Manhunt 2 rejected in UK

This is a very bad precedent ... I think that the US system is pretty flawed, but the terms and verbage in the EU are much scarier ... they really do directly link to 'risk and harm'. They can get shipped to war to die, but can't play a video game due to the 'risk'?

Well this is pretty ridiculous. It's just a game... And in every game like this, lets say "The Punisher" I guess that there would be a possibility of somebody actually trying those things.

I'm going to be odd man out and say this is a good call. Well, let me rephrase that... given the quote, at least their reasons for the ban do make sense. It doesn't sound like a knee-jerk reaction. I'm not familiar with laws in Britain, mind you. But it doesn't sound like a Jack Thompson-esque situation, but rather a decision that was made after serious consideration and appraisal of the content.

"Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing. There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game."

Good. Now I want this game even more.

LOL

This is going to make everyone want the game now. It's actually marketing genius.

The problem I have with this game is that they seem to have gone after exactly this reaction. I played the first, and it was cool... until it all wore off, and I got a bit bored with it. The story was ok, but wasn't really anything more than a vehicle for gore. One could argue that the same is true of a lot of games and of course movies, but that doesn't exactly make it good or ok.
I don't agree with it being banned entirely, but somehow it doesn't feel like the blow to free-speech or expression that it "should". Instead it just feels like a group calling the company out on making a game based on nothing but catering to the homicidal fantasies of teenage boys.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that's bad exactly, or that there aren't times when this sort of game is lot of fun. I'm just saying that when they were designing this game, this is exactly the reaction they were hoping for. Hard to get behind a product that toes the line on purpose, then suddenly finds that it stepped over sections of it.

GRT, I actually agree with you.

Wasn't that rule of Rose game for ps2 not released in Europe as well for the same reason recently?

I don't see how it's any different from a film like "Hostel." Was that also denied a rating in the UK?

I hope I'm not the only one who finds this brand of digital snuff film disgusting. I have a stomach for death and destruction, but not serial killing thanks.

I agree with the message this sets a precident about serial killing as entertainment. This kind of game turns my stomach, and i think people who like this kind of thing are sickos. (I hope this doesn't trigger a "manhunt")

You people are crazy. It's an interactive horror film like 'Hostel' or 'Saw.' You may not like splatter films but they're just good, mindless entertainment. I literally wouldn't harm a fly (I prefer to open a window and let them go) much less a person but I find over-the-top gore in games and films fun and interesting.

Re "I hope I'm not the only one who finds this brand of digital snuff film disgusting. I have a stomach for death and destruction, but not serial killing thanks."

I have no interest, and have not played the first. But note - I have a choice and if I don't want to see that content or have it around my kids I can make that choice. Having the government do it? There is a word for that - censorship.

"It's an interactive horror film like 'Hostel' or 'Saw.'"

The big difference is that in those movies, you are supposed to identify and feel for the victims, not the killers. Manhunt tries to present it's player characters as anti-heros, but in the end you are playing the role of the one spilling the blood, not the victim, however it is justified by the story.
As a slight aside, it's sort of hard to argue against the idea that games and movies like these desensitize us to violence when the majority of people probably don't see that considerable difference.

There are plenty of examples in games, films and literature of the villain being the protagonist of the story - American Psycho, Pulp Fiction, Destroy All Humans, Reservoir Dogs, etc. Who the audience chooses to identify with or from which pieces of fiction they derive their personal moral code should be irrelevant.

"it's sort of hard to argue against the idea that games and movies like these desensitize us to violence when the majority of people probably don't see that considerable difference."

I don't understand this. Difference between what? Games and movies? Virtual- and real-life?

Re "I have a choice and if I don't want to see that content or have it around my kids I can make that choice."

Are you positive that you can keep that content from your kids? what about ten years from now when the boundaries of of gore keep being pushed? are you going to choose to not let them watch it then?

It may be useless to ban anything, and i feel censorship may treading on our rights, but serial killing is wrong isn't it?

"I don't understand this. Difference between what? Games and movies? Virtual- and real-life?"

