By now everybody in the world has probably heard about the Manhunt 2 ban. The BBFC has refused to rate it in the UK and the game's been given an Adults Only rating in the US, meaning Sony and Nintendo won't go anywhere near it.
Of its decision the BBFC said, "Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing." Basically you don't do anything apart from killing people all the time.
Rockstar then came back with, "Manhunt 2 is an entertainment experience for fans of psychological thrillers and horror. The subject matter of this game is in line with other mainstream entertainment choices for adult consumers."
The BBFC has given Rockstar six weeks to appeal against the decision. Rockstar has yet to publicly say if it will go ahead and appeal or sit back and accept the BBFC's decision.
A source who wished to remain anonymous told CVG that the firm will indeed appeal against the decision and that the company believes the game could be released in around six weeks' time. Whether this means in its current form, or a toned down, edited version is unclear.
When contacted a Rockstar spokesperson simply told us that the company "is considering all its options". We're sure we'll be hearing more on the ban in the weeks to come.
Check in over the weekend for our Manhunt 2 feature, which also includes detailed hands-on impressions of the Wii version.
I doubt it will ever see the light of day now, its been in the Sun that a man was campaigning to get the first one banned as his son was killed a by another boy who was obsessed with the first game!
I doubt it will ever see the light of day now, its been in the Sun that a man was campaigning to get the first one banned as his son was killed a by another boy who was obsessed with the first game!
Was that the same case where they found out he had a copy of the game and then just assumed it was because he must have been obsessed with it.
I thought they decided it was nothing to do with Manhunt in the end?
As the saying goes: there is no such thing as bad publicity. Rockstar should (and probably will) do whatever it takes to release this game. Even if that means lowering the tone of the violence in order to get the BBFC classification.
From a business point of view, it will have no doubt cost hundreds of thousands (it not millions) to develop this game and they cannot afford to just write it off.
I've heard all sorts of wild stories about the content of the game. Everything from castration to rape, to corpse humping....surely this is all just wild speculation and doesn't actually happen in the game?
If any game did feature rape as a game play tool I'd want it to be banned, but I can't believe for a second that even Rockstar would have the ability to rape a woman in one of their games.
I've heard all sorts of wild stories about the content of the game. Everything from castration to rape, to corpse humping....surely this is all just wild speculation and doesn't actually happen in the game?
If any game did feature rape as a game play tool I'd want it to be banned, but I can't believe for a second that even Rockstar would have the ability to rape a woman in one of their games.
Don't give Rockstar any ideas. They just might try to create it and then give their 'freedom of expression' excuse.
Come on everyone! Think positive, think good thoughts! All the stuff about people killing other people because of the game is garbage. Games dont kill people, mental people kill people. How many of you guys actually want the game out?
Come on everyone! Think positive, think good thoughts! All the stuff about people killing other people because of the game is garbage. Games dont kill people, [i]mental people kill people. How many of you guys actually want the game out?uh huh, Ive seen your signiture.
Come on everyone! Think positive, think good thoughts! All the stuff about people killing other people because of the game is garbage. Games dont kill people, mental people kill people. How many of you guys actually want the game out?
uh huh, Ive seen your signiture.
Hey man. My signature is from last weeks episode of the simpsons. Whats wrong with that?
I doubt it will ever see the light of day now, its been in the Sun that a man was campaigning to get the first one banned as his son was killed a by another boy who was obsessed with the first game!
The Sun quoted as a reputable source
Yes there was a murder and it was claimed that the killer was obsessed by Manhunt, which led him to kill... but the police reported that there was no weight to this allegation, saying the motive was much more likely robbery. Given the trauma for the victim's parents I can understand to a point why they're trying to find something to blame for such a senseless killing... but there really is no proven connection.
Still, I have to say that given the controversy surrounding the game I think it was in fairly bad taste for Rockstar to release a sequel. But the controversy was always going to guarantee plenty of publicity, and they're obviously far more interested in profit than considerations of good taste... so I for one am fairly happy with the BBFC decision. They got what they deserved.
Even if they succeed and get the BBFC to give it a rating it will end up getting the same rating it got in the US.
