Wal-mart and Target. The AO represents the kiss of the death. As a rating alone, in a perfect world, sure it wouldn't matter, but in a real world essense the rating is representative as a ban of the way the game was meant to be experienced.

[CoffeeEdge]

I'm guessing that Take-Two will probably sell it from their site or something if it doesn't come to retail.

I'll be buying it.Same here.
No, that won't happen, because as I have explained at length, the game can NOT be published whatsoever if it's rated AO, regardless of where it's sold. Why don't you people get this?

[jmcc]

It's sad you even have to ask. ;)

The idea that there is nothing wrong with the rating is silly. Don't blame the rating, blame the publishers and retailers?

The fact is that they're all working together on this from the ESRB to Nintendo to Wal-mart and Target. The AO represents the kiss of the death. As a rating alone, in a perfect world, sure it wouldn't matter, but in a real world essense the rating is representative as a ban of the way the game was meant to be experienced.I don't understand what you're trying to say. The rating isn't anything other than a checklist of content. So it IS entirely between the publishers and retailers. The ESRB just looks at what's there and assigns a value to it based on an [industry-wide] agreed upon set of standards.

[CoffeeEdge]

Rapelay. Research it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapelay
Ooohhh, super versed worldly guy knows about Japanese hentai games! Wowzers! I mean, I totally haven't mentioned those before! There's seriously dozens of these released in Japan every week, but you don't see them in normal game stores over there. They're sold in the porn/adult stores, or online, obviously.

Banning any game outright is wrong. However I have no problem with an AO rating for Manhunt 2. Is this really the type of game that minors should have easy access to, especially the Wii version?
Nothing is ever banned in the US, dude, so don't worry about that. And the thing is, children already shouldn't have easy access to M-rated games, right? The difference between the (poorly enforced) age requirement to buy M and AO games is a single year. Kids shouldn't be buying any of this shit.

The fact is that they're all working together on this from the ESRB to Nintendo to Wal-mart and Target. The AO represents the kiss of the death. As a rating alone, in a perfect world, sure it wouldn't matter, but in a real world essense the rating is representative as a ban of the way the game was meant to be experienced.
Oh, gimme a break. They're going to remove some tiny thing from the game (probably the testicle-ripping, if you ask me), and get it re-rated M. You gorehounds will have your shitty little game yet, so quit your whining.

[Brak]

Do you believe that the world revolves around you, and everything that is "a technicality" to you is "a technicality" to everyone else, no matter what policies a company employs? I suppose in your little world, Reggie goes over to Rockstar and says "Pleeease make us a game?" and they say "Okay" and they go off and do it. Every once in a while they have tea together, and send each other Christmas cards.

In case you're confused: that's not how a multi-billion dollar video game industry operates.
The bolded text, in addition to being totally unnecessary, sounds completely defensive.

His claim that Nintendo opened its arms to Rockstar is entirely true. Saying that they "begged" may be a bit of a stretch, but on the same coin, you're stretching the facts and logic, yourself. (See the colored lines in your post.)

I know its cool to dislike Rockstar if you're a rabid, free-thinking purist video game fan, but the fact remains that Nintendo has had talks with Rockstar in order to build bridges that they missed out of this past generation.

Now, to the other purists and free-thinkers:

I see a lot of people who are about as out-of-touch as Jack Thompson (only slightly more anti-Rockstar) chiming in on things they absolutely know nothing about. In fact, I saw someone refer to Manhunt, in child-like wonder, "the most violent video game I know about". Don't know much, do ya, kid?

The Hostel comparisons are sound (in the sense of "Why does Hostel receive an M, and Manhunt 2 receives a Ao?), as the films are very graphic and have veeeery suggestive themes -- the themes outweigh the visible violence and gore, in fact.

If you've played Manhunt, or researched it beyond the "murder simulator" tagline that Jack "in-touch" Thompson has given it, you'd know that it's pretty tame and garners its simple M rating.

It makes me wonder if the masses still think of Bully as a "Columbine simulator", simply because they dislike Rockstar.

[Zen Davis]

Ooohhh, super versed worldly guy knows about Japanese hentai games! Wowzers! I mean, I totally haven't mentioned those before! There's seriously dozens of these released in Japan every week, but you don't see them in normal game stores over there. They're sold in the porn/adult stores, or online, obviously.

Not everyone realizes that though man.

Oh, gimme a break. They're going to remove some tiny thing from the game (probably the testicle-ripping, if you ask me), and get it re-rated M. You gorehounds will have your shitty little game yet, so quit your whining.

I think you're wrong there. Any motion assisted kills will be automatically labeled AO. They'll probably change the controls to be like the PS2 version AND tone the violence down.

[jmcc]

I think someone already theorized it, though for a different reason, but I'm wondering also if this isn't a calculated move by Rockstar. I think the ESRB has been on the hot seat lately from a lot of political groups and might have been looking to whack a game with a AO rating to prove they could. If Rockstar suspected this as well, I wouldn't put it beyond them to take their M rated (by standards they've gotten by with to that point) Manhunt 2 and inject it with enough over-the-topness to get it to the AO rating. Then, after a few weeks of hemming and hawing, cut it back down to the original content and resubmit it for an M rating.

[62t]

Sony is pretty strict about releasing hentai on the Playstation. The PS2 version of Fate Stay Night had all hentai removed. A lot of henati games on PC got edited when ported to console

[Zen Davis]

I think someone already theorized it, though for a different reason, but I'm wondering also if this isn't a calculated move by Rockstar. I think the ESRB has been on the hot seat lately from a lot of political groups and might have been looking to whack a game with a AO rating to prove they could. If Rockstar suspected this as well, I wouldn't put it beyond them to take their M rated (by standards they've gotten by with to that point) Manhunt 2 and inject it with enough over-the-topness to get it to the AO rating. Then, after a few weeks of hemming and hawing, cut it back down to the original content and resubmit it for an M rating.
Although you could say that it was a nifty marketing move, it would hurt Rockstar for releasing a watered down version of the game. Nevertheless, I will say that the publicity has been priceless.

I suspect that in some European countries where the game isn't rated as harshly, an unaltered version of the game will be released and that it will become the de facto version of the game to experience.

[Apossum]

Just curious, which do you guys think is worse-- driving on the sidewalk in GTA, getting out of the car, shooting people and cops until the army is there to take you down or a close up, graphic shot of your character ripping a guy's balls off in manhunt?

[botticus]

Manhunt. Most people are desensitized to shooting by now. Emasculation? No way.

[Halo05]

I gave Manhunt a whirl this morning on my Xbox just to remember what it's like.

Honestly, yes, the gore and violence is there but the most disturbing part of the game is the premise. The filming of murders for pleasure. Now, I haven't read up on Manhunt 2 simply because I didn't like the first one too much (although it was more fun this morning than I remembered it being) but if the "theme" is as vile or moreso than the first one, then I can see how, with slightly more graphic executions how it deserved an AO rating.

In related news, how long until the PS2 version gets leaked onto the Torrent sites? I see Thrill Kill happening all over again, ten years later.

[dopa345]

You're an idiot. We're talking about what getting an AO rating entails. Not the fucking semantics of it.

I think calling me an 'idiot' is a little harsh and it's not semantics. A game in which gameplay includes ripping a guy's balls off with pliers SHOULD be rated as AO. The choice of whether individual chains want to carry it or not is another issue. You can still buy the game online or in a store that carries it so I don't understand why this is such a big deal to people. So you're saying that the ESRB should downgrade a rating simply because it may affect sales? If that's the case, the ESRB would completely meaningless and even worse, corrupt.

[whoknows]

I think calling me an 'idiot' is a little harsh and it's not semantics. A game in which gameplay includes ripping a guy's balls off with pliers SHOULD be rated as AO. The choice of whether individual chains want to carry it or not is another issue. You can still buy the game online or in a store that carries it so I don't understand why this is such a big deal to people. So you're saying that the ESRB should downgrade a rating simply because it may affect sales? If that's the case, the ESRB would completely meaningless and even worse, corrupt.
Agreed for the most part. From the sounds of it, it deserves to be AO. However this can't be that much worse than the first Manhunt which was M. Then again, I have yet to play Manhunt 2 (as everyone else here) so I can't say too much about it.

If it's AO that will just mean it will be a little harder to get ahold of. At the very least maybe parents will be smart enough to not buy this for their kids. I bet when a parent sees the AO rating they'll think of it on the same level as porn.

[Halo05]

You can't still buy the game online, Sony won't let it be made for their systems, neither will Nintendo. There has never been an official AO release for the PS2, the Xbox, the Wii, etc. Maybe it'll change, maybe not. I don't think it's going to change for Manhunt 2, I think Manhunt 2 will change.

[evilmax17]

You can't still buy the game online, Sony won't let it be made for their systems, neither will Nintendo. There has never been an official AO release for the PS2, the Xbox, the Wii, etc. Maybe it'll change, maybe not. I don't think it's going to change for Manhunt 2, I think Manhunt 2 will change.
None of us have seen the official contracts signed between Nintendo/Sony and their licensees. None of us actually know if AO games are prohibited on these consoles, and you can't use the lack of them as justification for that theory. Most companies haven't developed AO games because they don't see much of a profit potential with them, given the extremely limited market that they would be available to.

It's like that old joke where a person claims that their lucky charm keeps tigers away, and when asked about the validity of the claim, they answer "Well...you don't see any tigers around here do you?"

Until I see the situation officially addressed, I'm not willing to discount anything. Granted, my money is on the game being toned down, but that's not to say that they couldn't release it as-is. I wouldn't make any hardcore predictions until we hear what Take-Two is doing.

[PyroGamer]

Fuck. This really sucks.

Will Nintendo even let the game on the Wii with an AO rating???


I was really looking forward to playing this, the premise of grotesque murders combined with motion control on the Wiimote sounded extremely promising.

I hope, if they do release an M rated version, they sell an uncut AO version on their website or something.

[Halo05]

I just checked out Gamespot (I know, not always a great plan but whatever) and they didn't bring up whether or not Sony or Nintendo would allow an AO game on their systems. They were focusing on whether or not Rockstar would cut out content to get an M rating.

Now I know that Gamespot isn't the greatest videogame news site in the world but by not mentioning it, it seems like the ball (haha) is more or less in Rockstar's court.

Oh well, I haven't thought this much about a videogame issue since... Um, ever from what I recall. (Maybe the Sony vs. Lik-sang thing) This'll be interesting to say the least.

[MarioColbert]

His claim that Nintendo opened its arms to Rockstar is entirely true. Saying that they "begged" may be a bit of a stretch, but on the same coin, you're stretching the facts and logic, yourself. (See the colored lines in your post.)
I see Detective Obvious here is going to do some schooling. Nobody argued with the fact that Nintendo worked very hard to secure one of the industry giants to release games on their console. However, no video game source, whether aimed in support or against Rockstar dares call the AO rating a "technicality." I guess that doesn't stop "anti-purists" and "anti-free-thinkers" from making claims with no factual base attached to them whatsoever.

