backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 83 comment(s) - last by Ajax9000.. on Jun 21 at 9:33 PM

Manhunt 2 taking heat for extreme violence

Wii's controller will let gamers make killing motions
Manhunt 2 could be the first "adults only" game to hit a Nintendo system

Immediately following the announcement that the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is disallowing the sale and distribution of Manhunt 2 in the UK, word came that the game would be rated as AO, or adults only, by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB).

Game publisher Take-Two Interactive today confirmed the rating, issuing the statement, “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.”

After the ban by the BBFC, watchdog group Center for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) sent a letter to ESRB president Patricia Vance demanding that game be rated AO.

The CCFC gives examples of why Manhunt 2 deserves an adults rating: “In Manhunt 2, players can saw their enemies’ skulls in half; mutilate them with an axe; castrate them with a pair of pliers; and kill them by bashing their heads into an electrical box, where it is blown apart by a power surge. On Wii, players will not merely punch buttons or wield a joy stick, but will actually act out this violence.”

Vance responded to the letter, as noted by GamePolitics, “It should be noted that ESRB has already assigned a rating for the Wii, PS2 and PSP versions of Manhunt 2, and that rating has in fact already been communicated to the publisher.”

According to Vance’s comments, Rockstar now has the option of either appealing the rating or to adjust the content of the game to elude the AO categorization. “We have not yet been notified by Rockstar as to what they intend to do with respect to our rating assignment,” she added.

“This is completely unexpected to the whole team,” said a Rockstar Games spokesman to Kotaku. “We love the horror genre. We thought we could do something interesting and entertaining with it in the video game medium. When we had this first Manhunt game, there wasn't this reaction. We thought (Manhunt 2) was consistent with a mature rating.”

When asked if the game’s content would be altered to fit a more accessible rating, the spokesman said, “We have to explore all of the options. I think it's too early to go into all of that right now.”

According to the ESRB site, only 23 games have ever earned an AO rating, with the majority being on the PC. Only one game ever released for home consoles has been rated as AO, which was the “Hot Coffee” version of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, also by Rockstar Games.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
This is what is "right"
By Boney on 6/20/2007 10:41:16 AM , Rating: 5
I think that the highlight of this article is not that the game recieved an "Adults Only" rating but that the game was not simply banned as it is in the UK. We still have the choice of whether or not we want to buy the game.

But seriously .... that is a pretty gruesome game. "AO" is fair in my opinion.




RE: This is what is "right"
By Devo2007 on 6/20/2007 10:45:32 AM , Rating: 3
Considering most retailers don't carry AO-rated games though, it's a huge setback for Rockstar.

(Granted, I somewhat agree with the rating overall).


RE: This is what is "right"
By slacker57 on 6/20/07, Rating: 0
RE: This is what is "right"
By dubldwn on 6/20/2007 12:04:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Considering most retailers don't carry AO-rated games though

Yeah, Rockstar knows the big impact this will have on sales. Hopefully it’ll be readily available online. I’m definitely going to buy it, because I think it’s important to support this kind of content. This is such a good use for the motion sensing controllers-I’m really looking forward to playing this.


RE: This is what is "right"
By Targon on 6/20/2007 1:35:25 PM , Rating: 1
Do you REALLY feel the need to support violent content in games, or adult material in games(I am not talking about porn). I am all for freedom of expression and such, but I really am sick of seeing every game aimed at an adult audience being focused on violence, rather than being a good game all around.

You almost never see games rated M with nudity in them because for some reason, game developers don't understand that games with an adult content that don't focus on violence would sell better. You see R-rated movies with sex as well as violence as the reason for the rating. Games just end up with the violence it seems.


RE: This is what is "right"
By dubldwn on 6/20/2007 1:56:01 PM , Rating: 1
Oh, sex is pretty taboo. The console in question would be taking a big gamble on that. Especially the otherwise family friendly wii. Maybe PC though. Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for nudity, too. Just not in the same venue. I would stand up for sex themed games, but I don’t think I’d buy it, because unlike senseless murder, fighting the cops, and selling drugs and weapons, I actually do that.


RE: This is what is "right"
By Christobevii3 on 6/20/2007 2:59:34 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but the wii controller would definately make sex games more fun.


RE: This is what is "right"
By Hoser McMoose on 6/20/2007 3:39:08 PM , Rating: 2
LOL! I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking that the Wiimote could take such games to a TOTALLY new level of fun! Especially if they integrate on-line gaming capabilities!

Just watch out for those 14/f/cali types.. you never know quite who you're really talking to with them ;)


RE: This is what is "right"
By enlil242 on 6/20/2007 9:26:32 PM , Rating: 1
Wait, the "Wiimote" has vibration?

;-)


RE: This is what is "right"
By GlassHouse69 on 6/20/2007 6:53:56 PM , Rating: 1
im all for the masturbation wii game. pr0n pics are on the screen and fake jerk off as fast as you can to get to the next level.


RE: This is what is "right"
By FITCamaro on 6/20/2007 4:14:09 PM , Rating: 3
Sex is wrong in video games. Running down cops with cars, shooting hookers, and stabbing people with knives is ok as long as you're of age.

/end sarcasm.