And we already know where Nintendo and Sony stand on that issue.
I say it serves them right, every single game they make, they try to create some sort of commotion, so that the publicity can net them so many extra copies... so this was bound to happen in time.
And I hope they shut up with this talk of art and adult games, Manhunt is and never has been either.
Even if they succeed and get the BBFC to give it a rating it will end up getting the same rating it got in the US.
And we already know where Nintendo and Sony stand on that issue.
The 'equivalent' in the uk is an 18 rating. Which is pretty much the equivalent of a Mature rating. If you're talking about the R18 rating, then that only applies to sexual content (read: porn). Since Manhunt 2 is not pornography, then the only rating it can get is most likely an 18 rating. Which I'm pretty sure is fair game for both Nintendo and Sony.
I say it serves them right, every single game they make, they try to create some sort of commotion, so that the publicity can net them so many extra copies... so this was bound to happen in time.
And I hope they shut up with this talk of art and adult games, Manhunt is and never has been either.
And who's to say that this game isn't art? have you played it? I think not. The first game may have been a bit s**tty, but how can you say this game is as well? From the reviews I've seen, it's getting a pretty positive reception; the first proper gore flick of the video game medium. Can you say that all those horror movies that got banned originally weren't art?
What I'm most curious about is what their initiative for the US will be. They seem to know what they're doing for the UK, but how will they handle the US classifications board? I don't see how they'll budge from AO without some serious changes.
Even if they succeed and get the BBFC to give it a rating it will end up getting the same rating it got in the US.
And we already know where Nintendo and Sony stand on that issue.
The 'equivalent' in the uk is an 18 rating. Which is pretty much the equivalent of a Mature rating. If you're talking about the R18 rating, then that only applies to sexual content (read: porn). Since Manhunt 2 is not pornography, then the only rating it can get is most likely an 18 rating. Which I'm pretty sure is fair game for both Nintendo and Sony.
<snip>
Nope - the US system is a little more liberal to content than here in the UK so it's more sensible to equate the AO to R18 (and yes that means hardcore porn - which is why the games companies don't want to have anything to do with it) and Mature (i.e. 17+) to our 18.
But as you say - it's not likely that a game will be given an R18 certificate... the means to distribute it don't exist - I can't imagine it's the sort of thing they want being sold in sex shops...
It's also worth pointing out that the BBFC ratings only apply to boxed goods for sale in shops. That means that there is the potential for selling it on download services - at the moment that would presumably be limited to PC, 360 and I guess PS3. The Wii doesn't yet have the storage capacity to allow download over VC...
So all is not lost for the sick f**kers who want to play the game - I'm not one of them: it all looks rather tedious to me.
Was that the same case where they found out he had a copy of the game and then just assumed it was because he must have been obsessed with it.
I thought they decided it was nothing to do with Manhunt in the end?
It would be difficult to prove, and games always get attacked first. Perhaps the fact that the killer was a psycho was what attracted him to the game in the first place. There may be no actual connection whatsoever, but games like Manhunt do give the industry a bad rep. Personally, I don't see the point of the game, not cerebral enough for my tastes.
Another thing: did the killer have horror DVDs? I bet he did. Couldn't have been them, though. Had to be Manhunt. Maybe he played one of those Army games, the ones with the green characters, sadly (sarcasm) I forgot the name. But those would drive anyone to murder.
I'd e suprised if they actually manage to successfully appeal this... But ya never know.
I do wish people would stop jumping no the "Violent games turn people into muderers" bandwagon. Back over 100 years ago there was a bloke running around called Jack The Ripper, who was responsible for killing prostitutes... But there were no computer games.
And what about Dr. Shipman? He's been described as the worlds most prolific serial killer, but I'm pretty shure he wasn't the kinda bloke to sit at home playing Manhunt, GTA 3 or any other video game that's been classed as violent.
It actually turned out the boy who was killed had the game and his parents bought him it. The killer did not own the game.