Now, what about context, Brak? The stuff you've highlighted is ridiculed quite well on your behalf, but it was the tea remark and the general "casual" relationship between the two parties that was meant to be the jist of the "joke." The statement ridicules the subject of the conversation, which is whether or not AO rating is "a technicality" which some claim Nintendo will "override" for this game. Even if Reggie begged on his knees for Rockstar to make a game, it still doesn't make a contractual obligation for SDK suddenly vanish, does it?

I know its cool to dislike Rockstar if you're a rabid, free-thinking purist video game fan, but the fact remains that Nintendo has had talks with Rockstar in order to build bridges that they missed out of this past generation.
Who dislikes Rockstar? Probably a handful that said that "UK did the right thing with banning the game," a claim that I've spoken out against on numerous occasions, if you bothered to read the discussion. I'm all for making Manhunt available on every system that would run it, except Nintendo will not carry AO rated games (and by CoffeeEdge's words, Sony and Microsoft have similar policies in action).

The Hostel comparisons are sound (in the sense of "Why does Hostel receive an M, and Manhunt 2 receives a Ao?), as the films are very graphic and have veeeery suggestive themes -- the themes outweigh the visible violence and gore, in fact.
You've seen Hostel. You have not played Manhunt 2. I agree with your sentiment for comparison, despite the two mediums having certain differences. However, just because your point "makes sense" does not mean it is valid. What makes you think you are in any position to judge Manhunt 2? ESRB have a list of Manhunt 2's content, straight from the publisher/developer - you do not. Even with the odds in your favor with the lack of properly justified ratings from ESRB in the past, there is still a chance that their judgement is sound, for no other reason than a mathematical probability.

(The following paragraph does not apply to Brak, before you start accusing me of putting words in his mouth - nowhere does he make a claim that M is the only suitable rating for a game he has not seen.)

It takes a certain type of a narcissist to contain enough arrogance within them to speak of things they have only a faint idea about. If you have played Manhunt 2 and want to list some facts for us about the contents of the game, I will most definitely listen. If you're going to make blanket statements clouded in faulty logic, with nothing more to support your claim than a few screenshots and videos you've seen online, you are silly not to expect someone to call you on it. You are ignorant of content of Manhunt 2, as am I. I oppose any government regulation on the content of the game (free speech). I disagree with current industry standards set against publication of AO titles on consoles (unfair control of the market content). Yet I do not blindly argue agaist an ESRB rating the reasons for which are "vague" at best, and "concealed from the public eye completely" at worst (not enough information).

Answer this, Brak: do you believe that the AO rating for MANHUNT 2 is unfair? I'm not asking you if you suspect that it is, because I'd be surprised if you didn't. I most definitely suspect that it is, yet I BELIEVE that the ban in UK is fucking ludicrous.

I don't understand how one can justify forming an extreme anti-AO-rating stance for Manhunt 2 without having all the necessary information available.

[GuilewasNK]

Don't they have Adult Games for PS2, PSP, etc. in Japan? Granted most, AO games are sexual though, not hyperviolent.

At anyrate, Rockstar should just make an AO version for PC and M version for consoles. That's what happened with Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude. The PC is the only place an AO game will be without restriction in North America. I don't care if Manhunt 2 is AO or not and I have no interest in the game, but Sony, M$, and the Big N control what is and isn't published on their machines. Fair or not, that's the way it is. With PC, they can distribute the title themselves.

[PyroGamer]

I thought the UK was a beacon for Liberalism. Same with Australia.

... yet they always ban films, video games, music and other forms of art.
Australia is our conservative buddy on so many things. Even the most liberal liberals here in America are regularly in support of videogame regulation.

[GuilewasNK]

Australia is our conservative buddy on so many things. Even the most liberal liberals here in America are regularly in support of videogame regulation.

Which is why the left and right sucks and those terms are becoming increasingly inaaccurate and irrelevant, but that is another topic for another time.

[PyroGamer]

PVance@esrb.org

Patricia Vance

I believe this is the woman at the ESRB who got the title rated AO. As mature gamers, please write to her in a respectful manner and ask her to stand up for mature gamers and not censorship. I'm not 100% sure that the e-mail will work, but the message I sent her hasn't bounced back yet so I'm assuming it works. Let her know your stance and please for god's sake, be mature about it.



Please do the right thing and give Manhunt 2 an M rating. Hostel, Saw, and various other films never received the dreaded NC-17 rating so I don't understand why Manhunt 2 has to go through this indignation.

Prove to the people who are this industry's livelihood why you stand up for them and not the special interest groups whose only goal in life is a hypocritical 'think of the children!' mentality. If they were doing their jobs as parents, Manhunt 2 would never end up in their hands to begin with and Ms. Vance, you know this to be true.

Please all you're doing is punishing the adult gamers this title was aimed for by essentially having the game blacklisted from the market and it's pretty much a backhanded manner of censorship. Please don't do this.

Thank you and take care.

Zen Davis
:lol: You do realize Saw DID receive an NC-17 rating, right? Hostel was intended to be NC-17, but ended up passing through the ratings board with flying colours.

[evilmax17]

Even if Reggie begged on his knees for Rockstar to make a game, it still doesn't make a contractual obligation for SDK suddenly vanish, does it?
I have yet to see any evidence presented that would back this up (beyond a vague line on the Nintendo ESRB page, which could be considered flimsy). Have you read these aforementioned SDK contracts? Have the specifics of this issue been reported on by any reputable gaming news sites? Show me the section in the SDK license agreement which explicitly prohibits AO games from being published, and then we'll talk.

You're speculating just as much as the rest of us, and unless you can provide some hard evidence to back up your claims, then your opinion is no more valid than any of ours.

[anomynous]

:lol: You do realize Saw DID receive an NC-17 rating, right? Hostel was intended to be NC-17, but ended up passing through the ratings board with flying colours.
Im pretty sure that Saw is rated R, unless it was originally NC-17, & got changed

[Zen Davis]

I have yet to see any evidence presented that would back this up (beyond a vague line on the Nintendo ESRB page, which could be considered flimsy). Have you read these aforementioned SDK contracts? Have the specifics of this issue been reported on by any reputable gaming news sites? Show me the section in the SDK license agreement which explicitly prohibits AO games from being published, and then we'll talk.

You're speculating just as much as the rest of us, and unless you can provide some hard evidence to back up your claims, then your opinion is no more valid than any of ours.

You're just speculating that he didn't. Your opinion isn't valid here either.

[PyroGamer]

While I am not omniscient, I think you can quite safely bet that Manhunt 2 will never see the light of day in its AO form. I wonder how much editing it will take to get in down to M.

Seems rather silly, really, because the only reason I can possibly think of to justify an AO rating is, essentially, economic-sanction censorship to protect the videogame industry. If games like Manhunt 2 could become so controversial, and psychologists begin to say they have damaging effects (due to the motion control), an M rated Manhunt 2 could be a terrible thing, and well could spark widespread cencorship on a level we'd all regret.

However, if it's just certain amounts of blood, or certain emasculation scenes that they remove, certainly that little content to get it down to an M rating wouldn't change its psychological or political impact?

Im pretty sure that Saw is rated R, unless it was originally NC-17, & got changed
That's right. Unlike what the letter implied, films with similar themes HAVE received NC-17 ratings: due to their content. The themes aren't the problem, it's the specific content displayed. And from what I hear about emasculation, enucleation, and stalking, I'm sure a film version of Manhunt 2 in its current form WOULD receive an NC-17 rating.

It sounds like "Henry" x1,000,000, and interactive with motion control.

[Logain8955]

I actually dont mind this news....I really liked the first Manhunt, and now that they're pushing it harder this time, it should be better.

It would suck if I can't pick up a copy at a B+M store though.

[MarioColbert]

I have yet to see any evidence presented that would back this up (beyond a vague line on the Nintendo ESRB page, which could be considered flimsy). Have you read these aforementioned SDK contracts? Have the specifics of this issue been reported on by any reputable gaming news sites? Show me the section in the SDK license agreement which explicitly prohibits AO games from being published, and then we'll talk.

Flimsy or not, Nintendo website source is enough, since it comes from a official source. Despite the fact that Nintendo have been less restricting in the GameCube era (no editing on the boobs in BMX XXX is the best example), there is no evidence to support their sudden embrace of AO titles.

You have yet to show a single piece of any evidence, flimsy or not, that Nintendo are abandoning the practice outlined on their official page. I'll admit to being hasty in posting an SDK-contract comment, since it is presumptious (and I can assure you, I've made a note of that). I will not, however, choose to ignore an official statement on the company webiste, especially since you don't even have unofficial statements on less credible websites. Apart from individual speculation on this forum, no other proof has materialized yet.

[yukine]

Analysts dissect Manhunt 2 rating: http://www.gamespot.com/pages/news/story.php?sid=6172800&part=rss&tag=gs_news&subj=6172800

[whoknows]

Analysts dissect Manhunt 2 rating: http://www.gamespot.com/pages/news/story.php?sid=6172800&part=rss&tag=gs_news&subj=6172800
Could someone copy and paste that? It's blocked from here.

[jmcc]

Analysts dissect Manhunt 2 rating: http://www.gamespot.com/pages/news/story.php?sid=6172800&part=rss&tag=gs_news&subj=6172800Hmm. Not a single one of them mentions the ban Nintendo and Sony have on AO games.

Analysts dissect Manhunt 2 rating
Industry watchers predict whether Take-Two and Rockstar will tone down the violence in their action sequel or release it with an Adults Only label.
By Brendan Sinclair, GameSpot
Posted Jun 20, 2007 10:37 am PT

This week, the unreleased action game Manhunt 2 took a beating worthy of its brutal subject matter. It's only Wednesday, and already the game has been banned in the UK and Ireland, drawn the ire of a parent watchdog group, and slapped with an AO for Adults Only rating in the US.

With the game's July 10 release date rapidly approaching, Take-Two Interactive and Rockstar Games will have to decide quickly if they want to tone down the game and have it rerated, appeal the Entertainment Software Rating Board to change the rating, or just accept the original judgment and release the game with the AO label intact.

GameSpot went to a handful of analysts asking for their expectations on how Take-Two will handle the situation, and found them split on how they expected the publisher to handle it.

Nollenberger Capital Partners' Todd Greenwald said he expects the publisher to do what it takes to get the game on the market with an M for Mature rating.

"Take-Two will have to make some edits--though Rockstar won't like it--to knock the rating down to Mature," Greenwald said. "AO games don't sell. They did it with GTA San Andreas after the Hot Coffee incident. I'd expect them to do it again here. The UK ban I think they could live with or work around, but I don't think they can launch the game with an AO rating."

Lazard Capital Markets' Colin Sebastian was a bit less certain about what the publisher will choose to do, but ultimately thinks Take-Two will resort to toning down the game.

"Take Two has to balance the benefits of free publicity for a new title against the potential risk of limited retail sales," Sebastian explained. "Unless Manhunt 2 is a sacrificial lamb to bolster Rockstar's 'bad boy' reputation ahead of the Grand Theft Auto IV launch, I think it's reasonable to expect Take Two to consider toning down the content in question."

Wedbush Morgan Securities' Michael Pachter said coverage of the game's ban and rating issues will draw additional curiosity in Manhunt 2, but notes that all the interest in the world won't help UK customers get around a ban, while an AO rating would also hurt overall sales. But when it comes to editing the content for an M rating, Pachter called it a tough decision.

