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

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Gee, I dunno. I've only explained that about 4,000 times already in this thread.[/quote]

Relax champ, I've only stopped in for the occasional joke or to read you guys flip out and argue (which is even funnier). Maybe you made a good point somewhere, but I didn't notice.

I was thinking Rockstar could self-manufacture the game, but I guess if they used Sony's development kits they could get sued. I was wondering why they couldn't 100% self-publish.
 
[quote name='Brak']I think that's because you have the memory of a goldfish.[/QUOTE]
Oh, ouch. You're a regular Don Rickles, you know that?

So, you're pissed at the ESRB, I get that, but for what? Doing their job? Oh, no, you think it's a conspiracy, blah blah blah. Forget it.

[quote name='mykevermin']I merely wish that there was *some* opportunity to buy/play this game.[/quote]
And there could well be, on the PC.
 
[quote name='willardhaven']Relax champ, I've only stopped in for the occasional joke or to read you guys flip out and argue (which is even funnier). Maybe you made a good point somewhere, but I didn't notice.

I was thinking Rockstar could self-manufacture the game, but I guess if they used Sony's development kits they could get sued. I was wondering why they couldn't 100% self-publish.[/QUOTE]
When game developers get licensed to use the console maker's SDKs and toolsets, they agree not to make AO games with them. It's not "they could be sued," they would be sued, and they'd probably never get licensed to develop for a console again. Very simple.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']And there could well be, on the PC.[/quote]

As I said earlier, "could be" is not the same as "good enough." I don't understand what you are arguing, CoffeeEdge. Here's a list of what you don't know:

  • whether or not ESRB rating is fair
  • whether or not Manhunt 2 is coming out for PC
  • whether or not Manhunt 2 will ever see light of day in its current form
And here's a list of what you do know:
  • Nintendo and Sony would not allow an AO game on their consoles
  • Manhunt 2 can not be published on the systems it was developed for
  • ESRB rating and Nintendo policy are responsible for the above
The argument expressed is: "Nintendo & Sony Publishing Policies have effectively banned the current version of the game from existing, removing the public's ability to become educated first-hand of the game, and vote with their wallets."

I fail to see how this statement can possibly be considered false. I probably fail to reason clearly by asking you to deconstruct it for us.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']So, it's censorship for console makers to set rules of what they'll allow on their systems?[/quote]Yes.

Is it also horrible, reprehensible, oppressive censorship that my local theaters don't play hardcore porno flicks along with the rest of the movies?
Click to expand...
No, but it is censorship.
[quote name='daroga']You know, even if the above list of things is fabricated, you've got to wonder what on earth could be in this game to give it an AO rating. After GTA, Saint's Row, etc. I wasn't sure anything could get the dreaded rating and that anything that wasn't T suitable got the M, to which the sky was the limit.[/QUOTE]
I've always thought GTA was rather tame, really. I suppose prostitution was a bit much, but it was always portrayed tongue-in-cheek. As for Saints Row, well, harsher language and more crimes (none of which nearly as bad as the original one: murder) but that's about it.

GTA and Saints Row both clearly fit in the category of "M". All of their contents would be perfectly suitable in any R rated movie.
 
I don't know why you are so angry at everyone, you're correct about the situation with developers/hardware manufacturers but it still sucks.

As said I suppose we would have to go to the PC for our games if we wanted to avoid this whole situation.

CoffeEdge,are you just trying to convince everyone that if it is legal it ceases to be censorship.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']This is something that should NEVEREVEREVER be used as a reason for not doing something. The religious right can and will find something to protest with or without Manhunt 2 in this world, and even those things should be held sacred and protected.

I can't believe you're advocating giving in and giving up on something because of the mere presumption of protests by a bloc of people who do nothing BUT complain about the state of moral decay in our society. If this were 80 years ago, they'd be complaining about jazz cats in zoot suits leading to moral depravity as well. Their great grandparents sure did.

Guess who you just gave power and legitimacy to? Jack Thomson. Well done, chap.[/quote]

I'm not advocating giving in or giving up. I'm saying that's Nintendo and now Sony's rationale for not letting Manhunter 2 come out on their system. If you'd pull your head out of the sliced up, swollen, maggot infested vagina for a second you'd realize that when something has a budget of 20 million or whatever it has that it cannot be devoid from its corporate masters.

You know who gives Jack Thomson more power and legitimacy then I do? fucking Rockstar by constantly putting out things to tweak him and people of his ilk. If you want to talk history, let's talk history. You know what happened at the end of the 1920s that those crazy religious psychos without any power did? Ever hear about a thing called the Hollywood Production Code? Here's what governed films for the thirty three years when it was in place:

[quote name='Motion Picture Production Code of 1930 (Hays Code)']General Principles

1. No picture shall be produced that will lower the moral standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin.

2. Correct standards of life, subject only to the requirements of drama and entertainment, shall be presented.

3. Law, natural or human, shall not be ridiculed, nor shall sympathy be created for its violation.[/quote]

History repeats itself my friend and the country is becoming more censored in the mainstream media, not less. As it stands now, gaming is a part of the mainstream media. By the way, Jack Thompson already has legitimacy with the millions of hard line conservatives that agree with him.