The difference between hero-driven and villain-driven violence, and who the audience identifies with. I'm not trying to say that in movies, the protagonist is always the good guy, and always fighting against evil, or even that it should be that way; but that who we, as the people taking part in either playing or viewing, identify and sympathize with isn't usually the psychopathic killer.
Are you saying that in movies like American Psycho we should identify the most with the character of Bateman? Although he has moments that I think we can all see ourselves in, saying that one identifies with his character is certainly not a "healthy" thing, is it?
Movies like Hostel are also driven entirely by violence, much like Manhunt is. Which of the characters are we emotionally invested in? If you are feeling more for the man with the torch than the girl in the chair, I personally think you have issues. That movie is sick, twisted and satisfies the same baser part of our minds as Manhunt does, but it doesn't put you into the role of the killer. I personally think that is a key difference.

Again, I'm not saying censorship is the answer, but when you have a game like this where crossing that line is the whole point of the experience, it's hard for me to defend it based on artistic merit.

Txa has nailed it on the head.

I don't care how fancy the jargon and PR gets for British regulations. Fact remains that having a regulatory body usurp the individual rights and thus, responsibilities that come with such volition, is an entire load of shit for a notion.

Hell, it's just plain counter-productive!

People need to check and balance themselves; that's what parents are for, damn it!

Well, my stance:
"Fuck 'em; I'll import!"

Senseless stuff has no use? Then can we swipe the slate clean with present-world politics, borders, and bigotry? Seriously, if you're gonna' make issue out of so-called useless things, then start from the real issues!

"People need to check and balance themselves; that's what parents are for, damn it!"

Well, maybe if parents (and retailers) did a better job of this maybe we wouldn't have such a mess.

Kiss of Death my friends. ESRB gave it an AO rating. It will be interesting to see if Gamefly pulls it.

It was just announced on GameSpot.com that this game got an AO rating. (Adults Only) Since most American retailers refuse to sell AO rated games Rockstar and Take Two are pretty much screwed.

Sorry I think there needs to be limits. By most of the reasoning I see on this topic a game featuring child porn should be ok because we have the "right" to play anything. No there is no "right" to play everything that publishers put out. There are some themes and ideas that should not be available for mass consumption.

This was banned cos of the Wii version where your hands on the remote act out the killing actions which is an immersive step too far for current officials. This will end up released in the end.

How Retarded are the BBFC. do they actually think they will stop this game Hitting Britain by banning it. How hopeless.

People will just import it and some will even do it in bulk and sell on Ebay. lol that would really piss them off.

Lame Lame Lame BBFC

Does it occur to those comparing game violence to film violence that the major difference is that in a game the player is the protagonist doing the murdering/killing/torturing/maiming (obviously not all games). Often the game design gives you no option but to kill in order to progress, and in doing so makes it a rewarding, pleasurable and fun experience, Imagine that. It's 'just a game' right .
Ask yourself, what's rewarding, pleasurable and fun about the concious decision to murder/kill/torture/maim?
Does it not therefore follow, that there is a greater psychological impact on the player. I haven't seen the films, Hostel or Saw, just not my bag, but I assume there is some kind of ending where the killer is brought to some kind of justice? I think with most films, especially hollywood films, you can watch some disturbing material safe in the knowledge those commiting the crimes will get their just desserts. With a game the player is doing the killing thoughout the game, and it's the actual act of killing that is rewarded with the eventual win scenario. Surely even the most die hard gamers can see there is a difference? You're all intelligent people right?
Please lets not pretend that the 'virtual' experience of the act of killing, is on a par with the movie version of watching a killing.
Sure, they're just polygons and so on, BUT ... it's a CONCIOUS decision. You WANT to kill, you HAVE to kill in order to finish the game.

On the subject of censorship, if people could be trusted to protect children from damaging material then censorship would not exist. We have laws becuase a percentage of the population don't behave in a manner that is beneficial to society. We have censorship because a percntage of the population will allow there children to view material that they don't and can't unstand the context of.

I don't like the idea of being critical about a game I've never played, I have no basis for opinions until I've played it. Unfortunately the negativity surrounding this game has already put me off. Rockstar remind me of the school playground, the child that jumps up and down screaming until he gets the attention he thinks he deserves, and once he has that attention, he finds he has nothing to say, just stands there, blank, vacant and pathetic. Although there will always be those who are impressed by him.