"In order to [tone it down], they would most likely have to delay the launch, and invest more in the game," Pachter said. "I'm not sure whether it's better to just ship it as is, or spend more and hope for an M rating. Given that the new management is looking to control costs, I'd speculate that they just take their lumps with this game, and use the example as a lesson to help rein in bad decisions going forward."

From a stock market analyst's point of view, Pachter said the company made a financial mistake in making the game as violent as it is to begin with. But on a personal level, he expressed more dismay at the reactions to Manhunt 2's content than the content itself.

"It's a sad state of affairs when we have to discuss the use of the Wii controller as a weapon for a game like Manhunt, but don't think twice when the game is a typical shooter game," Pachter said. "Killing is killing, and it's either acceptable or not. I think that singling out Manhunt is tantamount to discrimination against Take-Two.

"My personal view is that so long as consumers know what they're getting, they should be allowed to buy the game. If it is restricted to adults, so be it, but a ban is inappropriate. Adults should be able to decide for themselves whether they want to play this kind of game, and if they do, they should be allowed to purchase it."

[PyroGamer]

Could someone copy and paste that? It's blocked from here.
This week, the unreleased action game Manhunt 2 took a beating worthy of its brutal subject matter. It's only Wednesday, and already the game has been banned in the UK and Ireland, drawn the ire of a parent watchdog group, and slapped with an AO for Adults Only rating in the US.

With the game's July 10 release date rapidly approaching, Take-Two Interactive and Rockstar Games will have to decide quickly if they want to tone down the game and have it rerated, appeal the Entertainment Software Rating Board to change the rating, or just accept the original judgment and release the game with the AO label intact.

GameSpot went to a handful of analysts asking for their expectations on how Take-Two will handle the situation, and found them split on how they expected the publisher to handle it.

Nollenberger Capital Partners' Todd Greenwald said he expects the publisher to do what it takes to get the game on the market with an M for Mature rating.

"Take-Two will have to make some edits--though Rockstar won't like it--to knock the rating down to Mature," Greenwald said. "AO games don't sell. They did it with GTA San Andreas after the Hot Coffee incident. I'd expect them to do it again here. The UK ban I think they could live with or work around, but I don't think they can launch the game with an AO rating."

Lazard Capital Markets' Colin Sebastian was a bit less certain about what the publisher will choose to do, but ultimately thinks Take-Two will resort to toning down the game.

"Take Two has to balance the benefits of free publicity for a new title against the potential risk of limited retail sales," Sebastian explained. "Unless Manhunt 2 is a sacrificial lamb to bolster Rockstar's 'bad boy' reputation ahead of the Grand Theft Auto IV launch, I think it's reasonable to expect Take Two to consider toning down the content in question."

Wedbush Morgan Securities' Michael Pachter said coverage of the game's ban and rating issues will draw additional curiosity in Manhunt 2, but notes that all the interest in the world won't help UK customers get around a ban, while an AO rating would also hurt overall sales. But when it comes to editing the content for an M rating, Pachter called it a tough decision.

"In order to [tone it down], they would most likely have to delay the launch, and invest more in the game," Pachter said. "I'm not sure whether it's better to just ship it as is, or spend more and hope for an M rating. Given that the new management is looking to control costs, I'd speculate that they just take their lumps with this game, and use the example as a lesson to help rein in bad decisions going forward."

From a stock market analyst's point of view, Pachter said the company made a financial mistake in making the game as violent as it is to begin with. But on a personal level, he expressed more dismay at the reactions to Manhunt 2's content than the content itself.

"It's a sad state of affairs when we have to discuss the use of the Wii controller as a weapon for a game like Manhunt, but don't think twice when the game is a typical shooter game," Pachter said. "Killing is killing, and it's either acceptable or not. I think that singling out Manhunt is tantamount to discrimination against Take-Two.

"My personal view is that so long as consumers know what they're getting, they should be allowed to buy the game. If it is restricted to adults, so be it, but a ban is inappropriate. Adults should be able to decide for themselves whether they want to play this kind of game, and if they do, they should be allowed to purchase it."

Not really worth reading, but on the plus side it's not that long, either.

edit: I see jmcc edited his post... well now this is rather awkward.

[schuerm26]

Not a bad point


It's a sad state of affairs when we have to discuss the use of the Wii controller as a weapon for a game like Manhunt, but don't think twice when the game is a typical shooter game," Pachter said. "Killing is killing, and it's either acceptable or not. I think that singling out Manhunt is tantamount to discrimination against Take-Two.

[PyroGamer]

Not a bad point
It's a terrible point.

It's not about what acts are socially acceptable, it's about what could be harmful to minors.

[Reality's Fringe]

Gamefly and Blockbuster are saying they won't carry it.

[PyroGamer]

Gamefly and Blockbuster are saying they won't carry it.
Blockbuster won't carry AO titles.

[botticus]

Gamefly and Blockbuster are saying they won't carry it.Which means at this point even if Nintendo and Sony were to allow an AO game on their console, the only place to buy it will be here (http://www.take2store.com/)? Though I'm assuming, possibly incorrectly, that Amazon and other online retailers will be more likely to stock it.

[CoffeeEdge]

Will Nintendo even let the game on the Wii with an AO rating???
No, neither will any other console maker.

I hope, if they do release an M rated version, they sell an uncut AO version on their website or something.
Have you looked at any part of this thread at all? As I have said about a half-dozen times, no matter where you try and sell it, you CAN NOT release an AO-rated game on a Nintendo or Sony or Microsoft system. It's against their licensing policies, and if your game isn't licensed, then it's effectively impossible to develop it.

Do you people not understand how console game development works? A publisher doesn't just make a game and sell it. They have to individually license and certify each game with the console maker, pay fees to use the official SDKs, et cetera, et cetera. And those licenses forbid AO games, so, they're impossible to sell. Simple.

His claim that Nintendo opened its arms to Rockstar is entirely true. Saying that they "begged" may be a bit of a stretch, but on the same coin, you're stretching the facts and logic, yourself. (See the colored lines in your post.)
Okay, yeah, they invited Rockstar to make a Wii game, but at no point did they say "go ahead and make a game in violation of our inflexible licensing policies."

I think you're wrong there. Any motion assisted kills will be automatically labeled AO.
Uh, says who? If any "motion assisted kills" instantly equaled an AO rating, than I think most Wii games would end up being AO.

None of us have seen the official contracts signed between Nintendo/Sony and their licensees. None of us actually know if AO games are prohibited on these consoles, and you can't use the lack of them as justification for that theory. Most companies haven't developed AO games because they don't see much of a profit potential with them, given the extremely limited market that they would be available to.
Why are you guys being so fucking stubborn?

http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/buyers_guide.jsp
*Please note that Nintendo does not sell or license games that carry the ESRB rating "AO" (Adults Only).

And the evidence regarding Microsoft not allowing AO-rated games resides in the Xbox and Xbox 360 itself. Look at the Family Settings, where you can set ESRB ratings the system will be allowed to play. Notice how it DOES NOT include AO, but it does include every other rating. Simple as that. And I can't comment from experiance, but I believe that the PS3 is the exact same.

Again, it's common knowledge that they WILL NOT license AO-rated games, which effectively makes it impossible for them to be released.

[CoffeeEdge]

double fuck

[Brak]

It's a terrible point.

It's not about what acts are socially acceptable, it's about what could be harmful to minors.
If it's rated M, minors can't buy it. (Or shouldn't be able to.)

This is discrimination against Take-Two/Rockstar.

If the game had nothing to do with murder, and everything to do with sugar and spice, it still would have received an Ao rating, thanks to Thompson's "Muder simulator" dubbing of the first title.

A sad state of affairs.

[yukine]

No, neither will any other console maker.

Have you looked at any part of this thread at all? As I have said about a half-dozen times, no matter where you try and sell it, you CAN NOT release an AO-rated game on a Nintendo or Sony or Microsoft system. It's against their licensing policies, and if your game isn't licensed, then it's effectively impossible to develop it.

Do you people not understand how console game development works? A publisher doesn't just make a game and sell it. They have to individually license and certify each game with the console maker, pay fees to use the official SDKs, et cetera, et cetera. And those licenses forbid AO games, so, they're impossible to sell. Simple.
No one cares about your opinion, CoffeeEdge. I'm probably the only one that reads your posts, and I only do so for hilarity.

[PyroGamer]

This is discrimination against Take-Two/Rockstar.

If the game had nothing to do with murder, and everything to do with sugar and spice, it still would have received an Ao rating, thanks to Thompson's "Muder simulator" dubbing of the first title.

A sad state of affairs.
I honestly have no idea what the fuck you are babbling about. If you honestly believe there is some sort of conspiracy against Take Two, and that Manhunt 2's AO rating has nothing to do with its content, you are officially bat-shit insane.

Have you looked at any part of this thread at all?
No, I hadn't. I agree completely with your posts.

I do find it exceedingly odd that the "analysts" in that Gamestop article seemed to assume that Rockstar would be allowed to release an AO title on the Wii.

I suppose it could be just another example of how analysts are the most fucking retarted people on the planet.

[Brak]

I honestly have no idea what the fuck you are babbling about.
That's because you're a consummate idiot-ass, devoid of any sense of logic and cognitive thinking.

[CoffeeEdge]

No one cares about your opinion, CoffeeEdge. I'm probably the only one that reads your posts, and I only do so for hilarity.
Uh, what? I've posted fact. You can't have AO-rated games on the consoles. The manufacturers don't allow it. I've provided proof for all 3 systems.

And clearly people are reading my posts, judging by how they're replying to them.

Christ, I seem to be one of the few people in here who seems to understand how this shit works.

[PyroGamer]

That's because you're a consummate idiot-ass, devoid of any sense of logic and cognitive thinking.
If you honestly believe there is some sort of conspiracy against Take Two, and that Manhunt 2's AO rating has nothing to do with its content, you are officially bat-shit insane.

[jmcc]

Maybe Rockstar will go the route of Tengen and release unlicensed Manhunt 2. I don't think Sony could stop them for fear of losing GTA.

[Brak]

If you honestly believe there is some sort of conspiracy against Take Two, and that Manhunt 2's AO rating has nothing to do with its content, you are officially bat-shit insane.
Oh, really? I'm glad you have that much faith in the system.

Let me break down for you, real simple:

You're concerned that the game will get in the hands of minors if it were rated M. As it follows, you're concerned that this game will corrode the minds of children -- that's safe to assume, and a moot point. So let's just go past that one.

Now, that first concern - the concern of the title getting in the hands of minors - doesn't that indirectly say that you think the ratings system is a joke, and does not work at all, as you believe the title will be played by minors?

The very same ratings system that is giving Manhunt 2 a soft-core, indirect consumer ban by giving it an Ao rating? Now, why does that rating garner any validity in your eyes? I thought you were invertedly saying the ratings system was a joke..?

That's the part that you didn't understand me "babbling the fuck on about", or however many classy "fucks" you shoehorned in there, to make your point that much more valid.

As for my paranoia of Rockstar discrimination: I really don't think that's a batshit theory. Look at how much thunder the ESRB has received for not rating titles properly. Not to mention the American Liberal / Thompson thunder.

I think this received a rating before they even play-tested the game.

[whoknows]

I just want this game to be release in its original form. Censoring is lame. Whether is AO or Mature stupid parents will buy it for their kids regardless.

[jmcc]

I do find it exceedingly odd that the "analysts" in that Gamestop article seemed to assume that Rockstar would be allowed to release an AO title on the Wii.

I suppose it could be just another example of how analysts are the most fucking retarted people on the planet.Or maybe they're in the know compared to the general public, i.e. us.

[evilmax17]

I've provided proof for all 3 systems.
Where? I just looked through this thread and I haven't found anything beyond the quote from the Nintendo ESRB page. I haven't seen any official Sony or Microsoft policies posted. Forgive me if I missed them, but I didn't see any "proof" at all.

[CoffeeEdge]

Maybe Rockstar will go the route of Tengen and release unlicensed Manhunt 2. I don't think Sony could stop them for fear of losing GTA.
The only way that would be possible would be if they somehow developed the game without using any of Nintendo or Sony's official SDKs or software libraries or hardware documentation. That was a lot easier back in the NES days, yeah, but with the complexities of today's hardware, it's practically impossible.

And, even if they did release the game AO, no retailers would carry it. From a business and common sense perspective, I'm pretty sure they would rather cut the game back to M, and give it a wide release, than starting the game over and somehow magically developing it using no documentation or libraries from Nintendo or Sony whatsoever, and then only being able to sell it from a scant few online retailers.

And again, Sony's policies are the same. They won't allow an AO game.

[CoffeeEdge]

Where? I just looked through this thread and I haven't found anything beyond the quote from the Nintendo ESRB page. I haven't seen any official Sony or Microsoft policies posted. Forgive me if I missed them, but I didn't see any "proof" at all.
You must have missed the edit:

And the evidence regarding Microsoft not allowing AO-rated games resides in the Xbox and Xbox 360 itself. Look at the Family Settings, where you can set ESRB ratings the system will be allowed to play. Notice how it DOES NOT include AO, but it does include every other rating. Simple as that. And I can't comment from experiance, but I believe that the PS3 is the exact same.

I can't actually quote any policy pages from Microsoft and Sony, but it's been mentioned many times in the press that they don't allow AO-rated games. But the above is evidence enough that they simply don't allow it.

[botticus]

Maybe Rockstar will go the route of Tengen and release unlicensed Manhunt 2. I don't think Sony could stop them for fear of losing GTA.I'm not sure how things worked back in the day, but I'm not sure how they could use an SDK to make their game, then violate/terminate the license agreement and release it. Seems like that would be asking for a breach of contract suit.

And as far as the motion controls making this the AO game it is, possible, but the UK agency responsible for the ban says it was the content, not the controls.

[CoffeeEdge]

I'm not sure how things worked back in the day, but I'm not sure how they could use an SDK to make their game, then violate/terminate the license agreement and release it. Seems like that would be asking for a breach of contract suit.
Correct. It would be a gross breach of contract, and the publisher would never do something that suicidal.

[Brak]

Correct. It would be a gross breach of contract, and the publisher would never do something that suicidal.
But they have Sony and Microsoft by the cock and balls.

Not saying they're going to do it, but I bet they could get away with it.

[CoffeeEdge]

But they have Sony and Microsoft by the cock and balls.

Not saying they're going to do it, but I bet they could get away with it.
Uh, how so? Seriously, I don't get what the hell you just said. It's the other way around. Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo's rock-solid, impossible-to-circumvent licensing policies would appear to be the ones to have Rockstar by the cock and balls.

[Brak]

Uh, how so? It's the other way around. Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo's rock-solid, impossible-to-circumvent licensing policies would appear to be the ones to have Rockstar by the cock and balls.
Grand Theft Auto? If Sony were to threaten Rockstar, Rockstar could threaten to shift all GTA efforts towards Microsoft.

Hypothetically speaking, of course. It will never happen, but it plausible.

[GuilewasNK]

This is discrimination against Take-Two/Rockstar.

If the game had nothing to do with murder, and everything to do with sugar and spice, it still would have received an Ao rating, thanks to Thompson's "Muder simulator" dubbing of the first title.



Perhaps, but Rockstar screwed themselves badly witht he Hot Coffee mess. I think it was blown way out of proportion, but they didn't help themselves at all so no ratings group is going to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I still think Rockstar could sell it how they see fit on PC and would do just fine. I would have to see the content of the game before I could truly judge it though, because there have been plenty of games that push the edge but don't get AO. The God of War games probably use sex and violence as much as any console game could, but I don't recall it getting much, if any backlash. Maybe that is because the themes are appropriate within the context of the game and there is substance as well as flash.

[PyroGamer]

You're concerned that the game will get in the hands of minors if it were rated M. As it follows, you're concerned that this game will corrode the minds of children -- that's safe to assume, and a moot point. So let's just go past that one.I agree it's a moot point, but to make it clear: I make no claims as to whether this game will "corrode the minds of children". The goal of ratings is not to "ensure that the game will not get in the hands of minors", but to ensure that parents and private business are informed of the game's content.

Now, that first concern - the concern of the title getting in the hands of minors - doesn't that indirectly say that you think the ratings system is a joke, and does not work at all, as you believe the title will be played by minors?No, not at all. Not in any way whatsoever.

If you think that the rating's system is a failure because minors are playing M rated titles, you had better give up right now. The whole purpose of a ratings system is to put the power in the hands of the parents, not the government. That necessarily requires that parents choose to not allow, or (uh-oh, here's a shocker) TO allow, their children to play an M rated title.

The "M" rating means "Mature", not "banned for minors". The M rating does NOT guarantee minors will not play the game, and many parents would gladly allow their children to play M rated games. Content in M rated games is relatively tame to what can be imagined.

The content in Manhunt 2, as it has been described to me, could never be compared to that of, say, Halo 2. The "M" rating, and the content in Manhunt 2, are vastly different beasts.

M rated games "may be suitable for persons of 17", but AO rated games "should only be played by persons 18 and over". There is an obvious difference between these ratings.

M rated games get in the hands of minors far easier than AO rated games. It is very easy for a parent to decide "well, my child is mature enough to play Halo, he's mature enough to play any M rated game." In order to properly classify games, games that are egregiously more violent of filled with more sexual content must have a rating that suits their content.

Now, if the game were banned, like in England, well then yes: the ratings system has failed. But we here in the land of the free do not censor speech. We have a rating to give games like this, and we use it. To take a game that is being widespread banned in Europe (I can guarantee Germany, at least, will ban this title), and complain that our ratings system has failed because the game received an AO rating, is riddiculous.

If anything, our console manufacturers are to blame for refusing to liscence AO titles.

I think this received a rating before they even play-tested the game.
That's riddiculous.THE PUNISHER got an AO rating before being extensively edited, and that game didn't feature nearly as detailed murders, nor were they portrayed quite as sadomaschocistically.



That's the part that you didn't understand me "babbling the fuck on about", or however many classy "fucks" you shoehorned in there, to make your point that much more valid.Jesus, why can't people just read my posts without complaining about the words I use in delivering them???

[Brak]

Perhaps, but Rockstar screwed themselves badly witht he Hot Coffee mess. I think it was blown way out of proportion, but they didn't help themselves at all so no ratings group is going to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I still think Rockstar could sell it how they see fit on PC and would do just fine. I would have to see the content of the game before I could truly judge it though, because there have been plenty of games that push the edge but don't get AO. The God of War games probably use sex and violence as much as any console game could, but I don't recall it getting much, if any backlash. Maybe that is because the themes are appropriate within the context of the game and there is substance as well as flash.
Hot Coffee was a dire mistake... but, yes; I think that was the misstep that their detractors were looking for, all along.

[dallow]

Thrill Kill was never officially released.

[Brak]

If anything, our console manufacturers are to blame for refusing to liscence AO titles.
I disagree. The ESRB was playing their cards, knowing that giving it an Ao would be retail homicide for the title.

They did it with Gears of War in Germany.

[CoffeeEdge]

Grand Theft Auto? If Sony were to threaten Rockstar, Rockstar could threaten to shift all GTA efforts towards Microsoft.

Hypothetically speaking, of course. It will never happen, but it plausible.
Well yeah, that's pretty damned hypothetical. I was concerned that you were actually presenting it as a possibility, heh. Theoretically possible, but in the real world, impossible. Sony isn't going to change those policies for anyone, and even if they did, there's still the fact that nobody would sell an AO Manhunt 2.

[PyroGamer]

They did it with Gears of War in Germany.
You're joking, right? Germany is the most fucking anti-violent videogame country in the WORLD. Hell, it's up there in league with Saudi Arabia. Mainstream German politicians want violent videogame developers to serve JAIL TIME.

Germany cannot be used as a comparison to ANYTHING.

[Brak]

I can't express in words how disappointed I'll be if I do not own this game in its entirety.

We can all agree that video games are an art, and I don't know about you, but no art should be censored.
You're joking, right? Germany is the most fucking anti-violent videogame country in the WORLD. Hell, it's up there in league with Saudi Arabia. Mainstream German politicians want violent videogame developers to serve JAIL TIME.
Joking about what? If I were wrong about something, why would you acknowledge that I was correct a sentence later?

And that which you've detailed in the last sentence, my unfriend, is what is occurring over here if this shit goes on.

[Zen Davis]

In a statement on the board's Web site, BBFC director David Cooke said rejecting a work was a very serious action and not taken lightly. He said the board preferred to consider cuts or changes but that was not possible in this case.

"'Manhunt 2' is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing," he said.

Cuts won't get Manhunt 2 a lowered rating.

[PyroGamer]

I can't express in words how disappointed I'll be if I do not own this game in its entirety.

We can all agree that video games are an art, and I don't know about you, but no art should be censored.
The AO rating is not censorship, it rather protects art and free-speach.

However, close-minded game companies (nintendo, sony, microsoft) that refuse to liscence AO titles ARE ruining the industry.

Art cannot thrive on a closed platform.

Cuts won't get Manhunt 2 a lowered rating.
We're not talking about crazy brits here. I'm sure Manhunt 2 could acheive an M rating with extensive editing. And that's regrettedly what will probably happen.

[Halo05]

Thrill Kill was never officially released.

Which is why I wondered out loud several pages back about when the unaltered form of Manhunt 2 for the PS2 and/or PSP is going to hit the Torrents.

Man did Rockstar ever stir some shit up this time, I bet they're loving this. I would too if I were them.

[CoffeeEdge]

I can't express in words how disappointed I'll be if I do not own this game in its entirety.
Well, I guess your disappointment will just have to go untold, because if you play this game on consoles at all, you'll be playing an M-rated version of it. You poor, poor thing, only getting to play M-rated games. Is that just not enough for you?

We can all agree that video games are an art, and I don't know about you, but no art should be censored.
Videogames are also a business, and it's the right and prerogative of the hardware makers to say what can be developed using their toolsets. If can't enjoy an M-rated game, then you'll just have to pray that they release an AO-rated PC version (which would probably end up having to be a digital/internet distribution game).

[evilmax17]

You must have missed the edit:
I can't actually quote any policy pages from Microsoft and Sony, but it's been mentioned many times in the press that they don't allow AO-rated games. But the above is evidence enough that they simply don't allow it. Anecdotal evidence is hardly evidence enough to prove the theory, but thanks for directing me to your post.

Just for fun, let's take a look at that Nintendo ESRB quote.

*Please note that Nintendo does not sell or license games that carry the ESRB rating "AO" (Adults Only). Nowhere does it say that this is an official policy. It says that they "do not", it does NOT say that they "will not". A small difference, but an important one.

For example:
-Nintendo does not manufacture automobiles.
-Nintendo does not make videogames licensed by the NFL.
-Nintendo does not sell Super Smash Brothers: Brawl.

Just because they "do not" do something, doesn't mean that they "will not" do something. Again, if the ESRB quote said that this was an official Nintendo policy (which it doesn't), then it would be a different story.

Fun afternoon minutia.

[CoffeeEdge]

Cuts won't get Manhunt 2 a lowered rating.
Uh, that dude is talking about the game in the UK. We're not talking about that. Of course cuts can get the game an M rating.

However, close-minded game companies (nintendo, sony, microsoft) that refuse to liscence AO titles ARE ruining the industry.

Art cannot thrive on a closed platform.
Oh, please! Not having AO-rated games on consoles is "ruining the industry"? Excuse me? The industry seems to be doing fine without AO rated games (which are almost exclusively porn) on consoles. If you need AO games, play the stupid hentai games on PC.

[schuerm26]

It's a terrible point.

It's not about what acts are socially acceptable, it's about what could be harmful to minors.

so mowing down person after person with guns isn't harmful to minors? Hypocrisy at it's finest.

[CoffeeEdge]

Anecdotal evidence is hardly evidence enough to prove the theory, but thanks for directing me to your post.
It's obvious that they don't intend to have AO-rated games on their systems. It's fucking solid evidence.

Nowhere does it say that this is an official policy. It says that they "do not", it does NOT say that they "will not". A small difference, but an important one.

For example:
-Nintendo does not manufacture automobiles.
-Nintendo does not make videogames licensed by the NFL.
-Nintendo does not sell Super Smash Brothers: Brawl.

Just because they "do not" do something, doesn't mean that they "will not" do something. Again, if the ESRB quote said that this was an official Nintendo policy (which it doesn't), then it would be a different story.

Fun afternoon minutia.
Dude, you're pathetic, you know that? The way you're grasping at straws, trying to convince me that Nintendo would allow an AO-rated game on Wii because it says "do not" instead of "will not" is really pitiful. It says they don't allow AO-rated games, the official bottom line, simple as that.

And the 360/PS3 evidence (which I just realized also extends to the Wii, which has parental controls) is solid, and you know it.

Obvious and evidence-supported company policies stand for a hell of a lot more than your belief and staunch conviction that somehow, Rockstar is going to release an AO-rated game that no one will sell. Seriously, what's your problem?

[PyroGamer]

The best thing that could possibly happen here is that Rockstar cuts its loses, and the game releases as an AO title, Nintendo allowing an exception.

This way the AO rating can finally be a viable way for art that is significantly more violent or sexually-oriented to be classified.

No politician will say an AO rated game, which isn't even SOLD in most stores, is being marketed towards children.

And AO rating could do for games what the NC-17 rating did for film. However much the MPAA may use the NC-17 rating to soft-censor alternative lifestyles (see This Film is Not Yet Rated for more info), without it we'd have full-blown censorship.

Perhaps eventually both film and videogames can reach the accepted status litterature has, and we will no longer need these petty ratings.

Oh, please! Not having AO-rated games on consoles is "ruining the industry"? Excuse me? The industry seems to be doing fine without AO rated games (which are almost exclusively porn) on consoles. If you need AO games, play the stupid hentai games on PC.Censorship is harmful to art. Maybe not that many titles have had to be edited that you can say its "ruining" the industry, but there have been some. Most notably in my mind Indigo Prophecy (Farenheit).

If the ESRB was allowed to really use the AO rating, AO rated titles could be a viable option for people wishing to express their art freely. Currently there is pretty much no freedom on our closed platforms. But I can already tell you don't really believe videogames can be an art form, so discussing this with you is pointless.

[Brak]

Well, I guess your disappointment will just have to go untold, because if you play this game on consoles at all, you'll be playing an M-rated version of it. You poor, poor thing, only getting to play M-rated games. Is that just not enough for you?
Are you this... delusional? Hitler burned all of the books, and hand-picked reading material for Germany? Was that not good enough for German citizens?

Stretch? Maybe? Censorship? Yep.

That's not good enough for me; It's censored art.
The AO rating is not censorship, it rather protects art and free-speach.
It is in this instance. Ao = Unable to be sold.

It's indirect censorship, and its as simple as that.

It hinders art and free speech.

[GuilewasNK]

Just because they "do not" do something, doesn't mean that they "will not" do something. Again, if the ESRB quote said that this was an official Nintendo policy (which it doesn't), then it would be a different story.

Well, it is highly unlikely, but anything is possible. The whole Mortal Kombat situation on Genesis and SNES proved that. I would hve never thought MK II owuld be uncensored, but the almighty dollar proved otherwise. The only thing is that Manhunt isn't even close to the profile MK had back in the day so I doubt the Big N will cave.

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

Whatever, I think this is awesome news. Games like Manhunt are disgusting and quite clearly serve no purpose other than sick sadistic murder and I don't think they should be allowed to play by anyone, 6 or 60. At least other violent games (GTA, GOW, etc.) are clearly entertainment/fantasy. Manhunt is trying to be a realistic snuff film, and if that's our idea of fun nowadays, this society is completely fucked.

EDIT:
And don't give that bullshit "censored art" excuse; as a society we SHOULD censor certain things if they provide no actual benefits whatsoever and promote horrible imagery and murder. It's not fucking art, there's no redeeming or thought-provoking values to it at all.

[Brak]

Whatever, I think this is awesome news. Games like Manhunt are disgusting and quite clearly serve no purpose other than sick sadistic murder and I don't think they should be allowed to play by anyone, 6 or 60. At least other violent games (GTA, GOW, etc.) are clearly entertainment/fantasy. Manhunt is trying to be a realistic snuff film, and if that's our idea of fun nowadays, this society is completely fucked.
Translation:

I support the censorship of things that offend me.

Thanks for the input!

Also, since you think you're a movie-goer, keep what you've said in mind when you see your next horror film.

[PyroGamer]

Whatever, I think this is awesome news. Games like Manhunt are disgusting and quite clearly serve no purpose other than sick sadistic murder and I don't think they should be allowed to play by anyone, 6 or 60. At least other violent games (GTA, GOW, etc.) are clearly entertainment/fantasy. Manhunt is trying to be a realistic snuff film, and if that's our idea of fun nowadays, this society is completely fucked.
Entertainment is not synonymous with "fun".

It is in this instance. Ao = Unable to be sold.

It's indirect censorship, and its as simple as that.

It hinders art and free speech.
Refusing to liscense AO titles makes them unable to be sold. Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony, the very same companies that are providing any games in the first place, are the people censoring it.

Ratings may hinder free speech, and we are probably better off without them, but right now videogaming is so threatened by REAL censorship that we can't afford to not have them.

Unfortunately right now our ratings system is hindered by the fact that the AO rating cannot be really used at all, because it's not just about economic difficulty, it's about MS, Ninty and Sony not even ALLOWING such a title to be PLAYABLE.

[CoffeeEdge]

Are you this... delusional? Hitler burned all of the books, and hand-picked reading material for Germany? Was that not good enough for German citizens?

Stretch? Maybe? Censorship? Yep.

That's not good enough for me; It's censored art.
Hahaha, dude. It's not censorship, because going in, before they even started actually developing the game, from the instant they got the license to develop the game, Rockstar agreed not to make an AO-rated game. They're the ones that broke the rules. They can make all the AO-rated PC games they want, and sell them online, if it's so important to their art. Call it censorship if you want, but they agreed to it, and I don't think it's so unfair for the console makers to want to control what goes on their systems, and is made with their SDKs. It's their right to control that.

Allow me to make an example. Animals will kill members of their own species to control territory. So, is the law that I have agreed to by being an American citizen censoring my "right" to murder someone if I want their house? I would suppose so, huh? But, hey, by living here, I agree to follow the law or face the consequences. Simple as that. Likewise, if you want to make a game on a console, you have to follow the manufacturer's rules.

Stretch? Maybe. Logical comparison? Yep.

[Brak]

Refusing to liscense AO titles makes them unable to be sold. Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony, the very same companies that are providing any games in the first place, are the people censoring it.
It's both parties. One is playing off the others' policies.

[evilmax17]

It's obvious that they don't intend to have AO-rated games on their systems. It's fucking solid evidence.

And the 360/PS3 evidence (which I just realized also extends to the Wii, which has parental controls) is solid, and you know it.
There are currently no games based off of "I Love Lucy" on any of those systems. Does that mean that there is a company policy prohibiting them?

You don't know official company policy, and your observations don't prove them. You could very well be right, because I don't know what their official company policies are. But you sure haven't proved that you do either.

[GuilewasNK]

Whatever, I think this is awesome news. Games like Manhunt are disgusting and quite clearly serve no purpose other than sick sadistic murder and I don't think they should be allowed to play by anyone, 6 or 60. At least other violent games (GTA, GOW, etc.) are clearly entertainment/fantasy. Manhunt is trying to be a realistic snuff film, and if that's our idea of fun nowadays, this society is completely fucked.

Manhunt isn't for me at all, but then again I read Battle Royale (manga) which, if you look it up, is the most violent, graphic thing I have ever read by far and I thoroughly enjoy the story and drama and find it compelling. The AO Manhunt 2 got may be justified, and I understand the interactive element makes a difference, but in no way am I going to say a work of fiction should be banned entirely. I don't care how "realistic" it is, it isn't real. I wouldn't want anyone to say that about Battle Royale so why should I say that about something someone else likes.

[Halo05]

Battle Royale was the shit.

Although I just saw the movie, didn't read the book.

[evilmax17]

Well, it is highly unlikely, but anything is possible. The whole Mortal Kombat situation on Genesis and SNES proved that. I would hve never thought MK II owuld be uncensored, but the almighty dollar proved otherwise. The only thing is that Manhunt isn't even close to the profile MK had back in the day so I doubt the Big N will cave.
Manhunt 2 isn't really that big of a game, and Nintendo doesn't really stand to gain much from it.

GTA, however, is a pretty big deal, and that's what Nintendo is after. Nintendo has been going out of their way to rebuild all of those third-party bridges that they've burned in the past, and they've only recently had success in doing so. Their relationship with Take-Two and Rockstar is what's important, and depending on how they act (if they need to at all), they could risk violating third parties all over again.

Manhunt 2 isn't the issue for Nintendo. It all boils down to their relationship with third parties, and they're very mindful of that this generation.

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

Manhunt isn't for me at all, but then again I read Battle Royale (manga) which, if you look it up, is the most violent, graphic thing I have ever read by far and I thoroughly enjoy the story and drama and find it compelling. The AO Manhunt 2 got may be justified, and I understand the interactive element makes a difference, but in no way am I going to say a work of fiction should be banned entirely. I don't care how "realistic" it is, it isn't real. I wouldn't want anyone to say that about Battle Royale so why should I say that about something someone else likes. I've seen Battle Royale also and loved it, but that movie also essentially made the same point I made, i.e. violence is senseless and depraved and increasingly more prevalent in culture.

And if anyone actually enjoys horrible things like this game, really, are those our most valued members of society? Are they that important?

Also, I've written papers of censorship many times in the past; it's an issue I feel strongly about, that real art, that has something to say, has a piece of the artist in it, should not be censored, no matter how strong. If someone made Manhunt 2 with the intent of showing the depravity of our culture (and made it at least somewhat clear of that intent), I would not be against it. But the current game as it is is a horrible detriment to our society and another step into our downfall, and it is in cases like these in which censorship I think helps.

[Brak]

Hahaha, dude. It's not censorship, because going in, before they even started actually developing the game, from the instant they got the license to develop the game, Rockstar agreed not to make an AO-rated game. They're the ones that broke the rules. They can make all the AO-rated PC games they want, and sell them online, if it's so important to their art. Call it censorship if you want, but they agreed to it, and I don't think it's so unfair for the console makers to want to control what goes on their systems, and is made with their SDKs. It's their right to control that.
Firstly: How do you know Rockstar intentional broke their agreement (which I'm unaware of; source, please) to develop a game that wouldn't be, in the end, given an Adults Only rating?

Secondly, and this is my opinion (which I've mentioned a few times): I believe that this game, no matter what, would have received an Ao rating.

The Ao is a proverbial "cock block". Either they appropriate the title, for a lower rating, or it doesn't get sold in stores. Both of those options, in their own way, are censorship, no?
And if anyone actually enjoys horrible things like this game, really, are those our most valued members of society? Are they that important?
Your credibility in this argument drops further.

[GuilewasNK]

Battle Royale was the shit.

Although I just saw the movie, didn't read the book.

The manga is gruesome, but I can't put it down, and I usually can't stand hyper-violent stuff.

[CoffeeEdge]

There are currently no games based off of "I Love Lucy" on any of those systems. Does that mean that there is a company policy prohibiting them?

You don't know official company policy, and your observations don't prove them. You could very well be right, because I don't know what their official company policies are. But you sure haven't proved that you do either.
The lack of something does not prove it's impossibility to exist, yeah. But that isn't enough evidence to mean it's possible, either.

All three systems have evidence showing that AO-games are not in the cards, evidenced by AO not appearing in the parental controls. That's solid evidence.

Not to mentio---you know what? Fuck this. There's just no convincing you. I've given you the official company line from Nintendo, and it's not good enough for you. I've given you solid evidence for all three systems, and you shrug it off by making some bizarre comparison involving I Love Lucy. You're fucking convinced that the console makers will allow AO games, and there's no changing your stubborn, stupid mind. I'm not wasting any more time.

[dopa345]

Stretch? Maybe? Censorship? Yep.

That's not good enough for me; It's censored art.

It is in this instance. Ao = Unable to be sold.

It's indirect censorship, and its as simple as that.

It hinders art and free speech.

Please. This is not some major blow to free speech. An AO designation is not censorship. It's simply an assessment of the content of the game. The fact that an AO label may harm distribution and sales of the game is immaterial to how the ESRB should do their job. Frankly, I think the AO label isn't used enough; perhaps if it were, it may carry less of a stigma and this wouldn't be as much of an issue. Don't be mad at the ESRB, be mad at the retailers that won't distribute it.

[GuilewasNK]

Please. This is not some major blow to free speech. An AO designation is not censorship. It's simply an assessment of the content of the game.

At the very least, people are talking about Manhunt that may not have given a crap about it beforehand.

[CoffeeEdge]

Firstly: How do you know Rockstar intentional broke their agreement (which I'm unaware of; source, please) to develop a game that wouldn't be, in the end, given an Adults Only rating?
My bad, I worded that wrong. They can develop whatever the fuck they want, I suppose. They just can't publish it.

And the agreement they signed was the software license from Nintendo, which, of course, includes the company policy against AO-rated games, mentioned on their website. It wasn't a special agreement for Rockstar. It's part of the standard software development license from the console makers.

[Brak]

Please. This is not some major blow to free speech.
That's not my point.
The fact that an AO label may harm distribution and sales of the game is immaterial to how the ESRB should do their job.
That's my point; playing their cards to block the distribution of the title, in its intended form.

It's kind of like the bending of the laws that traffic cops use to their advantage.

"A suspicious minority driving at night? I better check if his license plate light is out."

All of that amounts to a greater point, where it goes on for so long that it's entirely abused.

[PyroGamer]

Whatever, I think this is awesome news. Games like Manhunt are disgusting and quite clearly serve no purpose other than sick sadistic murder and I don't think they should be allowed to play by anyone, 6 or 60. At least other violent games (GTA, GOW, etc.) are clearly entertainment/fantasy. Manhunt is trying to be a realistic snuff film, and if that's our idea of fun nowadays, this society is completely fucked.

EDIT:
And don't give that bullshit "censored art" excuse; as a society we SHOULD censor certain things if they provide no actual benefits whatsoever and promote horrible imagery and murder. It's not fucking art, there's no redeeming or thought-provoking values to it at all.
How are we supposed to make moral judgements on that? And how is it our business to?

Battle Royale is sick and twisted and provides no redeaming values, but it's objective objectional content is pretty much the same as Lord of the Flies, which is one of the best pieces of 20th century litterature ever.

Whether or not it is my opinion that something has "artistic merit", I must admit that something with the exact same patently offensive content COULD have "artistic merit". It is not my position to decide it does not.

There are several great critiques of the miller test and cencorship, however I cannot find links to any of them.

[Scrubking]

Whatever, I think this is awesome news. Games like Manhunt are disgusting and quite clearly serve no purpose other than sick sadistic murder and I don't think they should be allowed to play by anyone, 6 or 60. At least other violent games (GTA, GOW, etc.) are clearly entertainment/fantasy. Manhunt is trying to be a realistic snuff film, and if that's our idea of fun nowadays, this society is completely fucked.

EDIT:
And don't give that bullshit "censored art" excuse; as a society we SHOULD censor certain things if they provide no actual benefits whatsoever and promote horrible imagery and murder. It's not fucking art, there's no redeeming or thought-provoking values to it at all.

http://www.apfn.net/hitler_salute.jpg.

[CoffeeEdge]

Please. This is not some major blow to free speech. An AO designation is not censorship. It's simply an assessment of the content of the game. The fact that an AO label may harm distribution and sales of the game is immaterial to how the ESRB should do their job. Frankly, I think the AO label isn't used enough; perhaps if it were, it may carry less of a stigma and this wouldn't be as much of an issue. Don't be mad at the ESRB, be mad at the retailers that won't distribute it.
Don't forget that the console makers won't let you publish an AO-rated game on their systems. Just adding that in.

Again, I agree. It's not censorship, having a game rated AO. That's simply content assessment. And the console makers won't let you have AO-rated games on their systems. That's not censorship; it's corporate policy. I mean, Sony Pictures won't distribute porno films. Are they censoring potential "art" by refusing to distribute a porno film? Again, no, because that's against their policies.

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

Secondly, and this is my opinion (which I've mentioned a few times): I believe that this game, no matter what, would have received an Ao rating.

The Ao is a proverbial "cock block". Either they appropriate the title, for a lower rating, or it doesn't get sold in stores. Both of those options, in their own way, are censorship, no?

Your credibility in this argument drops further.
You're telling me my credibility has dropped when your whole argument is based on the notion that perhaps by some off-chance the ESRB had it in for this game? See any holes there, Zorak?

[CoffeeEdge]

http://www.apfn.net/hitler_salute.jpg.

GODWIN'S LAW, MOTHERfuckER! YOU LOSE.

[Genocidal]

Censorship is harmful to art. Maybe not that many titles have had to be edited that you can say its "ruining" the industry, but there have been some. Most notably in my mind Indigo Prophecy (Farenheit).The removal of small sex scenes that had nearly nothing to do with the main game is hardly "ruining" the industry. Not that I agree with censorship, but you cited a poor example for your argument.

[PyroGamer]

I've seen Battle Royale also and loved it, but that movie also essentially made the same point I made, i.e. violence is senseless and depraved and increasingly more prevalent in culture.
The same could easily be argued for Manhunt 2.

Certainly that is a huge part of the social-commentary in the Grand Theft Auto games. Manhunt simply removes all the comedic releif.

[Brak]

You're telling me my credibility has dropped when your whole argument is based on the notion that perhaps by some off-chance the ESRB had it in for this game? See any holes there, Zorak?
Now, hold on.

"Zorak"? That ate ass. Fail.

As for why you've completely lost all credibility, I want you to reread everything you've posted, where you're acting like the dictator of what is art, what is bad for society, what should be purchased and consumed by the people, etc.

Which leads to this question:

Who in the FUCK are you?

That's all that needs to be asked, and what needs to be asked to those with the position (which isn't God-given) who tell us what we can and can't consume, etc., etc.

See where I'm going with this? Probably not, as you're previous posts are insanely ignorant.

... Zorak. Wow.

[PyroGamer]

As for why you've completely lost all credibility, I want you to reread everything you've posted, where you're acting like the dictator of what is art, what is bad for society, what should be purchased and consumed by the people, etc.

Which leads to this question:

Who in the FUCK are you?

That's all that needs to be asked, and what needs to be asked to those with the position (which isn't God-given) who tell us what we can and can't consume, etc., etc.:applause:

Great post, sums up my feelings on the subject of censorship.

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

How are we supposed to make moral judgements on that? And how is it our business to?

Battle Royale is sick and twisted and provides no redeaming values, but it's objective objectional content is pretty much the same as Lord of the Flies, which is one of the best pieces of 20th century litterature ever.

Whether or not it is my opinion that something has "artistic merit", I must admit that something with the exact same patently offensive content COULD have "artistic merit". It is not my position to decide it does not.

There are several great critiques of the miller test and cencorship, however I cannot find links to any of them. Well generally speaking, it's usually fairly easy to tell what is trying to be art and what is not; obviously a movie like "The Condemned" is not trying to be art, it's trying to entertain and possibly succeeds at that, while, say a book like "Lord of the Flies" may also entertain, but was written to make some sort of statement, to make people think. You can agree that any rational-minded person would assume this. And which of those categories do you think Manhunt 2 falls under? If we censor things that have no real value and do practically nothing but harm, we help out our society so that the more naive and easily influenced don't get ahold of them and fuck others up (if they fuck themselves up, fine, I don't mind that, I'm all for legalizing drugs, but when there's a chance it'll lead to other's harm, that's when it starts crossing the line a civilized society does not want to cross)

[CoffeeEdge]

That's all that needs to be asked, and what needs to be asked to those with the position (which isn't God-given) who tell us what we can and can't consume, etc., etc.
No one is telling you what you can and cannot have. Console makers are simply setting rules for what can be developed using their SDKs and libraries and documentation, as is their right and prerogative. If you need AO games, you're welcome to them on PC, which isn't regulated by anyone.