RE: This is what is "right"
By encryptkeeper on 6/20/2007 5:27:28 PM , Rating: 2
Do you REALLY feel the need to support violent content in games, or adult material in games

Yes.

games with an adult content that don't focus on violence would sell better

No. (i.e. Leisure Suit Larry Magna Cum Laude)

Games just end up with the violence it seems.

No. (They usually have sexual exploitation of women AND violence. The best of both fantasy worlds.)


RE: This is what is "right"
By Targon on 6/21/2007 6:11:10 AM , Rating: 2
I was NOT saying sex games, or games that REVOLVE around nudity. I was talking about games that get the rating because nudity makes it into the game, not that the game should revolve around it. Perhaps this is the problem with the game industry itself at this point, that games MUST revolve around either sex or violence.

My original post was more about the way violence is the entire purpose of too many games, in many cases it isn't violence because you have no other choice, such as fighting your way out of a Nazi prison or something like that. I am talking about this whole focus on violence as the goal of the game.

Now, you could easily have a game where the player plays a detective. Now, there could easily be a storyline where either the detective deals with a woman who has criminal past who has fallen in love with the detective. No sex games or anything like that, but cut scenes with nudity involved between the main character and his not-so-nice informant who is trying to go straight. The game doesn't even need to revolve around that relationship, but if done on the level of any movie, could work.

The old days where adventure games were popular has gone(though with the current consoles it COULD come back if it has a good story line), but that doesn't mean that new action games MUST avoid sex. Sex is only considered bad here in the USA, but in other countries, violence is the thing that is frowned on.


RE: This is what is "right"
By XesBOX on 6/20/2007 5:08:39 PM , Rating: 2
Why is it a huge setback?

Because parents won't buy them for their 12 year olds?


RE: This is what is "right"
By RyuDeshi on 6/21/2007 2:38:18 AM , Rating: 3
No, but more casual gamers (that don't read gaming news/websites/magazines) are less likely to see it on store shelves and may never know about it.


RE: This is what is "right"
By Hoser McMoose on 6/20/2007 12:49:20 PM , Rating: 4
I tend to agree. This is not a game that should be sold to children. If parents want to buy this game for their kids that's their choice, but hopefully a big "Adults Only" sticker will make them take notice and at least think about it.

Almost nothing about video game ratings pisses me off more than when parents complain about all the violence in the 'M' rated game they bought for their 8 year old!

The GTA games have been the worst for parents in this regard. The say in big bold letters that it's for 17+ audiences ONLY and that it includes "Blood and Gore", "Intense Violence" and "Strong Sexual Content", yet somehow parents still feel that this should be a kids game with no violence or sex?!?! It boggles the mind!


RE: This is what is "right"
By Christopher1 on 6/20/2007 2:44:19 PM , Rating: 2
That's what I get upset about as well, though I also get upset when people say that "seeing violence makes children violent".

That's only true for violence they see in REAL LIFE, not in a video game! Though, some of the violence in video games is getting close to being portrayed the same as in real life..... so some games are going to have to be limited from children's views.


RE: This is what is "right"
By Clenathan on 6/20/2007 3:43:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's only true for violence they see in REAL LIFE, not in a video game!

But any child can turn on America's Wildest Police Chases or a similar show and actually see some of the things in real life (granted they are not physically there) that they can play on their favorite video game i.e. the shootout in broad daylight between the cops and the two guys outfitted in black body armor.


RE: This is what is "right"
By tehfire on 6/21/2007 2:12:52 AM , Rating: 2
I think the big difference betweeen violence seen on tv and violence in videogames is the fact that in a videogame, the child in question is actually causing the violence. Granted, this is all virtual, but I think there's an important distinction between watching COPS and killing somebody in a violent game.

That is beside the point, however. I still believe that violent videogames only cause problems in already unstable teens.


RE: This is what is "right"
By vortmax on 6/21/2007 8:40:24 AM , Rating: 3
But why the need to simulate violence so much. Isn't there enough real violence in the world already to feast on? Just seems pointless...


RE: This is what is "right"
By mindless1 on 6/21/2007 11:50:47 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, you have no reasonable basis for your conclusion.

With ADULTS, who are not still in their impressionable years, the ability to see violence in context is formed. In CHILDREN, there is still the overriding fundamental of learning life coping skills. If they spend their time using violence in video games it can only be a negative, and eventually problematic effect relative to engaging in non-violence-contexted activities where they use their mind instead of physical attacks to deal with life's problems.


Wait a minute...
By Polynikes on 6/20/2007 11:06:14 AM , Rating: 2
Theoretically, under the ESRB's current rating system, you have to be either 17 or 18 to purchase an M rated game, right? If it's 17 and not 18, is the difference that big? What is the point of an "Adults Only" rating, when essentially that's exactly what the M rating is?




RE: Wait a minute...
By drakanious on 6/20/2007 11:09:22 AM , Rating: 2
How many NC-17 movies have you seen in a theater?


RE: Wait a minute...
By kextyn on 6/20/2007 11:13:35 AM , Rating: 2
The main difference is nudity. Here's what ESRB says:

"Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity."

So I guess you have to define what prolonged is. Is it violence that lasts longer than 5 secs? 10 secs? 5 mins?