Maybe what rockstar should very quickly do is implement more stealth elements and other ways of dealing with npcs, like in hitman where you can just knock em out or splinter cell and just avoid them. As this would do away with the idea that you have to kill everyone and the player would have the option to avoid confrontations if you so desire. Thus making the game less of a snuff affair.
i have an idea.go to tesco get a few plastic bags,then go B&Q and buy a hammer, chainsaw and a pair of pliers.then go to the bbfc office and stalk all the employees.then you know what to do.
The 'equivalent' in the uk is an 18 rating. Which is pretty much the equivalent of a Mature rating. If you're talking about the R18 rating, then that only applies to sexual content (read: porn). Since Manhunt 2 is not pornography, then the only rating it can get is most likely an 18 rating. Which I'm pretty sure is fair game for both Nintendo and Sony.
OK, I didn't know R18 was only used for sexual content (since when did sex become worse than voilence anyway???).
But fact remains that Sony and Nintendo has said taht they won't touch the game in the US (and I belive half the reason is not the rating but probably the bad publicity that would come with it).
Now what would you expect would happen if Sony and Nintendo said OK to the same game in the UK but not for the US???
And who's to say that this game isn't art? have you played it? I think not. The first game may have been a bit s**tty, but how can you say this game is as well?
Oh please, we both know this game isn't art and never will be, no matter how many sequels it gets...
You can argue the point as much as you want and point out that I havent played it, but the fact remains this is just more of the same as the first one, with a couple of gameplay changes.
It seems to me your arguing the point for the sake of it, and not because you belive in what you argue.
From the reviews I've seen, it's getting a pretty positive reception; the first proper gore flick of the video game medium.
The first one also got good reviews, what is your point? I never said the game played badly in terms of a game, I said it isn't art or adult in any meaningful manner of the term.
Can you say that all those horror movies that got banned originally weren't art?
Why is it that whenever ratings comes into play, we draw comparisons to movies?? We expect games to be treated with the same maturity as the film business. Yet when it comes to the content each media portrays, it shows a night and day difference...
Lets take war and sex as a subject matter in the two respective media forms, in movies these subjects can be used to provoking thought and emotion. Yet in games it is mostly used either as an excuse to provide a target or out an of proportion female with out of proportion clothing...
But just to answer your question, banned horror movies, eh... any specific titles? Because as a whole, hell no, the majority of horror movies are not art in my opinion.
If your so positive games aren't an artistic medium, why don't you define your version of "art" then you patronising c**t...
people really f**king wind me up sometimes
I love this post, your arguing against the censorship and banning of adult materials... yet you take the time to censor two slightly rude words in your own post...
Edit: DarthMorbus is right... I thought you censored them yourself, because normally swear filters filter the whole word as opposed to just the middle letters.
I actually find this quite interesting as it's implying that your not alowed to swear on this forum, yet we are going to leave enough of the swear word in the post to allow people to understand what swear word you actually used...
Again a example of double standards when it comes to censorship in todays world
Anyway, I appologise and take back the above statement, although I still disagree with your use of name calling to argue your point of view
But to answer your question, I never once said no games could be considered art, I said the majority where not art... (please next time read my posts before taking the time to reply).
Games like Okami can easily be considered art in the graphical sence, and a game like either Ico or Shadow of the Colossus, and many japanese (FF) and even western (Deus Ex) role playing games portray a artisic and thought provoking storyline that touches on issues such as religion and politics.
Hope that defines my definition of art for you a bit better.
Games are just as expressive an art-form as sculpture or cinematography, its people like you that drag the medium down!
If you really belive that, than who am I to try to make you think otherwise, I'll respect your point of view...
But I don't feel the same way, I think the majority of games and games as a medium still have ways to go before attaining the same level of maturity as a art form compared to cinematography and more importantly literacy.
has anybody considered that Rockstar's games are actually a comment on society just as much as they are an influence on it.
I would agree with that to some degree about for example GTA and it's take on the subject on the radio station and so on...
But we are not talking about Rockstar's games as a whole, we're taking about Manhunt and only Manhunt.
It actually turned out the boy who was killed had the game and his parents bought him it. The killer did not own the game.
Maybe what rockstar should very quickly do is implement more stealth elements and other ways of dealing with npcs, like in hitman where you can just knock em out or splinter cell and just avoid them. As this would do away with the idea that you have to kill everyone and the player would have the option to avoid confrontations if you so desire. Thus making the game less of a snuff affair.
Yup I was going to point that out, it was the victim who owned the game so unless the killer was killing him in a bid to rob him of his copy of Man Hunt then the game is in no way guilty.
I totally agree with your second point also, it would give the game a less seedy snuff movie feel, and would be more likely to see the light of day.
Is it just me or is this another example of sensationalist headlines? Considering all CVG has to go on is an unnamed source, surely the title should be:
Rockstar "will appeal decision"
? Nevertheless, I hope they appeal, and successfully.
Is it just me or is this another example of sensationalist headlines? Considering all CVG has to go on is an unnamed source, surely the title should be:
Rockstar "will appeal decision"
? Nevertheless, I hope they appeal, and successfully.
By the sounds of it, it's a very reliable source. Probably someone at the company, who wishes to remain anonymous. I'd say it's pretty much a dead cert that they'll appeal.
I hope they do appeal, and I hope they win. And not because I want to play the game (I do, but that's besides the point), but because a parallel should be drawn between video games and cinema. Why is it that horrifically gory films like Hostel, Saw, Texas Chainsaw Massacre etc etc etc are more acceptable than this, when they portray the violence in a MUCH more realistic way? It is ludicrous to ban one medium and not another.
And blaming video game violence for real life violence is a farce. If someone is influenced to that degree by a GAME, then they have some serious mental issues to contend with anyway. First movies, and now it seems games were and are used as scapegoats for the sick society we live in. How many games or movies have people seen where a plane is hijacked and flown into a building, or a bomb is strapped worn and detonated in an underground train? Precisely none. People are FAR more sick and twisted than movies and video games.
We don't want to live in a nanny state - let us decide what we do or do not expose ourselves to.
this all brings back memories of the bbfc trying to flex their muscles like they did in the '80's , I remember they banned stuff then like , shogun assassin, driller killer,and countless others which they eventually gave a cert 18 to not so long ago because they reckoned that the movies content back then is more acceptable for the public to view nowdays because people are more enlightened or whatever. but I played the first manhunt and brought it back within a day because it was s**te, and not because it was too violent. it's funny though that there is such a buzz about this game, even though it will probably be as s**te as its predecessor... and don't discount the idea that all this buzz could have been a marketing ploy by rockstar themselves, leaking information about content just to create this whole situation, because there is no such thing as bad publicity.whatever the outcome, it won't change anyting, people will just buy a different game if it doesn't get a release..I won't be losing any sleep over it anyway
If your so positive games aren't an artistic medium, why don't you define your version of "art" then you patronising c**t...
people really f**king wind me up sometimes
I love this post, your arguing against the censorship and banning of adult materials... yet you take the time to censor two slightly rude words in your own post...
Edit: DarthMorbus is right... I thought you censored them yourself, because normally swear filters filter the whole word as opposed to just the middle letters.
I actually find this quite interesting as it's implying that your not alowed to swear on this forum, yet we are going to leave enough of the swear word in the post to allow people to understand what swear word you actually used...
Again a example of double standards when it comes to censorship in todays world
Anyway, I appologise and take back the above statement, although I still disagree with your use of name calling to argue your point of view
But to answer your question, I never once said no games could be considered art, I said the majority where not art... (please next time read my posts before taking the time to reply).
Games like Okami can easily be considered art in the graphical sence, and a game like either Ico or Shadow of the Colossus, and many japanese (FF) and even western (Deus Ex) role playing games portray a artisic and thought provoking storyline that touches on issues such as religion and politics.
Hope that defines my definition of art for you a bit better.
Games are just as expressive an art-form as sculpture or cinematography, its people like you that drag the medium down!
If you really belive that, than who am I to try to make you think otherwise, I'll respect your point of view...
But I don't feel the same way, I think the majority of games and games as a medium still have ways to go before attaining the same level of maturity as a art form compared to cinematography and more importantly literacy.
has anybody considered that Rockstar's games are actually a comment on society just as much as they are an influence on it.