[quote name='mykevermin']I pick this one. It's not like Larry Flint collaborated with Annie Liebowitz or "art" types when he fought his fight. He fought for himself and his filthy, filthy, FILTHY magazine (Hustler makes my stomach churn). And he won. Not on any grounds of "art" or "trying to say something for the medium."[/quote]

I think that's what has me most irritated about the whole Manhunt 2 situation. Larry Flint fought his fight on behalf of pornography, a completely adult medium. Rockstar is forcing the issue on behalf of games, a medium that spans everything from Mario Kart to Mortal Kombat. As a longtime anime fan, I remember when Blockbuster tagged all anime as adult because the representation of the medium at the time is that it was adult content only. I don't want to see Wicked City, a movie about spider ladies eating you with a vagina, make it harder to see something like Barefoot Gen, a movie about a young boy dealing with both the literal and metaphorical fallout of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima.

We all know politicians and corporations paint things with a broad brush. Why are we to think it'll be any different from gaming?

[quote name='mykevermin']I'd like to be able to find out, but Grandma and Grandpa...err, Nintendo and Sony, won't let me buy it.[/QUOTE]

I would too. I didn't like the first Manhunt but it had some interesting gameplay gimmicks, especially the microphone aspect of the game. I think Rockstar's a talented development studio, but I think they're stifling creativity in the gaming medium in the future because they're forcing an absurd backlash that will lead to more, not less censorship with their games which strike me as closer to pornography then art.

Besides, it's a poor business decision to release an AO game on a console at this point. I hope in the future it isn't and we see a change, but as it stands right now there's too much risk and not enough reward for making a game like that. My guess is that the AO rating needs to prove itself viable in the PC market before we'll see it on consoles, and so far, it hasn't.
 
Those of you who are still furious about not being able to play the title as intended, it's quite possible a later PC port of the game will be available in an unedited version.

That's the best thing we can hope for at this stage (well, besides the AO rating being overturned on appeal).
 
[quote name='Strell']Jesus.

This is the biggest discussion on nothing I've ever seen in my life.[/QUOTE]
What? You mean 18 pages of

"this isnt coming out rated AO"
"yes it is"
"No"
"Ya huh"
"Whatever. It's so not"
"Ya it is"

is nothing?
 
[quote name='furyk']You know who gives Jack Thomson more power and legitimacy then I do? fucking Rockstar by constantly putting out things to tweak him and people of his ilk. If you want to talk history, let's talk history.[/quote]

Yeah! Just like those damn witches who kept provoking the early Puritan colonists with their singing and dancing and cavorting around with Satan - they had it coming!
 
[quote name='whoknows']What? You mean 18 pages of

"this isnt coming out rated AO"
"yes it is"
"No"
"Ya huh"
"Whatever. It's so not"
"Ya it is"

is nothing?[/QUOTE]
Wow.

I challenge you to find ANYONE posting that.

ANYONE.
 
[quote name='Brak']Wow.

I challenge you to find ANYONE posting that.

ANYONE.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much whats been happening.

Someone says: If it comes out maybe it'll just be on Rockstars website
Coffee Edge: "OMG, NINTENDO AND SONY DONT ALLOW AO GAMES ON THEIR SYSTEMS"

Its been repeated over and over.
 
[quote name='camoor']Yeah! Just like those damn witches who kept provoking the early Puritan colonists with their singing and dancing and cavorting around with Satan - they had it coming![/QUOTE]

I guess I see your point. I mean cigarette companies aren't held accountable for their products either, am I rite?

Making points like that is almost as irrelevant as coming into a discussion you think isn't worthwhile only to say, "Hay guyz. This talk sure is crap."
 
I think someone needs to buy Nintendo and Sony some balls. I mean, Nintendo of all people really should be jumping at the chance to get an adult title with a lot of buzz around it for its system, especially since a good chunk of that system's catalog looks like it was made for old ladies and toddlers.
 
I don't know what I hate more. The Fact that Sony and Nintendo don't allow AO games on their consoles. Or...... Actually that is all that tweaks me. If an AO rating is even in place yet you don't allow AO titles, whats the point of even having the rating?
 
[quote name='mr ryles']I don't know what I hate more. The Fact that Sony and Nintendo don't allow AO games on their consoles. Or...... Actually that is all that tweaks me. If an AO rating is even in place yet you don't allow AO titles, whats the point of even having the rating?[/QUOTE]


PC games.

it is crappy. why should consoles be locked out? why's there a limit imposed on this medium to begin with? the situation is all around BS.

and I don't want to hear otherwise from the guys arguing that Sony and Nintendo are within their rights-- they are, but to quote the Big Lebowski: "You're not wrong Walter, but you're still an asshole."
 