The problem here is nobody pays attention to any ratings EXCEPT for AO. When you go look at games do you look at the rating? If M games were restricted like they should be you could probably rate this game as M and there wouldn't be a problem. By making it AO they are limiting the purchase not only by what the parent/consumer sees as the rating but also by where it's sold. So basically they're saying "parents are too stupid to look at ratings and cashiers are too lazy to check IDs so we're going to rate it so high that it gets taken out of most stores."


RE: Wait a minute...
By Hoser McMoose on 6/20/2007 12:41:13 PM , Rating: 2
The 'Mature' or 'M' rated games can be purchased by 17 year olds, while Adults Only ('AO') games can only be purchased by those 18 or over, so yeah, 1 year difference.

Of course, the real issue is with some rather messed up ideas in our society. With this game being an obvious exception, the real difference between 'M' games and 'AO' games has always been sex and nudity, and MANY retailers won't carry such games. For some reason we feel that brutal violence and gore and perfectly acceptable, but toss a couple pairs of titties into the game and it's suddenly evil and wrong!


RE: Wait a minute...
By Spivonious on 6/20/2007 12:49:26 PM , Rating: 2
That's not correct. M-rated games can be purchased by minors with the approval of a parent/guardian. AO-rated games can never be purchased by minors.

It is identical to the movie ratings of R and NC-17 (Formerly X). If I choose, I can take my 5 year-old with me to see an R-rated movie. I cannot take him in to an NC-17 movie.

Normally I'd be against rating a game AO simply for violence, but after reading a bit about it, I agree with the ESRB's decision. I mean come on, castrating someone with pliers? There is no reason to have that in a videogame. If anyone was looking forward to that "feature" then he/she needs to seek medical attention.


RE: Wait a minute...
By hubajube on 6/20/2007 3:20:59 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I mean come on, castrating someone with pliers?
You can do that in the game? Oh HELL YEAH!!!!!


RE: Wait a minute...
By Hoser McMoose on 6/20/2007 3:58:53 PM , Rating: 2
And how, exactly, is it any different in practice with a computer game? Basically it's the difference between a 13 y/o coming up to the counter with the game in their hands and their parents saying 'it's ok' vs. the parents coming up to the counter with the game themselves. End result is still the same.

Same goes for R vs. NC-17 ratings at a video store. There's absolutely nothing the store can do to stop you from renting an NC-17 rated movie and bringing it home to watch with your 5 y/o.

The real difference, as someone mentioned earlier already, is that damn near everyone (parents especially it seems) ignore all ratings EXCEPT for 'Adults Only'.


RE: Wait a minute...
By CrimsonFrost on 6/20/2007 4:33:00 PM , Rating: 2
Uhhh, no an M-Rated game cannot be purchased by a child under 17 at all. The parent or guardian has to be the one making the purchase, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES is the child allowed to purchase the game. Of course the adult can give the kid the game after it's bought(which is usually exactly what happens).

And yeah what the hell? Brutal and deploreable violence is A-OK but throw some nudity in there, and it's "ZOMG"!


RE: Wait a minute...
By TSS on 6/21/2007 5:04:50 AM , Rating: 2
seriously, there have been moments where i really really would like to castrate a certain person with some pliers. but instead i take a breath make a smart ass remark, go home and let cash here do it for me. great thing is: i can have him to it as much as i want, i wont get in trouble, nobody gets hurt, and i get rid of my frustration.

but of course i and a whole lot of gamers who have found a way to safely release their social anger, get F'ed in the A by the fear of the majority of that itsy bitsy percentage that will freak out anyway.

let me give an example, anybody saw the new rambo 4 trailer? now THAT looks over the top. unless rambo 4 gets banend world wide, violent games like this can get a M rating. nothing against rambo or rambo 4, i wanna see that movie. heck i'd even set manhunt 2 aside for a moment to go see it.

the point of a virtual world is beeing able to do things you are not able to do in real life. there will always people that wont get that. just like the suicides fueled by all the bad news from the media (AKA the world sucks, emo anyone?) and the extremely thin models on the cat walk (AKA what "pretty" means). some girls wont get that they dont have to be extremely skinny and some emo's wont get that the world isn't all bad. same way some gamers will lose toutch with reality. but honestly, its not the game, its the person and that persons enviroment's fault.


Couple of thoughts...
By vortmax on 6/20/2007 1:03:24 PM , Rating: 1
Does anyone ever wonder why acting out brutal murders and torture is fun?

In many parts of the world, these types of things happen for real. If someone you loved was murdered or tortured to death, do you think you'd be playing this game?

How far does the free speech/artistic expression argument go?




RE: Couple of thoughts...
By dubldwn on 6/20/2007 1:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In many parts of the world, these types of things happen for real.

Detroit?
quote:
If someone you loved was murdered or tortured to death, do you think you'd be playing this game?

No. I would find that person and kill them.
quote:
How far does the free speech/artistic expression argument go?

As far as adults are concerned, until it goes out of its way to harm you. It’s that simple.
You know, some of you guys need to lighten up. This is a video game. If your preference is lighter, more family friendly content, then have at it. Those kinds of games just don’t hold my interest. I guess I’m tired of hearing the, “oh, we live in such a sick society” nonsense. Relax. It’s just murder.