I would agree with that to some degree about for example GTA and it's take on the subject on the radio station and so on...
But we are not talking about Rockstar's games as a whole, we're taking about Manhunt and only Manhunt.
Wow you should be a politician, the amount of waffle that comes out of your mouth! One question for you though, why are video games any different from movies when it comes to ratings? I know the BBFC argue that games are interactive so in a way they can say its 'you' acting out the killings etc but movie images are far more effective and realistic I know I for one would be more shocked by a movie scene of intense violence then any video game, video games are far more easier to distance from real life then movies are. Baring this in mind why are films like Hostel or Saw for example allowed through even though they are both very graphic and violent?
Wow you should be a politician, the amount of waffle that comes out of your mouth! One question for you though, why are video games any different from movies when it comes to ratings? I know the BBFC argue that games are interactive so in a way they can say its 'you' acting out the killings etc but movie images are far more effective and realistic I know I for one would be more shocked by a movie scene of intense violence then any video game, video games are far more easier to distance from real life then movies are. Baring this in mind why are films like Hostel or Saw for example allowed through even though they are both very graphic and violent?
Yawn... These uninformed comments are becoming rather dull. In actual fact the BBFC recognise that games are less likely to be interpreted as 'real' than film, and this has nothing to do with the realism of the visuals but the interactive nature of the game which reinforces the fact that "it's only a game".
I suspect the real problem here is that they also recognise that many parents don't take game ratings seriously, whilst they do so for film... So they won't let little Jonny watch Hostel, but they'll happily buy him a copy of GTA.
So the BBFC have to balance these two issues when making a decision. Do the risks of the game getting into the hands of young children outweigh the right for mature gamers to play it?
Sure in an ideal world where game ratings were respected then people might have a right to slag off the BBFC, but in the present situation I think they made the right decision. Probably in 10-20 years when most parents will have grown up with gaming and have a better understanding of gaming's potential, and types of content, this sort of thing won't be an issue... though of course in that time gaming may have changed beyond recognition.
This game should never be released. The fact that you are controlling the actions of a vicious killer makes all the difference. I know games have let you do this before, but never to the same sick degree as this. At least I can rest easy knowing that some wayward individual won't try and stick a carrier bag over my head, trying to imitate his hero!
Why is is that the government has now chosen Videogames as their latest target?
If somebody wants to go outside and kill people in horrible ways, then it isn't the games they play that needs to be addressed, but rather the psychological state of that person. In some cases, they should also take a look at the parents and find out why their child has a desire to mutilate people.
Viedogames may well invent new forms of murder but that is half the fun of playing those games. Most sane people know that if we were to walk out into the street and threaten, stab, shoot, or assault someone, the Police would be after us because ITS ILLEGAL! We would not respawn at a hospital somewhere, we will not avoid the police by driving around the block a few times. The fun comes from being able to do something that you would never dream of in the real world.
If you play Medal of Honour or Call of Duty, do you want to join the army? If you play need for speed or Burnout, do you want to race your car at 100mph down the wrong side of a road? The probable answer is no. So why blame violent games for violent actions? The answer is because it's easier than spending time and money on getting to the real cause of the problem.
I find it all very odd considering that the certificates put on games are not legally enforced as is with films. Sure GAME or HMV may not sell them to younger gamers but that is by the retailers choice. How can they justify banning a game when the rating system on games isn't legally binding in the first place?!
Why is is that the government has now chosen Videogames as their latest target?
<snip>
FFS! When did the BBFC become part of the government? And at what point did they say the game was going to make people go out and kill?
As for ratings not being legally enforced? What planet are you on? If something has a BBFC rating slapped on it then it's no different to film - there's a legal requirement not to sell it to people under that age... there's nothing voluntary about it!
The irony here is that people are accusing the BBFC of making an uninformed, knee-jerk decision (which IMHO they have not), and then responding with totally uninformed, knee-jerk rantings.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
What planet are you on? If something has a BBFC rating slapped on it then it's no different to film - there's a legal requirement not to sell it to people under that age... there's nothing voluntary about it!