[quote name='Apossum']PC games.

it is crappy. why should consoles be locked out? why's there a limit imposed on this medium to begin with? the situation is all around BS.

and I don't want to hear otherwise from the guys arguing that Sony and Nintendo are within their rights-- they are, but to quote the Big Lebowski: "You're not wrong Walter, but you're still an asshole."[/QUOTE]

True.

It's like they are soooo concerned with their image that they won't allow a game on their console that doesn't fit their values.
 
[quote name='Apossum']and I don't want to hear otherwise from the guys arguing that Sony and Nintendo are within their rights-- they are, but to quote the Big Lebowski: "You're not wrong Walter, but you're still an asshole."[/QUOTE]
Exactly. They're well within their legal rights, but it's still absolute bullshit.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']
hitler_salute.jpg
.[/quote]

I agree with Scrubking in that anyone who considers censorship of a game, movie or dvd based on the fact that it would be for 'adults only' obviously hasn't been paying attention to the main age group that most games are targeted towards anymore. 18-34 ring a bell? Moreover, they are a nazi for depriving the rest of us of being able to watch digitized simu-sex between CJ and his girls in San Andreas, not that I care and if I wanted to watch that crap I could turn on Skinemax almost any night of the week.

I played the first Manhunt and while it was gory and sadistic at times, I enjoyed it. And, I will chime in with the same thing others have said already, if parents actually paid attention to what their kids are watching, playing and listening to, there would be no need to 'ban' this game because it's 'too graphic'.

Stupid people need to stop buying 10 year old little Johnny Spoiled Jackoff the latest Resident Evil or Mortal Kombat just because little Johnny wants it.

If not for all the morons out there doing that exact thing, even the ESRB wouldn't have been needed.
 
[quote name='evanft']I think someone needs to buy Nintendo and Sony some balls. I mean, Nintendo of all people really should be jumping at the chance to get an adult title with a lot of buzz around it for its system, especially since a good chunk of that system's catalog looks like it was made for old ladies and toddlers.[/QUOTE]

Yeah well when the majority of your investors oppose controversy it's next to impossible to grow some balls. All of us have to understand that gaming is big business and when you have hundred of thousands of shareholders you become quite sensitive to controversial material. That's why they should release the game on PC.
 
[quote name='Apossum']it is crappy. why should consoles be locked out? why's there a limit imposed on this medium to begin with? the situation is all around BS.
and I don't want to hear otherwise from the guys arguing that Sony and Nintendo are within their rights-- they are, but to quote the Big Lebowski: "You're not wrong Walter, but you're still an asshole."[/QUOTE]
[quote name='PyroGamer']Exactly. They're well within their legal rights, but it's still absolute bullshit.[/QUOTE]

Is it also absolute bullshit that they won't play Anal Teen Tryouts #15 at my local theater? Is it also bullshit that one can't buy a block of local public access cable to broadcast their homemade sex tapes? Is it also bullshit that I can't rent a billboard next to a daycare and plaster a photo of, I dunno, tubgirl or goatse on it? If this shit about console games means so much to you, do you apply that to your entire worldview?

If that's bullshit, then it's got to be reasonable bullshit, at least.

Edit:
And these examples don't have to be so extreme. What you guys are saying is that the creators of a medium should allow anything to be released on it, basically. In otherwords, it's their job, as a business, to cater to every market and customer, by not controlling content. So, should I get pissed that the local Chinese buffet doesn't serve tea and scones? If I got a job as a chef at a pizza restaraunt, and I believed that it was my artistic calling to bake and sell wedding cakes, are they repressing me by not letting me do it there, because it isn't part of their business? Should I be annoyed that the local trinket consignment shop can't sell my house for me?

It's not every business' duty to cater to every customer. Sony, MS, and Nintendo don't want to cater to people that want AO games. I don't think that's bullshit.


By the way: I want to gloat to whoever it was who was nitpicking about the console makers' AO game policies, because in the wake of all this Manhunt 2 shitstorm, all three have come out and publicly mentioned their stance about not allowing AO rated games.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Is it also absolute bullshit that they won't play Anal Teen Tryouts #15 at my local theater?[/quote]

If that film had seen theatrical release, it's been played in multiple movie theaters accross the country. Pornography has a well-established distribution channel. Manhunt 2 created for PS2 and Wii does not.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Is it also bullshit that one can't buy a block of local public access cable to broadcast their homemade sex tapes? [/quote]

There are other avenues for that as well. For a thorough listing how you can broadcast your sex tapes google "Adult YouTube Clones." Furthermore, in Austin TX there are places that would gladly pay you some money for shooting a porn video with your loved one. They'll take care of distribution and online broadcasting of that material. Manhunt 2, created for PS2 and Wii still fails to have a distribution channel.