RE: Couple of thoughts...
By vortmax on 6/20/2007 1:52:51 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Relax. It’s just murder.

Now that's the perfect quote for our desensitized society. Maybe we'll see that on a billboard ad for this game...

I'm still looking for answers to my original question:

Why is acting out brutal murders and torture deemed as fun?


RE: Couple of thoughts...
By dubldwn on 6/20/2007 2:34:05 PM , Rating: 3
Well, I don’t think anything is “deemed” fun. It either is or it isn’t. When playing video games, some of us don’t want some little animal making t-shirts going doot doot doot. We want police cars launched 13 feet in the air. We want to feel the recoil as our submachine gun sheds the assistant manager before we steal the cash. We want to shove a knife under our victims ribcage, set him on fire, and throw him off a roof. Adult entertainment. To ask someone why they think something is fun is probably a non starter, but I’ll try: it’s fantasy and it’s exhilarating. Children shouldn’t have access to this, and based on your post, you obviously wouldn’t find this game fun. That’s ok. You’re with most people. As long as I can do what most people don’t like, and you can do what most people don’t like, and neither of us are hurting anyone else, then we’re both siding with freedom.


RE: Couple of thoughts...
By smitty3268 on 6/20/2007 3:21:15 PM , Rating: 2
Although I agree with dubldwn in principle, I'm a little glad I'm not working with him every day...

What about a racing game where you race through city streets and can crash? I imagine anyone who has been in a horrible car wreck or lost a close relative in one wouldn't really enjoy that, but does it mean it can't be a fun game? I doubt you want all crashes to be censored out, with some "you crashed, try again" message put on the screen instead do you? Like everything else, it is just a matter of degree.

In the US, free speech goes as far as it can without hurting anyone. That's why neo-nazi groups, white supremacists, and flag burners are all tolerated (barely). Of course you can always organize boycotts but outright banning isn't right. Only when you start hurting someone like child predators does it move from protected free speech into illegality. Other places like Europe have much lower standards and do ban certain types of speech they deem offensive like holocaust denial.


RE: Couple of thoughts...
By vortmax on 6/20/2007 11:04:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What about a racing game where you race through city streets and can crash?
This game is 'slighly' different than that. Intentional murder and torture vs. racing on streets?

quote:
it’s fantasy and it’s exhilarating

Dubldwn answered my question. It's fantasy and it's exhilarating. So, the next question begs to be asked:

Why is brutal murder and torture a fantasy and exhilarating for someone?


RE: Couple of thoughts...
By tehfire on 6/21/2007 2:22:37 AM , Rating: 2
Systemically, why is murder and torture `appealing`? Same reason why kids gotta do something after you tell them not to.

If you told a person from birth not to color with a green crayon, they'd crap themselves the first time they got to do it. It's that simple.

And the fact of the matter is, law doesn't follow morality exactly, and that's a litote. Law shadows the values of those in power, and those in power are all adults. It's fine to legislate to children, but the `nobody can tell me what to do` attitude of adults stops legislation from being levied against themselves.


RE: Couple of thoughts...
By JohofNovi on 6/21/2007 7:55:07 AM , Rating: 2
I humbly submit that we do not use pliers to castrate people in Detroit. Most castrations in Detroit are performed using surgical scissors and the occasional 9MM handgun.


RE: Couple of thoughts...
By PWNettle on 6/21/2007 3:56:11 PM , Rating: 2
I don't find games like GTA or one like this to be entertaining. I find it kind of disturbing that so many people DO enjoy these types of games.

However, I don't think any agency has any business thinking for me or for anyone else. I don't need some agency to decide what is "adult" and if I were to spawn some children I wouldn't need some uptight pinheads to help me decide what's best for them.

In my opinion, people who want to rate this or that and tell you want you should watch/do/think are even sicker in the head than the wannabe gangstas that enjoy games like GTA.

Kinda sad that a video game would get banned in a supposedly civilized country like England. I guess the English are a bunch of sheep? Does someone from the government hold your hand while you pee too? Frick.


All this hype
By viperpa on 6/20/2007 11:30:16 AM , Rating: 2
All this hype about the game, I definately have to buy it. :D

Banning the game outright is the wrong thing to do. It's telling right minded adults that they can't make right minded choices.




RE: All this hype
By Imaginer on 6/20/2007 12:20:39 PM , Rating: 2
Yes but you are forgetting that there are pleanty of people out there who make ignorant decisions as well. Society always, and I do mean always cater to the LOWEST common denominator.


RE: All this hype
By Scrogneugneu on 6/20/2007 9:51:39 PM , Rating: 2
Banning a game on the reason that most people can't make the right choice by themselves is horrible. It opens the way to the same logic everywhere.

We can't really let you decide on if we should or not participate in this war; you can't make the right choice.

We can't really let you decide if this law should pass; you can't make the right choice.

We can't really let you decide if this candidate should be prime minister; you can't make the right choice.