Rant over.

Blah Blah Blah, David.

I don't care what your views are on mass consumption. You don't get to decide what I do with myself, just as I don't get to decide what you should do with your bloviations, eh? That's how it works.

SAW II had a good ending? Oh lawl! Now you don't wanna' step on that land-mine. This is getting way to subjective, and I'm convinced now that the neo-con movement could very well use its own swastika.

Please, do me a favour: Ban war! There's no sense of justice or balance in the world - your kids grow up attempting to comprehend that very world. Some of the biggest examples of mass chaos, bloodshed, and violence are politically motivated rather than media bred.

Corporate Whore and David - I laugh at your half-assed pseudo psychological analysis of this whole situation, and I'm sure Freud's probably rolling in his grave as we speak.

[Outrage Over]

"Well, maybe if parents (and retailers) did a better job of this maybe we wouldn't have such a mess." - mccomber

And with the current direction, that kind of responsibility isn't going to be evoked in the aforementioned parties.

"By most of the reasoning I see on this topic a game featuring child porn should be ok because we have the "right" to play anything." - David "The Douche"

Sure! I accept that blatant butchery of reason. So political and semantically dishonest of you - impressive.

Child Porn carries an entire miasma of implications - including abuse and misuse of a child's nature and will in the generation and use of content. For fuck's sake, you had to sink that low, didn't you? They don't ban child porn in order to discourage already screwed up mind-sets/offenders from their rather disturbing brand of desires.

This is more of a moral exercise to detract any heinous practice of disrespect and abuse against the humanbeing as an entity in its most innocent and fundamental state - child. You see, to make this sick porn you need a subject to abuse - the laws are set to protect that subject! To make Manhunt 2, you've got a lot of lifeless digital content doing nothing that's any more heinous than your entire war-mongering history. But of course, you already knew that - I refuse to accept that you're this naive.

Although I have to hand to people like you: Always ******* around with the sub-context of every debate to throw the actual crux of the argument off of its paradigm into something far more sickening and disturbing. And that is how nothing gets resolved, because before we even resolve the issue of a fuckin' videogame, its lifeless political-drones making us debate child porn!

Ladies and gents, this is why issues in this world do not get resolved - word play, by equally mendacious & malicious players.

kade storm, I laugh at you full stop.

To Kade Storm: Why are you resorting to name calling? You could just say "I disagree with your statement". But no thats to civilized so call me a name. You Undercut your obvious intelligence by such childish tactics.

What do you mean by "Your entire war mongering history" Do you live in a country that has never been in war? And why is it my history?

I merely supported the idea that the ESRB rating was fair and that some games should not be easy to obtain. There are standards that exist on Movies, Music, Pornography that retailers follow. Just because a game has an AO rating it is not censorship.

I do apologize if my example upset you.

"kade storm, I laugh at you full stop." - Corporate Whore

Feeling's mutual, boy. Now go back to your little verbal chemistry lab and create another fallacy. Perhaps a review of American Psycho and it's so-called 'happy', morally vindicated ending. *Laughs hysterically*

Oh, and just a little something else:
"What do you mean by "Your entire war mongering history" Do you live in a country that has never been in war? And why is it my history?" - David.

Uh, yeah, see, I speak of world in general. No exclusive countries etc. Sorry if it felt like a direct attack on you, but no - that's to all of us. Moral being driven home was that there's a lot of garbage that children do -not- get sheltered from, far more harmful than this game.

But, that's not the point, David. You see, your comment from earlier on did upset me. You made it sound like we're anti-rating, which we're not (at least I didn't gather anything of the sort from this thread)! What I am against, is outright bans. I am not even too happy with AO, but at least it's a rating, and not a blunt ban (comes close enough, though). I was speaking in the context of this story - UK ban. I don't care about US status and at least AO doesn't make the purchase of this title an empirical impossibility.

it's not lke they're banning Tolkien or the anarchists cookbook or even history books - This game degrades the PSP.