[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Is it also bullshit that I can't rent a billboard next to a daycare and plaster a photo of, I dunno, tubgirl or goatse on it?[/quote]

However you -can- post a picture of tubgirl or goatse for a much larger audience than the one that would spot your billboard. It can be enjoyed (as both have been) on the internet. Manhunt 2, created for PS2 and Wii has not and can not under current conditions.


[quote name='CoffeeEdge']If this shit about console games means so much to you, do you apply that to your entire worldview?[/quote]

So far you've failed to show a single other monopoly-related example of straight-up refusal of publication of a work to its medium of choice. Porn Films exist as reels of film, video tapes, and DVD, along with numerous other formats. Manhunt 2, created for PS2 and Wii does not share this freedom - it can not be published.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']If that's bullshit, then it's got to be reasonable bullshit, at least.[/quote]

What's "that" refers to?

Since you are notorious for repeating yourself, I'll indulge you, if only for the sake of completeness.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']And these examples don't have to be so extreme. What you guys are saying is that the creators of a medium should allow anything to be released on it, basically. In otherwords, it's their job, as a business, to cater to every market and customer.[/quote]

No. SHOULD never entered the discussion, apart from a few extreme voices here and there. Sony and Nintendo sold you hardware, and at present you are unable to utilize it to serve your needs, despite the fact that you have paid for it.


[quote name='CoffeeEdge']So, should I get pissed that the local Chinese buffet doesn't serve tea and scones?[/quote]

Again, I can point you towards a number of places that will sell you tea and scones. When it comes to Manhunt 2, developed for PS2 and Wii, you can not do the same for me.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']If I got a job as a chef at a pizza restaraunt, and I believed that it was my artistic calling to bake and serve wedding cakes, are they repressing me by not letting me do it there, because it isn't part of their business?[/quote]

This is the only statement of all yours that is applicable. Except it does not apply to us - it applies to Rockstar (we don't make wedding cakes a.k.a. Manhunt 2, developed for PS2 and Wii). Your sentiment is clear - their work is to video games as pizza is to wedding cake. If you didn't mean that the difference was as drastic, you wouldn't use this example.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Should I be annoyed that the local trinket consignment shop can't sell my house for me?[/quote]

There are many places that would sell your house for you. When it comes to the stores that would sell Manhunt 2, developed for PS2 and Wii, you can not point me to one.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']It's not every business' duty to cater to every customer. Sony, MS, and Nintendo don't want to cater to people that want AO games. I don't think that's bullshit.[/quote]

Nobody said that it was their business, although keep reading. People have expressed dissapointment in the decision. By your book, it was somehow wrong of them to feel that way. They disagree. End of argument.

If you want to talk about morality, do keep in mind that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have created a very effective monopoly over which games will and will not get publishing credit total. You can not provide any other industry that does the same. All DVD players play every type of film. Companies that sell paper do not regulate what is printed upon it. Last but not least, computer technology manufacturers have no control over what software is run on their systems. The fact that anyone but myself controls the private contents of my hardware - especially the legal ones that do not involve criminal acts to produce - is a violation of a consumer's freedom.

[quote name='CoffeeEdge']By the way: I want to gloat to whoever it was who was nitpicking about the console makers' AO game policies, because in the wake of all this Manhunt 2 shitstorm, all three have come out and publicly mentioned their stance about not allowing AO rated games.[/quote]

Why do you want to gloat? Please answer this question.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']*snip*[/QUOTE]
*sigh*

There really is no use discussing this with you if that's the best you can come up with.

The post above me adequately responds.
 
all of your points coffee edge are not even in the same realm as this. Manhunt 2 is just a game developed for a certain console. People have the option to buy it and with the AO rating you must be a certain age. It's not like little Mormon kids are going to be playing this. (Unless they got dipshit parents) Buying a game is an option, I am aware there is extreme gore and violence in this game, I am also aware it is just a game, and I want the option to buy it.
 
Personally I don't care too much about this as I'd never play it anyway (never been one for the horor genre--the only "horor" game I've played is RE4).

But this all made me think, why can't Nintendo, Sony, etc. have these kinds of standards for games for technoligical standpoint? Why must games like Far Cry Wii and Bubble Bobble Revolution be allowed to be sold to consumers, despite being either broken or looking like my TV just threw-up in its mouth?
 