Either you let the people make their own choices, or you don't. Starting to go in between is very dangerous. Alright, maybe I'm a bit paranoid on this, yeah... but keep in mind I've seen V for Vendetta yesterday. Maybe I'm a little bit paranoid because of that. But then again, it being paranoid can avoid getting there, I'm happy to be it.


RE: All this hype
By Ringold on 6/21/2007 3:41:41 PM , Rating: 2
You're not being paranoid at all. History has nothing in it to suggest that the slippery slope you hint at, once made fully available by a string of events like banning content to protect "the ignorant people", the government wont continue to move down that path.

This really lights my Goldwater-style conservative fires, but I'll just say this is precisely why I believe in small government. Stick a warning label on it, make it available only to adults if so desired, but as long as consenting adults want to buy it there should be no restrictions on it and retailers shouldn't try to avoid stocking it just due to a content rating. If an adult or child thereby is so deranged that after playing this game he or she commits a crime then we must assume that all individuals are responsible for their own actions (they were warned, after all, of the content of the game) and, well, that's why our taxpayer dollars build jails.

To back up the point that government will go further down the path you outlined, just look at the amnesty bill. Congress' approval rating is or was lower than Bush's (good job! I wasn't aware that was possible!), and the majority of American's clearly dont support the amnesty bill, and yet politicians across Washington DC clearly consider the masses too ignorant to know what they like and dont like about immigrant so they've been plotting for weeks now how to horse-trade and implement arcane political maneuvers to make sure it becomes law regardless.

Where does it stop?


When I stab
By GlassHouse69 on 6/20/2007 6:49:49 PM , Rating: 2
When I stab with the Wii controller, I am going to be picturing the vast majority of daily tech forum members being bloodied.

This game is going to be hot.




RE: When I stab
By colonelclaw on 6/21/2007 6:53:21 AM , Rating: 2
i'm gonna start lobbying rock star to create an MMOG version!


RE: When I stab
By GlassHouse69 on 6/21/2007 1:48:13 PM , Rating: 2
this would be a great online game. I would want it to be much more graphic though, with like the ability to use feces, urine and other neato things on your oponents corpse.


censorship
By colonelclaw on 6/20/2007 1:00:40 PM , Rating: 2
i loathe any kind of censorship, and this really makes my blood boil. bloody new labour bullshit. i will do my absolute best to buy a copy of this game just to piss off the authorities here in the uk

...plus i've heard it's meant to be a great game




RE: censorship
By Oobu on 6/20/2007 4:08:44 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
i will do my absolute best to buy a copy of this game just to piss off the authorities here in the uk


They are going to be SOOOOO mad when you get your hands on a copy of that game man! SOOO MAD!


RE: censorship
By colonelclaw on 6/20/2007 5:12:37 PM , Rating: 2
heh, yeah, 99% of them will never have heard of it, of course. i can't imagine it will be exactly difficult to get hold of

actually, i have no idea if it will or won't be legal to own a copy in the uk. the bbfc have said the game has been refused a certificate, which, as far as i know, means you can't sell it here. i'm guessing no one's going to stop people ordering it in mail order from abroad


Absurd
By Treckin on 6/20/2007 4:37:14 PM , Rating: 2
Its angering and absurd that in western culture, sex is portrayed as FAR more negative than violence. What is more damaging? Learning with a motion sensing remote how to fire an automatic weapon at kids and police, or seeing a perfect pair on TV?
How fundamentalist Christian do we have to get before we see the fallacy there? Perhaps we should ban nudity further, making it illegal to have even CONSENSUAL sex... Or make thinking sexual thoughts a capitol offense.
In some countries, violence is banned on TV, while sex is in commercials. I'm not sponsoring censorship of wither one though. Its wrong all around.
If parents were better at instilling morals and values into their children, we wouldn't need the FCC and ESRB to raise our kids for us.

Is seeing breasts really that bad? Look at the violence on TV. You can show people getting their heads blown off, but GOD forbid you see a bare ass.... Absolutely absurd

And if they ever did have a sex based game on Wii, it would of course receive a new rating.... Like you have to be cleared by homeland security to buy it or some other bull shit.




RE: Absurd
By GlassHouse69 on 6/20/2007 8:46:06 PM , Rating: 1
im hoping youre not one of those parents that are supposed to instill morals. Sex is a personal thing perverted by people's satanic lust for self gratification and shameful, pathetic cowardess in terms of voyeuristic wants like a video gaming having pr0n in it. Killing is black and white. kill the bad, save the good. It might be twisted, it might be "perverse" in many ways or exploited and glorified which all are bad. Sexual exploitation, exposure, immorality, perversion effect the soul more bleakly and more permanently than simple violence can.


Nasty
By Supersonic3474 on 6/20/2007 2:46:18 PM , Rating: 2
I hate censorship but the simple fact you will be "acting out the motions" is kind of creepy. Next it will be a school knifing!




about time nintendo
By Vettesweetnos on 6/20/2007 5:15:12 PM , Rating: 2
My country tells us we are mature at 17 and adults at 18. Wow what a huge difference!




Fair rating
By Schugy on 6/21/2007 5:00:28 PM , Rating: 2
I think this rating is right. I don't care about sex in games as long as it isn't rape but killing motions with a wii controller really deserve an AO rating.