View and Sign my Antiban Petition for Manhunt 2 here

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/manhunt2bannedinuk

Thanks

Kade storm, your masturbatory word play is unfortunately littered with aggression, which dismisses your opinions as valid debate. If you find it in yourself to discuss the matter in a mature manner you may find you garner a more reasonable response. Until then, it might be best for you return to the playground. Oh ... see what I did there ...

For the record, I have no problem with the creation of material aimed at adults, but surely there have to be limits? We have enough de-sensitising material thrown at us on a daily basis from News broadcasts. We have to be able to look beyond your own selfish needs and desires. Society as a whole needs a degree of protection from elements that would corrupt it for it's own ends. The bigger picture?

I'm not for banning. I do however understand the need for regulation, when self regulation is abused.

If you choose to break the speed limit, don't whine about it when you get a ticket.

Anyway I've already wasted too much time considering your opinions. It's a shame, you appear to be an intelligent individual with something to say. You just don't say it in a very mature manner.

"Kade storm, your masturbatory word play is unfortunately littered with aggression, which dismisses your opinions as valid debate. If you find it in yourself to discuss the matter in a mature manner you may find you garner a more reasonable response. Until then, it might be best for you return to the playground. Oh ... see what I did there ..."
- Corporate Whore

Three prongs:
- Invalidity of the debate within my literature: Your opinion, and not fact. From where I stand the points are just as valid, vitriolic--partially uncompromising--but valid.

- Maturity. Relative, subjective - open to various forums of interpretation, especially when it comes to a subject where obfuscation is so shamelessly used, and I don't only speak of this very argument in this PSPfanboy blog.

- "Return to playground." - quote. Thank you for defeating your own moral higherground vis-a-vis maturity in this argument. Enjoy the fall from your pedestal, good sir. By the way, now that's an ample/valid example of 'immaturity'. Note: The only concrete evidence of immaturity exuded on my part, is something to which I plead guilty: Name calling against David.

[Now to deal with your real points.]

"I'm not for banning. I do however understand the need for regulation, when self regulation is abused." - Corporate Whore.

- Who isn't for ratings and regulation? That's the whole point made by certain members, and implicitly supported by others. Limits have to be drawn - ratings and regulatory bodies have to be put in place to mark those limits. But, then the responsible parties have to take action in accordance to said limits: Parents et retailers. Is this point still not coming across, because it certainly has been the bone of contention from post one.

"If you choose to break the speed limit, don't whine about it when you get a ticket." - Corporate Whore

- Irrelevant, and quite contradictory to the spirit of the whole, "individual responsibility philosophy", anyway. Are you trying to argue against me, or for me? Perhaps you're confusing this with another thread of arguments?

"Anyway I've already wasted too much time considering your opinions. It's a shame, you appear to be an intelligent individual with something to say. You just don't say it in a very mature manner." - Corporate Whore

- Why thank you. I wasn't exactly looking to market to your demographic, but at least something got through. Not really, but I got a backhanded compliment. Although I must add by saying that crass bluntness against frivoulous semantic butchery isn't exactly part of the 'immaturity' genre. But then again, immaturity has become a cornerstone cliche-excuse of the 21st century, so I see no point in addressing this ignorance. If this excuse makes you feel better/happy/content/whatever - I'm good with the notion. Not my problem, as I can acknowledge where I've been immature (towards David) and where I've been straight blunt (towards you).

Later.

"it's not lke they're banning Tolkien or the anarchists cookbook or even history books - This game degrades the PSP." - Jarret Kramer

You know, I wasn't even that drawn to the game. But now I'm just gonna' import for the kicks, until and unless that's somehow made illegal. It's more a matter of principle; give it a harsh rating, but let it out.

I personally think it was a good idea to ban the game, at least that way, anyone who really wants it will have to buy it off the internet etc, and they will be adults, although maybe the US system of major retailers not stocking the game is a better idea that an outright ban. This will stop a lot of people playing the game that shouldnt and cant in a resposible manner. How many kids do you know that play 18+ games, lots, which is why banning it will stop a large majority playing it. Don't we have a a big enough gun crime and knife crime problem in the UK as it is, without a game like this coming into childrens hands.
I played the original Mnahunt and to be honest it got very boring and repetetive, so i never finished it. I dont know if Mnahunt 2 will be much better.