Not sure if this has already been linked/discussed but here is a recent hands-on preview of the game: http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/...&sid=6172967&part=rss&tag=gs_wii&subj=6172967

Based on what we played, Manhunt 2 is shaping up to be a solid, intriguing follow-up to the original. The game's violence and gore, which have become the mother of all lightning rods for the title, are in full effect. But, while they've been ramped up from the original game, they're not exactly going to wreck Western civilization any more than, say, the Saw and Hostel movies--or just about any other of the slasher flicks that come in and out of vogue. What we saw was graphic for sure, and given a slightly unsettling twist by the interactivity offered by the Wii game, but ultimately it's nothing we haven't seen before in other games, movies, or even some television. We're curious to see the form Manhunt 2 ends up taking should Rockstar make changes to get a more retail-friendly rating. The game's violence is part of the dark story it's telling, not an element tossed in for shock value. If films such as Seven or Reservoir Dogs had been toned down, they arguably wouldn't have told the same stories. Hopefully Rockstar can figure something out and keep the game's dark vision intact. We'll keep you posted as Manhunt 2 is prepared for release.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='MarioColbert']If that film had seen theatrical release, it's been played in multiple movie theaters accross the country. Pornography has a well-established distribution channel. Manhunt 2 created for PS2 and Wii does not.



There are other avenues for that as well. For a thorough listing how you can broadcast your sex tapes google "Adult YouTube Clones." Furthermore, in Austin TX there are places that would gladly pay you some money for shooting a porn video with your loved one. They'll take care of distribution and online broadcasting of that material. Manhunt 2, created for PS2 and Wii still fails to have a distribution channel.




However you -can- post a picture of tubgirl or goatse for a much larger audience than the one that would spot your billboard. It can be enjoyed (as both have been) on the internet. Manhunt 2, created for PS2 and Wii has not and can not under current conditions.




So far you've failed to show a single other monopoly-related example of straight-up refusal of publication of a work to its medium of choice. Porn Films exist as reels of film, video tapes, and DVD, along with numerous other formats. Manhunt 2, created for PS2 and Wii does not share this freedom - it can not be published.



What's "that" refers to?

Since you are notorious for repeating yourself, I'll indulge you, if only for the sake of completeness.



No. SHOULD never entered the discussion, apart from a few extreme voices here and there. Sony and Nintendo sold you hardware, and at present you are unable to utilize it to serve your needs, despite the fact that you have paid for it.




Again, I can point you towards a number of places that will sell you tea and scones. When it comes to Manhunt 2, developed for PS2 and Wii, you can not do the same for me.



This is the only statement of all yours that is applicable. Except it does not apply to us - it applies to Rockstar (we don't make wedding cakes a.k.a. Manhunt 2, developed for PS2 and Wii). Your sentiment is clear - their work is to video games as pizza is to wedding cake. If you didn't mean that the difference was as drastic, you wouldn't use this example.



There are many places that would sell your house for you. When it comes to the stores that would sell Manhunt 2, developed for PS2 and Wii, you can not point me to one.



Nobody said that it was their business, although keep reading. People have expressed dissapointment in the decision. By your book, it was somehow wrong of them to feel that way. They disagree. End of argument.

If you want to talk about morality, do keep in mind that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have created a very effective monopoly over which games will and will not get publishing credit total. You can not provide any other industry that does the same. All DVD players play every type of film. Companies that sell paper do not regulate what is printed upon it. Last but not least, computer technology manufacturers have no control over what software is run on their systems. The fact that anyone but myself controls the private contents of my hardware - especially the legal ones that do not involve criminal acts to produce - is a violation of a consumer's freedom.



Why do you want to gloat? Please answer this question.[/QUOTE]
Epic trouncing.
 
Nice to see that the those who have played it say it DOESN'T DESERVE an AO rating just like some of us knew it already didn't.
 
[quote name='Foolman']Don't think it matters in the end. Rockstar will definitely try for a rerating.

The ultra-violent videogame Manhunt 2 allows you to rape a woman shortly after you beheaded her in the brothel level called Honey Pot. Members of the ESRB were shocked when Daniel Lamb used his male reproduction organ and simulated a penetration in the bloody hole. Other gruesome parts include microwaving a living cat to death and being a witness of necrophilia in a cemetery in one of the later stage of the game.
Click to expand...

Quote from an article from GAF. That is pretty disgusting.[/quote]
I'm glad that that was proven false because it would make for quite a disturbing reel for a company that's had enough experience straddling the M/AO rating line for years. It would've been very naive for them to have included that type of stuff in the game and to expect an M rating for the game.

[quote name='mr ryles']True.

It's like they are soooo concerned with their image that they won't allow a game on their console that doesn't fit their values.[/quote]
I'm sure that Sony loved getting sued every time somebody sued Rockstar and all the related companies for GTA causing their kid to go nuts and kill people.

I doubt that it's solely based on values, but because retailers don't support the rating, they don't want to be even more liable for the games they already allow on their systems, and that they do have the right to decide what gets published on their systems, much to the chagrin of everyone here. Why should Sony and Nintendo be held hostage into having no control at all over what comes to their systems?