[CoffeeEdge]

:applause:

Great post, sums up my feelings on the subject of censorship.
Wow, your feelings on censorship sure are over-reactionary and overly-simple.

[Brak]

No one is telling you what you can and cannot have. Console makers are simply setting rules for what can be developed using their SDKs and libraries and documentation, as is their right and prerogative. If you need AO games, you're welcome to them on PC, which isn't regulated by anyone.
My censorship war isn't with the consoles (not entirely, anyway); It's with the ESRB who is, and will be, using the console manufacturers' policies to their advantage.

Wait 'til GTAIV comes out.
Wow, your feelings on censorship sure are over-reactionary and overly-simple.
Simple is as simple does -- read Macy's posts and reasonings, and you will see why what I've said is simplistic.

[CoffeeEdge]

double fuckkcks

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

Now, hold on.

"Zorak"? That ate ass. Fail.

As for why you've completely lost all credibility, I want you to reread everything you've posted, where you're acting like the dictator of what is art, what is bad for society, what should be purchased and consumed by the people, etc.

Which leads to this question:

Who in the FUCK are you?

That's all that needs to be asked, and what needs to be asked to those with the position (which isn't God-given) who tell us what we can and can't consume, etc., etc.

See where I'm going with this? Probably not, as you're previous posts are insanely ignorant.

... Zorak. Wow. Heh okay yeah the Zorak part was lame, sorry about that, I just saw your name and was reminded of Space Ghost. I think I came off a bit too strong in my argument; I'm not trying to say I am any important scholar in the subject, I'm just saying sometimes censorship is okay, in my opinion. People differ on the point where the line is crossed and mine is crossed at Manhunt 2, while others, such as yourself, may differ in opinion and believe that there is no line to be crossed. That's okay, that's your opinion and that's what's great about the country, I'm just saying I disagree, but you're right, I don't have a ton of knowledge on this, just my thoughts and observations

[PyroGamer]

Well generally speaking, it's usually fairly easy to tell what is trying to be art and what is not; obviously a movie like "The Condemned" is not trying to be art, it's trying to entertain and possibly succeeds at that, while, say a book like "Lord of the Flies" may also entertain, but was written to make some sort of statement, to make people think. You can agree that any rational-minded person would assume this. And which of those categories do you think Manhunt 2 falls under?
http://cheapassgamer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3036398&postcount=206


Here's a good example: Quentin Tarantino freely admits his goal is to appeal to puerile interests and simply entertain, and yet his work is widely recognized as some of the best art of the last twenty years.

No one is telling you what you can and cannot have. Console makers are simply setting rules for what can be developed using their SDKs and libraries and documentation, as is their right and prerogative. If you need AO games, you're welcome to them on PC, which isn't regulated by anyone.
Brak wasn't talking about soft free-market self-regulation. He's talking about William H. Macy's support of pure nazi-esque big-brother control of the populace.

[CoffeeEdge]

My censorship war isn't with the consoles (not entirely, anyway); It's with the ESRB who is, and will be, using the console manufacturers' policies to their advantage.
Using the policies to their advantage? Prey tell, what does the ESRB stand to gain here?

Judging from the rest of your conspiracy theories, I assume you think it involves large sums of money, the mafia, and possibly Martians?

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

http://cheapassgamer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3036398&postcount=206


Here's a good example: Quentin Tarantino freely admits his goal is to appeal to puerile interests and simply entertain, and yet his work is widely recognized as some of the best art of the last twenty years.
I don't know, I'd probably say that it falls under both categories, art and entertainment, and he has created art, whether intentionally or unintentionally

[Brak]

Heh okay yeah the Zorak part was lame, sorry about that, I just saw your name and was reminded of Space Ghost. I think I came off a bit too strong in my argument; I'm not trying to say I am any important scholar in the subject, I'm just saying sometimes censorship is okay, in my opinion. People differ on the point where the line is crossed and mine is crossed at Manhunt 2, while others, such as yourself, may differ in opinion and believe that there is no line to be crossed. That's okay, that's your opinion and that's what's great about the country, I'm just saying I disagree, but you're right, I don't have a ton of knowledge on this, just my thoughts and observations
That was... unexpected.
Using the policies to their advantage? Prey tell, what does the ESRB stand to gain here?

Judging from the rest of your conspiracy theories, I assume you think it involves large sums of money, the mafia, and possibly Martians?
:roll: Come on...

What do they have to lose?

Remember the thunder they received because of Hot Coffee? Not Rockstar; The ESRB.

What they have to gain is credibility amongst those who fund them, and support them... and those who support them are their biggest critic, for better or worse.

[CoffeeEdge]

Here's a good example: Quentin Tarantino freely admits his goal is to appeal to puerile interests and simply entertain, and yet his work is widely recognized as some of the best art of the last twenty years.
Uh, sure, he may try to "appeal to puerile interests and simply entertain," but his work honestly isn't that horribly violent. It fits well within established "rated R" limits, that's for sure.

[MarioColbert]

The best thing that could possibly happen here is that Rockstar cuts its loses, and the game releases as an AO title, Nintendo allowing an exception.

I thank you sincerely and without a hidden meaning for that very sentence. I agree with it completely, despite my deep rooted belief that this will not happen.


The Ao is a proverbial "cock block". Either they appropriate the title, for a lower rating, or it doesn't get sold in stores. Both of those options, in their own way, are censorship, no?

Yes, but when it comes to content control, the individuals who make the call are all business owners. If Nintendo would choose NOT to publish an AO game for whatever reason, that is up to them (a company is entitled to its policy, you can rebel by modding the shit out of hardware you purchased - perfectly legal to do so - or not buying their system in the first place). Stores and companies which choose not to carry AO titles do so at their own discretion while protecting their very own business interests. There is no practical marketplace system without quality control and content control being in there somewhere.

[CoffeeEdge]

Remember the thunder they received because of Hot Coffee? Not Rockstar; The ESRB.
Uh, I definitely remember Rockstar getting some hell, themselves.

They got in trouble because they didn't rate a game AO, for "AO" content that is impossible to normally access in the game, content that they had no idea existed, and couldn't have known existed. It wasn't their fault, and they deserved no criticism in that situation. If they do their jobs and rate games as they see fit, then everyone will be fine.

[Brak]

Yes, but when it comes to content control, the individuals who make the call are all business owners. If Nintendo would choose NOT to publish an AO game for whatever reason, that is up to them (a company is entitled to its policy, you can rebel by modding the shit out of hardware you purchased - perfectly legal to do so - or not buying their system in the first place). Stores and companies which choose not to carry AO titles do so at their own discretion while protecting their very own business interests. There is no practical marketplace system without quality control and content control being in there somewhere.
That's my point, to which I've mentioned and elaborated upon a few dozen times already.

That was the intent of this rating, so it rolls over all of those factors and becomes unaccessible.

Uh, I definitely remember Rockstar getting some hell, themselves.

They got in trouble because they didn't rate a game AO, for "AO" content that is impossible to normally access in the game, content that they had no idea existed, and couldn't have known existed. It wasn't their fault, and they deserved no criticism in that situation. If they do their jobs and rate games as they see fit, then everyone will be fine.
Uh..? Developers don't... rate their own games...

I don't see where you were going with your thought, but it completely neglected what I said right above it.

[Genocidal]

Using the policies to their advantage? Prey tell, what does the ESRB stand to gain here?They get to keep control over the rating of video games, instead of having to give it up to the government when enough people with money and influence complain.

[CoffeeEdge]

Yes, but when it comes to content control, the individuals who make the call are all business owners. If Nintendo would choose NOT to publish an AO game for whatever reason, that is up to them (a company is entitled to its policy, you can rebel by modding the shit out of hardware you purchased - perfectly legal to do so - or not buying their system in the first place). Stores and companies which choose not to carry AO titles do so at their own discretion while protecting their very own business interests. There is no practical marketplace system without quality control and content control being in there somewhere.

Thank you for that excellent and level-headed post. I agree, it IS up to the console maker. Thanks.

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

That was a fun little mini-debate BTW, hope we can have it again sometime

[PyroGamer]

I don't know, I'd probably say that it falls under both categories, art and entertainment, and he has created art, whether intentionally or unintentionally
You said that "you can easily tell the difference between what tries to be art and what is just entertainment" (I paraphrase).

Unintentionally or intentionally he has created art, even though many many many many many people think it is not art, but simply a scourge to our society.



The right to ownership over one's thoughts and mind is even more fundamental to american civil liberties than the ownership of ones body. It's intrinsically fundamental to the freedom of choice. Controlling what goes on in one's own mind is a fundamental right of all human beings. Controlling what you consume and what you don't consume is intrinsically related to controlling one's thoughts and beliefs. Censorship is not only suppresion of our god-given freedom-of-speech, but also our freedom of thought.

Whether or not someone is one of the "most valued members of society", they are fucking human beings with fucking human rights. Your moral world-view has quite the same moral-fiber as the agenda of the holocaust and Action T4. Your sick ideal of some "most valued members of society" conjours up images of star-of-David armbands and Action T4 posters.

That was a fun little mini-debate BTW, hope we can have it again sometime
It quite was (and I hope will continue to be, if you'd like to respond to this post).

[CoffeeEdge]

Uh, I definitely remember Rockstar getting some hell, themselves.

They got in trouble because they didn't rate a game AO, for "AO" content that is impossible to normally access in the game, content that they had no idea existed, and couldn't have known existed. It wasn't their fault, and they deserved no criticism in that situation. If they do their jobs and rate games as they see fit, then everyone will be fine.Uh..? Developers don't... rate their own games...

I don't see where you were going with your thought, but it completely neglected what I said right above it.
Uh, in case it wasn't completely obvious, I was talking about the ESRB in that second paragraph. Now that you know this, re-read it.

[Brak]

Uh, in case it wasn't completely obvious, I was talking about the ESRB in that second paragraph. Now that you know this, re-read it.
I see that now. The reason I didn't before was because you misread what I said, with "Not Rockstar; The ESRB", where I presume you thought I was saying that Rockstar received no flack, when I was elaborating that I was speaking of the ESRB, exclusively, in that instance.

[dallow]

There is no way Manhunt 2 deserves this much discussion.
The game will be forgotten by next year.

The first one was forgotten even quicker.

[PyroGamer]

Uh, in case it wasn't completely obvious, I was talking about the ESRB in that second paragraph. Now that you know this, re-read it.
People hate the ESRB because it effectively blocks most censorship.

If they can take a scandal like the Hot Coffee Mod and use it in ANY way to fling mud at the integrity of the ESRB, they will.

There is no way Manhunt 2 deserves this much discussion.
The game will be forgotten by next year.

The first one was forgotten even quicker.
In case you missed out on the last... 12 pages of this thread, the discussion has mostly had little to do with Manhunt 2, but were about the ESRB, censorship, and the game industry in general.

[Brak]

There is no way Manhunt 2 deserves this much discussion.
The game will be forgotten by next year.

The first one was forgotten even quicker.
It would have been an exciting step for the Nintendo scene, but all is lost.

[CoffeeEdge]

There is no way Manhunt 2 deserves this much discussion.
The game will be forgotten by next year.

The first one was forgotten even quicker.
All they need is to sell at least one more copy because of this scandal that they wouldn't have sold otherwise, and it'll be worth it to Rockstar's PR department.

[MarioColbert]

HOLD THE FUCK UP.


Society DOES censor the content of shit it despises. By not purchasing and supporting those that do. Why do we need a help of a governing body to "ease the pain?" Whatever the fuck happened to "I may disaree with what you're saying, but I'll die for your right to say it?" I guess that's "oldschool." We don't need to protect our own freedom of choice. I guess while we're at it, let's ban the Wii Dancing game because the religious sects that see dancing as a sin are offended by it. Probably moreso than you guys are offended by Manhunt 2's violence.

[Brak]

HOLD THE FUCK UP.


Society DOES censor the content of shit it despises. By not purchasing and supporting those that do. Why do we need a help of a governing body to "ease the pain?" Whatever the fuck happened to "I may disaree with what you're saying, but I'll die for your right to say it?" I guess that's "oldschool." We don't need to protect our own freedom of choice. I guess while we're at it, let's ban the Wii Dancing game because the religious sects that see dancing as a sin are offended by it. Probably moreso than you guys are offended by Manhunt 2's violence.
Where did this suddenly come from?

Although I agree with it, entirely, it's very sudden.

So sudden that I'm not sure if it's sarcastic or not. That may be because I'm tired.

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

You said that "you can easily tell the difference between what tries to be art and what is just entertainment" (I paraphrase).

Unintentionally or intentionally he has created art, even though many many many many many people think it is not art, but simply a scourge to our society.



The right to ownership over one's thoughts and mind is even more fundamental to american civil liberties than the ownership of ones body. It's intrinsically fundamental to the freedom of choice. Controlling what goes on in one's own mind is a fundamental right of all human beings. Controlling what you consume and what you don't consume is intrinsically related to controlling one's thoughts and beliefs. Censorship is not only suppresion of our god-given freedom-of-speech, but also our freedom of thought.

Whether or not someone is one of the "most valued members of society", they are fucking human beings with fucking human rights. Your moral world-view has quite the same moral-fiber as the agenda of the holocaust and Action T4. Your sick ideal of some "most valued members of society" conjours up images of star-of-David armbands and Action T4 posters.


It quite was (and I hope will continue to be, if you'd like to respond to this post). Whoa I wasn't saying most valued members of society, I was just saying all the ones who aren't complete idiots (which is about 70-80% of us). I think most intelligent, rational-minded people would agree that a game like Manhunt 2, whether or not it detriments society, is probably not going to improve it positively either, and as that is my opinion too, I'm just saying that I don't mind it or things as bad or worse being censored. I think in cases like that, censorship helps for the greater good; if it even stopped just one death from someone playing it, it would be worth it to not have it.
Again, just my opinion, I'm not trying to argue that I'm correct

[Brak]

Where did this suddenly come from?

Although I agree with it, entirely, it's very sudden.

So sudden that I'm not sure if it's sarcastic or not. That may be because I'm tired.
Let me elaborate on this before I go to work:

The ESRB should be a guideline, which society uses as - you know - a guideline.

My point is that it seems as though the ESRB, with ulterior motives, is abusing its "authority", and hindering the release / intended content of a video game.

Indirectly (and ulteriorly), they're making it near impossible for me, someone of age, to acquire the intended video game, let alone simply acquire the video game.

"Adults Only"? Why can't I play it?

[PyroGamer]

Whoa I wasn't saying most valued members of society, I was just saying all the ones who aren't complete idiots (which is about 70-80% of us). I think most intelligent, rational-minded people would agree that a game like Manhunt 2, whether or not it detriments society, is probably not going to improve it positively either, and as that is my opinion too, I'm just saying that I don't mind it or things as bad or worse being censored. I think in cases like that, censorship helps for the greater good; if it even stopped just one death from someone playing it, it would be worth it to not have it.
Again, just my opinion, I'm not trying to argue that I'm correct
To be quite clear: I respect your opinion, and I infinitely respect you civility in divulging it. This thread has remained suprisingly civil (despite my prevelant use of the f-word, which appears to offend alot of peopl).


While I cannot say whether or not Manhunt 2 could be a detriment to our society, or even if it will not benefit our society (as I have never played it), I know for certain that censoring it WOULD be a detriment to our society, a terrible detriment whose impact would be immeasurable.

I consider Britney Spear's CD's a detriment to our society, but to ban them would do much to absolutely destroy the very fabric of our nation and our civil liberties.

Let me elaborate on this before I go to work:

The ESRB should be a guideline, which society uses as - you know - a guideline.And that's how it's being used. Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft's sacred right to free enterprise is being excercised. Now, Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft are not following the guidelines of the ESRB word for word (rather than "should be played by adults only" the big three are saying "cannot be played by anyone"), but that's their sacred right.

[MarioColbert]

Whoa I wasn't saying most valued members of society, I was just saying all the ones who aren't complete idiots (which is about 70-80% of us). I think most intelligent, rational-minded people would agree that a game like Manhunt 2 has no societal benefits, and as that is my opinion too, I'm just saying that I don't mind it or things as bad or worse being censored. I think in cases like that, censorship helps for the greater good; if it even stopped just one death from someone playing it, it would be worth it to not have it.
Again, just my opinion, I'm not trying to argue that I'm correct

Hello. Your definition of art sucks balls.

By your token, abstract, dadist, nonsense, futurist, and surrealist art serves no purpose, because there isn't a biblical allusion to 10 commandments being discussed in there somewhere.

You don't mind things as bad or worse being cencored. What do YOU know? Have you played it? Where the fuck do both sides get these presumptious wankers spouting extreme opinions of a product that they've never experienced by themselves?


If you think I contradict myself in here, do try to make a complete dumbass of yourself trying to point this out. Ignorance is and has been on both sides of this "debate." If more people spoke like PyroGamer (see way above), this thread would be more sensible (and obviously less fun).

[I AM WILLIAM H. MACY]

Hello. Your definition of art sucks balls.

By your token, abstract, dadist, nonsense, futurist, and surrealist art serves no purpose, because there isn't a biblical allusion to 10 commandments being discussed in there somewhere.

You don't mind things as bad or worse being cencored. What do YOU know? Have you played it? Where the fuck do both sides get these presumptious wankers spouting extreme opinions of a product that they've never experienced by themselves?


If you think I contradict myself in here, do try to make a complete dumbass of yourself trying to point this out. Ignorance is and has been on both sides of this "debate." If more people spoke like PyroGamer (see way above), this thread would be more sensible (and obviously less fun). Okay, fair enough, I haven't played it and am not yet fully aware of the content. I do have a fairly good idea of what it will be though, judging by the first game (which I have played) and what I've seen in previews for the second one.

And why exactly could what I was saying be interpreted as "I hate non-conformist works of art"? I dabble in some of those categories myself (in short films and writing) and have nothing against free expression; hell, even ultra-violent movies, sometimes, if they are entertaining, can be good, if they are just mindless entertainment that will likely not be a huge detriment. What I'm against are forms of media that promote and practically endorse horrible, horrible crimes that in the real world would be thought of as, well, unthinkable, such as Manhunt 2. Again, something like Lord of the Flies would not endorse this type violence, while it's possible that something like the Saw movies (I'm not saying they do necessarily, I'm just saying that it's not entirely clear) might endorse this type of violence. Basically, it crosses the line, IMO, and at that point it's time to stop.

Once again, it's just my opinion, and I think any civilized society needs some censorship; we already do it to ourselves, in that we don't act like the animals we naturally are, we don't jump at every innappropriate impulse, we control ourselves. We need to protect children and the easily influenced potential murderers from getting ahold of things that are mass-marketed and readily available, that seem appealing to them, that would promote and possibly lead to life imitating Manhunt 2.

I suppose, just because I don't believe in censorship, that if an adult wanted to play Manhunt 2, and he/she was proven to be of sound mental state, I suppose I'll go back on what I said and say that they should be allowed to play it, and they can, with an AO rating.

[dallow]

In case you missed out on the last... 12 pages of this thread, the discussion has mostly had little to do with Manhunt 2, but were about the ESRB, censorship, and the game industry in general.

Glad to hear it, as I'd never read a thread dedicated to Manhunt.

And if this thread has indeed turned into a purile debate on censorship, and art in general....... I'm going to back away slowly.

[KaneRobot]

Oh for christsake...I'm not reading 12 pages.

But really, fuck Nintendo. Sony too, since they also apparently backed out.

[MarioColbert]

And if this thread has indeed turned into a purile debate on censorship, and art in general....... I'm going to back away slowly.

It's "puerile" if you want to sound smart. :]

I suppose, just because I don't believe in censorship, that if an adult wanted to play Manhunt 2, and he/she was proven to be of sound mental state, I suppose I'll go back on what I said and say that they should be allowed to play it, and they can, with an AO rating.

I think I have misunderstood your original post regarding the game. Thanks for posting this bit. The "sound mental state" thing is a bit of a slippery slope, but I don't think this thread is ready for any more poop slinging than we've already experienced.

[dallow]

It's "puerile" if you want to sound smart. :]

Oh you'll get yours Colbert! ::shakes fist::

[Foolman]

Oh for christsake...I'm not reading 12 pages.

But really, fuck Nintendo. Sony too, since they also apparently backed out. It would be stupid for Nintendo and Sony to allow AO games on their systems. It is really bad publicity and Nintendo and Sony don't want it associated with their brand names.

Might as well be mad at Microsoft too, they don't allow AO games. Actually, lets go a little further, plenty of stores don't carry AO games. Fuck them too, right?!

[willardhaven]

Maybe it will be a Phantom exclusive?

[Chuplayer]

What they need to do is find someplace to release it, make it region-free, make it NTSC and PAL compatible, and release it. Importing FTW!

[MarioColbert]

Maybe it will be a Phantom exclusive?

That quote is civilization.


Well, it seems we didn't have to wait too long on the official stance of Nintendo in this:

http://kotaku.com/gaming/original/nintendo-nixes-ao-manhunt-270741.php

Games made for Nintendo systems enjoy a broad variety of styles, genres and ratings. These are some of the reasons our Wii and Nintendo DS systems appeal to such a broad range of people. But as with books, television and movies, different content is meant for different audiences. That's why the ESRB (http://kotaku.com/gaming/esrb/) provides ratings to help consumers understand the content of a game before they purchase it. As stated on Nintendo.com, Nintendo does not allow any AO (http://kotaku.com/gaming/ao/)-rated content on its systems.

I could not help myself with the bold marking. Sorry, guys, but I told you so.

[Brak]

In the end, I guess it's a good thing that Manhunt 2 (in its current state) won't see the light of day on the Wii, as tacked-on motion controls are more gruesome than ripping someone's testicles out with wire cutters.

[itachiitachi]

Is the no AO agreement universal. I.E. if it gets an AO rating in the US but a M rating in Mexico(or what ever they have there) than does that mean that they can't publish the game in Mexico too? Or is the ESRB an international organization that does universal ratings not just for the U.S.

[Halo05]

As far as I've ever heard, ESRB ratings are just for the US. Britain's equivilent organization banned Manhunt 2 before the ESRB rated it AO.