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

[quote name='Sporadic']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.[/QUOTE]

Then the problem is with the retailers and the perception of an AO rating, not the rating itself.
 
[quote name='dopa345']Then the problem is with the retailers and the perception of an AO rating, not the rating itself.[/quote]
You're an idiot. We're talking about what getting an AO rating entails. Not the fucking semantics of it.
 
Reality's Fringe;3032015 said:
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.)
Click to expand...


Thank god people still have brains!!! I
 
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.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']You're an idiot. We're talking about what getting an AO rating entails. Not the fucking semantics of it.[/QUOTE]So the entire business end of the game industry is semantics?
 
[quote name='jmcc']So the entire business end of the game industry is semantics?[/quote]

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.
 
[quote name='Silent Assassin120'][quote name='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.[/quote]Same here.[/QUOTE]
No, that won't happen, because as I have explained at length, the game can NOT be published whatsoever if it's rated AO, regardless of where it's sold.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?
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']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.[/QUOTE]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.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']Rapelay. Research it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapelay[/QUOTE]
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.

[quote name='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?[/QUOTE]
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.

[quote name='Zen Davis']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.[/QUOTE]
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.
 
[quote name='MarioColbert']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.[/QUOTE]
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.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']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.[/quote]

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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
 
[quote name='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.[/quote]
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']You're an idiot. We're talking about what getting an AO rating entails. Not the fucking semantics of it.[/QUOTE]

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.
 
[quote name='dopa345']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.[/QUOTE]
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.
 
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.
 
[quote name='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.[/quote]
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
[quote name='Brak']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.)[/quote]
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
[quote name='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.[/QUOTE]
Australia is our conservative buddy on so many things. Even the most liberal liberals here in America are regularly in support of videogame regulation.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Australia is our conservative buddy on so many things. Even the most liberal liberals here in America are regularly in support of videogame regulation.[/quote]

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.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis'][email protected]

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
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]
: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.
 
[quote name='MarioColbert']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?[/quote]
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.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']: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.[/QUOTE]
Im pretty sure that Saw is rated R, unless it was originally NC-17, & got changed
 
[quote name='evilmax17']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.[/quote]

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

[quote name='anomynous']Im pretty sure that Saw is rated R, unless it was originally NC-17, & got changed[/QUOTE]
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.
 
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.
 
[quote name='evilmax17']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.[/quote]

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.
 
[quote name='yukine']Analysts dissect Manhunt 2 rating: http://www.gamespot.com/pages/news/story.php?sid=6172800&part=rss&tag=gs_news&subj=6172800[/QUOTE]Hmm. 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."
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='whoknows']Could someone copy and paste that? It's blocked from here.[/QUOTE]
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."
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='schuerm26']Not a bad point[/QUOTE]
It's a terrible point.

It's not about what acts are socially acceptable, it's about what could be harmful to minors.
 
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? Though I'm assuming, possibly incorrectly, that Amazon and other online retailers will be more likely to stock it.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Will Nintendo even let the game on the Wii with an AO rating???[/quote]
No, neither will any other console maker.

[quote name='PyroGamer']I hope, if they do release an M rated version, they sell an uncut AO version on their website or something.[/QUOTE]
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.

[quote name='Brak']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.)[/quote]
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."

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

[quote name='evilmax17']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.[/quote]
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).
Click to expand...

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.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']It's a terrible point.

It's not about what acts are socially acceptable, it's about what could be harmful to minors.[/QUOTE]
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.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']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.[/quote]
No one cares about your opinion, CoffeeEdge. I'm probably the only one that reads your posts, and I only do so for hilarity.
 
[quote name='Brak']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.[/QUOTE]
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.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Have you looked at any part of this thread at all?[/QUOTE]
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top