How is giving a game whose content is supposedly more severe than what an M-rated game gets suddenly a bad thing? The people that rated it, who are just normal people, felt that the content they saw wasn't suitable for an M rating. I'd like to see the reel that Rockstar sent to the ESRB that resulted in this instead of assuming it's because the ESRB are asses that wanted to ban the game. It's the fault of the retailers that don't stock AO games for your not being able to buy Manhunt 2 in a few weeks. I'd bet that if retailers did indeed allow AO games, Manhunt 2 would've still gotten an AO regardless. Since that is obviously not the case, everyone's free to come up their own reason as to why it got an AO rating. I can't see that the three random people that were assigned to the game took store policies, political issues, the policies of the console makers, and all that junk into consideration for their suggestion of what to rate AO.

As for the AO rating itself, if this link works for you, it shows that there are nearly two dozen games that have received the AO rating over the years.

Either way, Manhunt 2 just isn't my cup of tea, so I definitely won't be getting it regardless of whenever it does come out. The first game wasn't something I wanted to play either, and this one seems to take things further this time.

[quote name='Scrubking']Nice to see that the those who have played it say it DOESN'T DESERVE an AO rating just like some of us already knew it didn't. This is a railroading of massive proportions and I hope the head of the ESRB gets fired.[/quote]
Please point out where they said that "Manhunt 2 doesn't deserve an AO rating." They only say that they hope the game's story and atmosphere isn't sacrificed to get the game down to an M rating.
 
Based on what we played, Manhunt 2 is shaping up to be a solid, intriguing follow-up to the original. The game's violence and gore, which have become the mother of all lightning rods for the title, are in full effect. But, while they've been ramped up from the original game, they're not exactly going to wreck Western civilization any more than, say, the Saw and Hostel movies--or just about any other of the slasher flicks that come in and out of vogue. What we saw was graphic for sure, and given a slightly unsettling twist by the interactivity offered by the Wii game, but ultimately it's nothing we haven't seen before in other games, movies, or even some television.
Click to expand...
.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']As for the AO rating itself, if this link works for you, it shows that there are nearly two dozen games that have received the AO rating over the years.[/QUOTE]

Hmm. That's a fascinating link, actually. One that's *really* telling of what matters in terms of offensiveness in our culture. Only *5* of the 23 AO games have anything related to "violence" in their descriptors. One of them (Thrill Kill) was never released, and another (GTA: San Andreas) was originally an "M" title until "Hot Coffee" was found (and we all know that had nothing to do with violence). Moreover, another of the remaining 3 was the director's cut of Indigo Prophecy. Knowing that was an "M" title on the consoles, let's compare the two, shall we?

The changes in the descriptors are as follows: (console:pc)
partial nudity:nudity
sexual themes:strong sexual content

The remaining descriptors are identical.

So, we're left with only 2 AO games with violence in them. "Lula 3D" and "Critical Point," after performing a cursory search on the titles, are...*ahem* clearly not rated AO for their violent content. Lula 3D looks like a Barb Wire platformer, while Critical Point has a hentai vibe to it.

So, we're left with, frankly, only *ONE* game so far that was rated AO on account of its violent content: Thrill Kill. And we all know how that one went.

The shame our culture has towards nudity and sexuality, and the fact that the slightest suggestion of it puts our culture up in arms, is bothersome (particularly when we consider that shooting people in games is totally fine, unless blood is shown). It's a very backwards culture, IMO. That's how the MPAA is, pretty much, so it comes as little surprise that the ESRB is nearly identical. Nevertheless, it's still troublesome to see that the AO games thus far have not, at all, come out for any consoles. Not that I want to play "Lula 3D." But I would like to try Manhunt 2; now I don't because Nintendo is afraid of dumb fucking parents who would buy this garbage for their kids and then file a lawsuit. Or some "image" thing.
 
[quote name='Scrubking'].[/quote]
Yeah, they never say "it doesn't deserve an AO rating." They even compare it to Saw and Hostel, which from what I've seen and heard of those movies, I don't believe there are many games, if any at all, that deal with the kind of extremely graphic scenes that those movies contain.
 
[quote name='mykevermin'] Not that I want to play "Lula 3D."[/quote]

I looked at the very same article linked through the Wikipedia's ESRB Criticisms and Contrversy page. I would have posted it, but the discussion had nothing to do with ESRB at that point. And Wikipedia lists ESRB's stance on sexuality (which you have documented quite well yourself) on the top of its listing of criticisms.

Read Lula 3D MobyGames page... Turns out it is an adventure game, and there are lot of quite positive reviews that, get this, PRAISE THE PUZZLES. The setting involves a porn film that you're directing? Starring in? I don't know, I was at work.

In a recent interview with ESRB, it is mentioned that AO is a specific tag that isn't attached to age as much as it warns about "extreme" content. I can't say that this statement would necessarily work in their favor - they are admitting, in part, that the rating is designed to be unfavorable. The ESRB representative also claimed that there was no age differences between NC-17 and R - rated films, since both "cut off at 17" (not true, visit MPAA website for details, though now I'm just being a dick).