But hey, I've had to be 18 to buy TUXRACER !!!! in Germany because this imported child game doesn't have an USK rating.

But there are so many cases in which this ugly regime has gone mad.




'Ridiculous' swings both ways..
By XesBOX on 6/20/2007 5:07:43 PM , Rating: 1
On one hand I was expecting a number of flames, on another, I didn't expect the flames to be so ignorantly based.

The ESRB was created as a guideline, not a standard. It was intended to help consumers (more specifically those who don't actually play the games) make pseudo-educated decisions based on a tiny description on the back of the box. This tiny description is 98% of the time entirely ignored and over-looked by both the parents AND the merchant, so while two games may share the same rating, say.. GTA:SA and Halo 2.. anyone who plays these would argue their differences don't justify being in the same category. The problem is that we've been far too lenient all of these years, and game publishers are more concerned about the buck than the game, and have become accustomed to the ratings they've been seeing over the years. There's a lot of fault on the head of ESRB for not being more aggressive, but on the same token they've failed to provide ratings that can cover the wide array gaming today, especially as we're approaching more interactive entertainment which requires someone to actually make a decision about how the game progresses. We've also waived the responsibility of the people who sell these games -entirely-.

This is where you 'but it's not real' numb-nuts come in. You're right, it's less real than, say, real life. However, it IS simulated, and unlike the news or movies where the entertainment has zero interactivity, the psychological impacts change when the audience has to make a decision about their actions. This brings into weight all kinds of moral and ethical judgments, and while I don't personally think you should punish the whole class because one student is mentally unstable enough to go stab a 14 year old with a claw hammer [http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/07/29/uk.manh...] it certainly proves, if anything, that it CAN happen. In fact, these incidents should advocate parental involvement, and gamers should stand by their right to play (and enjoy playing) grossly violent/sexual material by holding parents accountable for the games they buy their children, and for the parents responsibility to gauage how their own children will react (read: if your kid is prone to violence, stay away from the games that involve choking someone to death with a plastic bag, mkay?) After all.. that's what this whole fucking fiasco is all about: the children.

I for one applaud the rating. I hope to see more AO games, because in all honesty, those are the ones I want to see. Why have an AO rating if everyone is afraid (or even shocked, according to the article) to have their title given such a rating? Especially Rockstar, who has been in the game pushing acceptable limits for a long time. And it should be the responsibility of the sane to put pressure on parents to pay more attention to what their kids are doing... or hell, encourage the use of birth control.




Where's my Wiimote????
By encryptkeeper on 6/20/2007 5:30:20 PM , Rating: 1
The CCFC gives examples of why Manhunt 2 deserves an adults rating: “In Manhunt 2, players can saw their enemies’ skulls in half; mutilate them with an axe; castrate them with a pair of pliers; and kill them by bashing their heads into an electrical box, where it is blown apart by a power surge. On Wii, players will not merely punch buttons or wield a joy stick, but will actually act out this violence.”

It's about fucking time we could do this.




Australia will probably ban it
By Ajax9000 on 6/20/2007 9:46:24 PM , Rating: 1
It'll be interesting to see what the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classifications do with this -- we don't have Adults Only ratings for video games (despite many calls for there to be one). Our system is a bit weird:

Films/video :
General
Parental Guidance (unsuitable for under 8's, but not mandatory)
M (15+ recommended, but not mandatory)
MA15+ (unsuitable for under 15's, but not mandatory)
R18+ (18+ ONLY)
X18+ (18+ ONLY) Basically hard core porn, nominally illegal in all states (but not territories -- go figure!) but widely available with occasional tokenistic police raids (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/02/15/11714053... ).

Literature (books/papers/magazines/etc):
Unrestricted
R1 (18+ ONLY) Basically soft core porn, but also violent content (e.g. American Psycho)
R2 (18+ ONLY) Basically hard core porn, legal in all states and territories (but not conservative Queensland).

Video games :
General
Parental Guidance (unsuitable for under 8's, but not mandatory)
M (15+ recommended, but not mandatory)
MA15+ (unsuitable for under 15's, but not mandatory)
Note that there are no R or X classes -- this continues to be a problem.

Despite the oddities in the system, I think the MA15+/R18+ split is a damn sight more sensible than the NC17/AO split in the US.

Re Manhunt 2
Personally (and assuming the descriptions of the content are accurate) I have no problems with it being Adults Only ... but I'm not really heartbroken with it being banned either.

I'll admit that I'm sensitised a bit -- my wife, one of our friends, and I were supposed to go to Port Arthur on 28 April 1996, the day Martin Bryant murdered 35 people in the worlds worst lone gunman massacre. We had a party the night before and got up late ... there for the grace of god go we . Moreover my wife worked for the prosecution department and saw some of the thousands of crime scene photos of the murders. BTW, don't give me any of the cover-up/conspiracy bullshit.




Morality Police. Banning fun for your own good.
By psychobriggsy on 6/20/07, Rating: -1
By PitViper007 on 6/20/2007 11:00:14 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Has there been one case where a perfectly normal person has been twisted by playing computer games into committing crime?