And last but not least, Thrill Kill was AO due to sadomasochistic (i.e. sexual) overtones (again, same old interview). It is safe to assume that AO is basically a label for pornographic games, or games that are seen as "too sexual." It is quite possible that Manhunt 2 rating is the first of its kind, unless of course there is a Cold Soda Mod in there somewhere.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
The shame our culture has towards nudity and sexuality, and the fact that the slightest suggestion of it puts our culture up in arms, is bothersome (particularly when we consider that shooting people in games is totally fine, unless blood is shown). It's a very backwards culture, IMO. That's how the MPAA is, pretty much, so it comes as little surprise that the ESRB is nearly identical. Nevertheless, it's still troublesome to see that the AO games thus far have not, at all, come out for any consoles. Not that I want to play "Lula 3D." But I would like to try Manhunt 2; now I don't because Nintendo is afraid of dumb fucking parents who would buy this garbage for their kids and then file a lawsuit. Or some "image" thing.[/quote]The ESRB president admitted as much that their ratings have to fit the mood of the culture. So it really should be little surprise. What good does a rating system do if it doesn't mesh with the expectations and understanding of those who are reading it?

http://kotaku.com/gaming/feature/esrb-head-talks-ao-manhunt-2-and-community-standards-271159.php

Two important points, I think:

2. Has the ESRB ever rated a game Adults Only due to violence?

PV: Yes. The AO rating has been assigned more often than it actually ends up appearing on product shipped. Our system affords publishers the opportunity to modify and resubmit games that receive the AO rating in light of the business ramifications that such a rating currently presents.
Click to expand...

5. In general, when rating a game does the ESRB use a system that relies on community standards to decide what is and isn't an acceptable level of violence or sexual references in a game? If so, do you feel those standards shift over time?

PV: By their very nature, as well as to maintain credibility and trust, ratings must reasonably reflect the current cultural norms and community standards of those for whom they are intended. That is why we regularly conduct research across the country to gauge parental agreement with the ratings. Our most recent study found that parents agreed with the ratings we assigned 82% of the time, and 5% of the time they actually found our rating "too strict." The FTC's report from April of this year also found strong agreement with ratings, and in fact reported that 87% of the parents they surveyed are "somewhat" to "very" satisfied with the ESRB ratings. We'll continue to ensure that parents are satisfied with the ratings we assign.
Click to expand...
 
You know as much as it gets ragged on I enjoyed manhunt and the later stages were not terrbile by any means. The ending was a bit difficult to figure out what triggered it but overal I would say a 7-8 in a game.

I was looking forward to Manhunt two based on what I played in the first. Lets hope good news comes from this and they get it fixed and released on Wii.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Not that I want to play "Lula 3D." [/quote]

I actually have the German demo installed on my PC. It really not that bad at all.
 
[quote name='botticus']Two important points, I think:[/QUOTE]

Regarding the frst quote: if there *were* titles rated AO in terms of violence, wouldn't they be on the ESRB page? Unless, of course, they revised the game to get an "M." We may never know what games were AO due to violence in that case.

I respect the "cultural norms" argument, and wasn't arguing against it (culture is reciprocity, after all). It merely sickens me that sexuality is so much more taboo than violence - and that's not just limited to videogames. Not at all.

Hmm. Y'know what would be satisfying? If they revised Manhunt 2 so that it was an "M" game, and then put out the "AO" version months later on the PC for a budget price. This way, I could buy the Wii version (used, of course; Nintendo isn't going to make money off of me this time around), and if there were substantial differences, play it as it was meant to be played.

Not satisfying in the sense that we'd be able to circumvent our puritanical overlords, of course...but at least we'll be able to play the game.

I don't see why they couldn't pull a "Wal-Mart" here; millions of dumb motherfuckers buy music at Wal-Mart every year (me? I spent $2 on a whistle there in the past 12 months). Millions of dumb motherfuckers willingly fork over cash for music stripped of naughty language, devoid of their artistic integrity, and sanitized for the public's consumption. Me? I buy my music elsewhere for that very reason. As a consumer, I'm given an option. I can say "no thanks, Wal-Mart, you can keep your censored music, your dichotomous christian-and-female-smut-novel book section, and your wealth of firearms; I'm going to buy my music elsewhere."

Now, I can't do that with Manhunt 2 - if one version is "M" and one "AO," what's so hard to tell about the two discs? Gamestop has done a savvy job at not buying GTA: San Andread 1st Edition - so they've proven, logistically, they could do this again.