I don't think that is the point at all. Let's look at this from the perspective of a movie. Given the graphic violence that this game has, a movie of the same type would be rated "R". Then add in the interactiveness of it being a game plus the additional interactivity due to the Wiimote, I think that the "AO" rating is warranted.

PitViper


By drakanious on 6/20/2007 11:08:27 AM , Rating: 2
What about the Playstation/Xbox versions? In your opinion, they should get an 'M' rating because there's no Wiimote?


By PitViper007 on 6/20/2007 12:03:36 PM , Rating: 2
Not necessarily, I just pointed out that the Wiimote adds an additional amount of interactivity which contributes more to the "AO" rating.

PitViper


RE: Morality Police. Banning fun for your own good.
By Dharl on 6/20/2007 12:09:27 PM , Rating: 3
Yes. Sad to say, but I'm going to agree with this article here. Not for said "violence", of which is quite graphic, but for the interactive features of the Wii.

The Playstation and Xbox versions should only receive an M rating because you do not act out the part of killing others. It's funny though, the Wii doesn't really allow you to act out an actual killing. It only allows you to mimic certain movements IE: Zelda Twilight Princess, attacking with sword, blocking with shield. Yet it's not so interactive that you're actually doing it. At most your flicking your wrist or pressing a button while holding a remote in a certain direction. Regardless of this, the player is still acting out the part of someone killing another interactivly. I distinctfully remember people begging to be able to act as if they are choking someone to death using the Wii Remote and Nunchuk. That is an example of the mindset and desires here to interactivly kill. It's what they want to avoid with this AO rating.

Then you have the whole idea of how this is just a game. Yeah you aren't actually killing a human being here. Adults should be the only ones playing a game of this nature, or Adults who approve of this for their children. Because Adults can make more rational decisions based on how things are perceived.

Simple facts for you. Children cannot think abstractly. If you tell them there is a monster in a closet, then there IS a monster in the closet to them. Teenagers think and act more emotionally. They can think abstract thoughts, and balance out consequences, but emotions often take over their actions. Tell a teenager they can't do something and the first words out of their mouth will be "That's not fair!" That's not saying teenagers can't make rational decisions, they often do. However, adults are the only ones who can consistantly make rational decision.

This game should not be banned outright, that's wrong. This is someone's work. Just like a movie. You don't have to agree with the content on any level, but it still needs to be released. That's freedom for you.

As for the comment on older "violent" cartoons. #1 there was no rating system when they were first produced. #2 There is a HUGE difference between blood, guts, gore, and murder, than Tom & Jerry chasing after one another. If they pulled an Itchy & Scrathy show moment, then they'd deserve a more mature rating.


By EndPCNoise on 6/20/2007 12:57:00 PM , Rating: 2
Congratulations Wii!

Sarcasm

You have just graduated from being a politically correct gaming machine for families with young children and old folks to being able to play adult content with the big boys now.

So much for that sweet, innocent marking image now.


By EndPCNoise on 6/20/2007 12:58:52 PM , Rating: 2
typo sorry

marking --> marketing


RE: Morality Police. Banning fun for your own good.
By luhar49 on 6/20/2007 1:55:37 PM , Rating: 3
Well the game is not actually banned .
You just need to be an adult to buy it.
I am sure most adults wont have an issue here. If they desperately want to play this game, they can certainly get hold of it.

But if I was a parent, I would certainly not want my kids to play this game. This AO rating ensures that my kid wont be able to get hold of a copy easily. So good job ESRB with the AO rating.


By EndPCNoise on 6/20/2007 2:39:32 PM , Rating: 2
luhar49

"Well the game is not actually banned."

The game is actually banned in the UK. See the first sentence of this article.

"Immediately following the announcement that the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is disallowing the sale and distribution of Manhunt 2 in the UK"

However, if I were a parent, I would not allow my children to play this game either.

I do not support an all out ban like in the UK.


By FITCamaro on 6/20/2007 3:32:22 PM , Rating: 2
So you just wouldn't buy it for them. Mature is 17 and older. At that age if they haven't distinguished right from wrong you've already failed as a parent.

With the game only being able to be sold primarily by online stores that have no age verification, anyone can buy it. A kid can get his moms credit card and make the purchase himself. Or someone who's 16 with a bank account can buy it and lie about their age.


By psychobriggsy on 6/20/2007 11:20:01 AM , Rating: 1
I don't see Roadrunner cartoons, Tom and Jerry cartoons, or Popeye cartoons getting R ratings, even though they contain "graphic violence", and indeed set a really bad example - the maimed victim is still alive after the pain, so surely it's not that bad to emulate in real life?

If you are claiming that the Wii's graphics are totally realistic, that they're beyond the reality canyon, then you've got another thing coming.

This may be a murder simulator. It is not a murderer training tool in any form however.


By encryptkeeper on 6/20/2007 12:03:14 PM , Rating: 2
I do thoroughly enjoy that they want the game off the market.

Have they tried playing it yet?

I bet not...


RE: Morality Police. Banning fun for your own good.
By Dharl on 6/20/2007 3:20:12 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't they recently make a change in the way the ESRB functions. Something along the lines of they have to actually play through a game completely and viewing all possible content before rating it.

If I remember correctly this was a BIG issue before because the ESRB was only shown various clips of a game in order to give it a rating.