Nope, nope, nope. I get nothing. I'm glad I have Jack Thomson sleeping in the same bed as Nintendo, Sony, and MS: looking out for my best interests, being a highly impressionable 28 year old. :roll: :lol:

[quote name='GuilewasNK']I actually have the German demo installed on my PC. It really not that bad at all.[/QUOTE]

I'm not disputing the quality of any of the AO games (except Thrill Kill, which I have played; Christ almighty that's some shameful gameplay right there). I am disputing that there are any AO-rated games that earned it b/c of their violent content.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']I'm sure that Sony loved getting sued every time somebody sued Rockstar and all the related companies for GTA causing their kid to go nuts and kill people. [/QUOTE]
I didn't even think of that.

Has Sony really been sued over GTA??
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Yeah, they never say "it doesn't deserve an AO rating." They even compare it to Saw and Hostel, which from what I've seen and heard of those movies, I don't believe there are many games, if any at all, that deal with the kind of extremely graphic scenes that those movies contain.[/QUOTE]

it's nothing we haven't seen before in other games!
Click to expand...

it's nothing we haven't seen before in other games!
Click to expand...

it's nothing we haven't seen before in other games!
Click to expand...
.

PV: By their very nature, as well as to maintain credibility and trust, ratings must reasonably reflect the current cultural norms and community standards of those for whom they are intended. That is why we regularly conduct research across the country to gauge parental agreement with the ratings. Our most recent study found that parents agreed with the ratings we assigned 82% of the time, and 5% of the time they actually found our rating "too strict." The FTC's report from April of this year also found strong agreement with ratings, and in fact reported that 87% of the parents they surveyed are "somewhat" to "very" satisfied with the ESRB ratings. We'll continue to ensure that parents are satisfied with the ratings we assign.
Click to expand...

I also want to say that this quote horribly incriminates the head of the ESRB because the acceptable social standard IS sex, nudity and violence in 17+ content. Hostel, Saw and the countless other R movies prove this. Hell there is more sex/nudity on TV than is allowed in a damn videogame.

So clearly she is NOT adhereing to social standards and treating videogames the way Jack Thompson and Co. want her to.
 
The only thing you need to ask is, did GameSpot play the same parts of the game that were sent in video form to the ESRB for rating? We don't know the answer to that question.
 
[quote name='Scrubking'].So clearly she is NOT adhereing to social standards and treating videogames the way Jack Thompson and Co. want her to.[/quote]

I'm going to have to say that this post of yours "wins" hard. Are you as frustrated as I am that now there will be discussion in what the Wii controls add to the "murder simulator" side of the game every time we will be discussing graphic violence in a video game?

[quote name='botticus'] The only thing you need to ask is, did GameSpot play the same parts of the game that were sent in video form to the ESRB for rating? We don't know the answer to that question.[/quote]

You are right, we don't. But that does not necessarily annihilate the quote Scrub had posted. Furthermore, it does not matter if the game contains material we've seen or not seen before, because even if it did involve grotesque and awful images - WE (consumers) get no say in it. In my not-so-humble opinion, "tasteless" is not a concept that should be defined as a universal truth, especially in context-sensitive cases such as a video game.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']So clearly she is NOT adhereing to social standards and treating videogames the way Jack Thompson and Co. want her to.[/QUOTE]

Well, that certainly boils down my longwinded points and advances them to a point where, regretfully, the word "pwn" may be deserved. Indeed, since sex seems to be the standard-bearer separating M from AO, this is anomalous and an unfortunate reaction to the need to prove the ESRB's legitimacy in the eyes of people who will never view it as legitimate.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Well, that certainly boils down my longwinded points and advances them to a point where, regretfully, the word "pwn" may be deserved. Indeed, since sex seems to be the standard-bearer separating M from AO, this is anomalous and an unfortunate reaction to the need to prove the ESRB's legitimacy in the eyes of people who will never view it as legitimate.[/QUOTE]

Well, in fairness to the ESRB, the standard for MPAA seems to be whether or not you show a dick between NC-17 and R.

There's no way the ESRB is going to around in two years sadly. It's unfortunate too because I think we'll go to explicit censorship rather then censorship by circumstance.

And as someone who owns AO titles (a friend who legally bought them sent them to me and that's the gods honest truth), most of them are remarkably terrible.
 
I guess you guys haven't paid attention to the culture surrounding video games much if you don't think they're adhering to a social standard. Sex in movies? Not a lot of uproar unless it's approaching pornography, happens in just about every other R-rated movie. Sex in games? Chaos. Violent content is generally the same. People get shot all the time in PG-13 movies, but have a human killed in a game, generally moves it to an M. Blame in on Jack Thompson, or that video games are being seen as "for kids" still, whatever, the fact is that's how games are judged, and that's what rating systems have to reflect.

I'm sure none of us like it, but just how when I was a kid (some 20 years ago), it seemed like any movie that had an inkling of nudity was an R, though nowadays some PG-13 movies can sneak through with the same - the same will likely occur with games as the industry matures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top