Dailytech even had an article on it...

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6108

And I'm not sure if this legislation went through yet. Heh, people argue some games like WoW can't be completed. Eh just let the ESRB play a game like that through with 10x xp gains to level 70. Give them God Mode for instances, and they could technically "complete" all content without the true experience.


By FITCamaro on 6/20/2007 4:11:12 PM , Rating: 2
Every MMO out there though says right on the box that "Game experience may change during online play". The ESRB rates an MMO based on what the game developers provide. What is said or happens in the game as the result of other players, the game developer isn't responsible for.


By Dharl on 6/20/2007 4:40:05 PM , Rating: 2
You're exactly right. My point was only for those who argue that the ESRB could not finish an MMO. They can still test all available content.


By PitViper007 on 6/20/2007 12:22:32 PM , Rating: 3
While I agree that those cartoons were violent in their way (and ones that I grew up on BTW) there is a difference between these cartoons that used animal surrogates (or in the case of cartoons such as Popeye, a reduced amount of violence compared to Roadrunner etc., re-watch them and see...) and an interactive game such as this. As you say, the graphics on the Wii aren't totally realistic, but they are at the point where they are "real enough". In the old cartoons, you did see the blood and guts of a murder the way you do here, nor were they interactive.

Also remember that the rating system for games isn't enforced the way that movies are. They are more for parents to be able to judge what kind of content is in the game so they can make an informed decision on whether or not they want their kid playing said game. I certainly don't want MY kids playing this game.

On that note, I disagree with what the UK has done by totally banning the game. If an informed person of legal age wants to buy/play this game, they should be able to do so.

PitViper


By PitViper007 on 6/20/2007 12:27:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In the old cartoons, you did see the blood and guts of a murder the way you do here, nor were they interactive.


Should have been:

In the old cartoons, you didn't see the blood and guts of a murder the way you do here, nor were they interactive.

Reviewed my comments and still didn't catch that...hehe

PitViper


By Akazar on 6/20/2007 1:00:43 PM , Rating: 2
I once thought this rating system was unnecessary. Then my nephew began punching people right in the balls. And yes he learned that from a video game. And yes......he hurt me pretty bad. :-(

Now I think differently.


RE: Morality Police. Banning fun for your own good.
By spillai on 6/20/2007 12:30:13 PM , Rating: 4
It is not about developing Killing Attitude. It is the neutral attitude developed for such a Brutal Scene makes trouble for a normal person later.

Satheesh
www.knowledgevibes.com


RE: Morality Police. Banning fun for your own good.
By dubldwn on 6/20/2007 12:45:56 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, but how cool would force feedback be when you stab someone? Plus, with the wiimote, you could write your name in their blood. There are so many possibilities here.


By Spivonious on 6/20/2007 12:50:12 PM , Rating: 2
You are a sick individual.


By Spivonious on 6/20/2007 12:53:37 PM , Rating: 2
As an addition to my post above, if you are an adult, then you have the right to make the decision on your own. It may be kind of disturbing to others that you think stabbing someone and writing his name in blood is "cool", but it's your choice.

The AO rating is more an informative warning to parents considering buying this for their 13 year-old who "has to have it" than a censorship action.


By mindless1 on 6/21/2007 11:53:01 AM , Rating: 2
How cool is "not cool". If you are so sensory deprived then take a kitchen knife and stab your leg a few times to get as close to reality as possible. Otherwise, there should be no desirable effect to simulate what it would be like to stab someone.


RE: Morality Police. Banning fun for your own good.
By dubldwn on 6/21/2007 1:29:36 PM , Rating: 2
Or how about if instead of playing NFS I actually launch my car off the interchange onto the street below? Or how about if instead of playing Hitman I actually commit murder for hire?
Fantasy <---------> Reality
And what kind of lunatic would stab himself in the leg? That would hurt.


By Ajax9000 on 6/21/2007 9:33:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And what kind of lunatic would stab himself in the leg? That would hurt.


Plenty of people are into self harm (not that such numbers make it any more sensible ... ).

When I was in middle primary school, I noticed another student unwinding a bandage then slicing the existing wound with a razorblade (to prolong the "injury"), all so that he could get out of sports.

People do sick things to themselves ... and unfortunately some will do sick things to others with a nudge by alcohol/drugs/porn/etc.


By Hoser McMoose on 6/20/2007 12:32:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
How can they classify a work of art such as this game differently to a very similar work of art, for example Hostel, Saw, etc? Is it because it is a game?

How is this in ANY way different then how those movies are classified?!?!

Both Hostel movies and all 3 Saw movies were rated 'R' in the US. Actually the first Saw was rated NC-17 initially but was then re-edited to get it down to an 'R' rating. MPAA define this rating as "Under 17 requires accompanied parent or guardian", while NC-17 is listed as "No one 17 and under admitted".

Those two rating are virtually identical to the 'Mature' and 'Adults Only' rating on video games respectively. As with the original Saw, this game at least initially stepped across that line from the equivalent of an 'R' rating to an 'NC-17' rating, though like the movie it could be re-edited to get it back down.

Seems pretty darn consistent across the mediums if you ask me!


"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki