Rockstar pleads for help

Controversial publisher Rockstar is asking for the industry's support in its battle to revoke the BBFC's 'no rating because it's revolting' decision on Manhunt 2. In an interview with Develop, Rockstar Leeds chief Gordon Hall, said:

"But if you look at a film like Man Bites Dog, it makes Manhunt look tame in comparison, but that film can be bought by anyone aged 18... We need to teach people that games are an art form - they are more artistic than film. I think the games industry should rally behind us, because there will come a time when we'll all have an idea that's a little edgy, and we need to have the freedoms to express it.

"We are an adult entertainment industry - we may have started out with child-like technology making games solely for a younger audience, but it's just not like that anymore. It might take legislature a little while to catch up, but if the industry sticks together hopefully we can change people's attitudes quicker."

View: Full story
News source: Guardian Unlimited

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

AVG Free Edition 7.5.484a1100

Next Story

CCleaner 2.00.475 Beta

39 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The only way to circumvent under 18's playing IMO is to enforce harsh fines or similar. Jail, while sounding ridiculous, would make people think twice.

Rockstar is full of crap... they can sell the game if they want, no one is saying they can't sell the game. What they are really worried about is that without a kid-friendly rating, they won't sell as many copies. It's all about money and nothing about "artform". If they are strapped for cash, then they should stop doing stupid things like delaying Grand Theft Auto 4.

So we can watch Cary Elwes cut his leg off in Saw, but we can't see polygons **** in GTA.

We can also watch a woman cut in her way through hundreds, if not thousands of people just for revenge in Kill Bill, but we just can't deal with crowbaring someone in the head in Manhunt.

We can go to war for our country at the age of 18 but we can't drink until age 21. We can buy condoms at any age, but we can't have sex until 18. But if we see some titties and smoking in Leisure Suit Larry, it's a god damn tragedy.

Case closed, allow all video games of all ratings be sold at video game stores. I don't care how much violence, sex or drugs are in it, these things are part of our damn species. You don't see threatres, although some do but that is very few, refusing to show films just because it has a R rating. Nor do you see those macabre pieces of the dead human body artwork being restricted. And if you really want to see some unrestricted ****, just turn on your news and hope they're covering the Iraq War.

As for the whole "Children may watch it" problem. **** the children, I was not scarred by watching violent films when I grew up, hell I'm actually scared of doing harm to people or things, or causing bodily harm to others. Neither am I a sex crazed maniac running around ****ing everything on site. I don't smoke or drink either, or take drugs. Why though? Because I had good parenting. The people don't want the government invading into their marriage (gays) and bedroom (that sodomy law in Texas) but they(the people) oh so do want the government to take control of how you and myself parent our children, and this is because of a huge majority in this country which has the government in a vice grip of which I cannot say their name because that would be going off topic and I digress.

We are so ass backwards it's not even funny.

"I was not scarred by watching violent films when I grew up" and "... I had good parenting."

so your parents let you watch violent films when you were growing up and now you're whining about not being allowed to play a video game that is so sick it has not got past the censors, sounds like real role model stuff to me...

bobbba said,
"I was not scarred by watching violent films when I grew up" and "... I had good parenting."

so your parents let you watch violent films when you were growing up and now you're whining about not being allowed to play a video game that is so sick it has not got past the censors, sounds like real role model stuff to me...

I did not say I would be personally playing Manhunt, in fact I wouldn't buy the game at all. I just believe in freedom of choice for others. And I am opposed to government censorship.

I wanted to play this game so bad, stuff christians.. people like that who wanna ban it, just like DOOM.. they scared of HELL, o yeah it's all fake. WOW they take it all bad. get a life and don't let some bible ruin your life, live it like you should.

+1 For Rockstar. Tho I do see the fine point between, having horrific violence shown to you and you interacting to create the horrific violence, but I do think aslong as the majority of the adult population can recgonise that and indeed take on the notion that this is just a game and in no way a reflection of how you should or could go out and commit brutal acts against fellow human beings then we shouldnt really have any problems on our hands.

Aslong as you can recognise the fine line between reality and simulated violence then thats ok

Console gaming is for kids. At least that's what the AO rating console death-sentence and the console makers' refusal to license AO rated games tells us.

man, we should petition, wtf ... we need games like manhunt, gta, halo, and darkness ...

politics has gone too far and with out us (game players, tax payers and youth) this world would cease to exist

i say ... let games be games and life be life ... politics is for stupid people, publish the damn game .. i wanna play ..

oh and i like syringes


and also if you don't like it don't buy it, go live in the woods or something ... is not like anyone is forcing you to buy the damn game so u can become a psycho, no, hell no ... so you like you buy, don't like don't buy, you break you buy, simple ain't it

I don't know about over in the Uk, but in the US at 18 you can join the army, get a gun, in real life kill someone, in real life lose a limb or your life, and be sent to iraq and see explosions and death all the time. It doesn;t get any more real or interactive than that! So if you're telling me at 18 one can't buy a video game cause it's "too interactive" that's BS!

I think someone should be telling you that both killing people in iraq and enjoying sick video games are morally wrong.

If you think violent video games and iraq are equivalents it's no bad that you are not out there. Maybe the soldiers at Abu Ghraib had a simlar view.

So I guess the question is, is there really a "line" that should not be crossed or is everything ok to be published? What is considered illegal in real word situations is ok in the gaming world. Where is the line on what is illegal in the gaming world?

I am all for free speech, but calling this "art" is a BIG reach. Yes, we as individuals should be allowed to make choices, however there should be restrictions on how those choices are made and how you make your selections. Plus some choices you make may have consequences, not saying buying this game does.

I've been looking around and I'm seeing some extremely violent content in games and movies recently. I DON'T think thats good for ones psychology.

They also say they're and adult oriented company, yet the main audience is kids. As a kid I would've said this is ok, but as a mature adult, it's down right scary.

That's where you're wrong. The main audience is not kids. In fact I'm almost positive that there are more gamers in teh 18-24 demographic than the <18 demographic. Videogames aren't a kids thing anymore. They're just as much for adults and believe it or not, adults are playing. You're a mature adult and that empowers you to make the decision whether or not you or any kids you may have (now or in the future) will play this game. And you seem like the person who would make the smart choice and not let said hypothetical kids play this game, as it's not for them.

What's scary is the fact that there are way too many idiot adults out there that will let their kid get this game if it hits shelves without knowing anything about it, and then they will go and blame the gaming industry for whatever may happen, when in fact it is their own fault.

-Spenser

stifler6478 said,
That's where you're wrong. The main audience is not kids. In fact I'm almost positive that there are more gamers in teh 18-24 demographic than the <18 demographic. Videogames aren't a kids thing anymore. They're just as much for adults and believe it or not, adults are playing. You're a mature adult and that empowers you to make the decision whether or not you or any kids you may have (now or in the future) will play this game. And you seem like the person who would make the smart choice and not let said hypothetical kids play this game, as it's not for them.

What's scary is the fact that there are way too many idiot adults out there that will let their kid get this game if it hits shelves without knowing anything about it, and then they will go and blame the gaming industry for whatever may happen, when in fact it is their own fault.

-Spenser

thats why i need to educate my uncle on what games he should buy for his son.. but he just doesn't understand it.. ESRB ratings are good.. but i think they need to advertise themselves a lot more than they are.. 40 year old can tell you what R stands for.. but can they tell you what AO means?

stifler6478 said,
That's where you're wrong.

-Spenser

No, I'm not. The main audience is kids, kids make up the majority who play M rated games. But yes I agree with placing blame on the parents. The stores are also at fault, I've seen them sell to kids.

Mike Frett said,

No, I'm not. The main audience is kids, kids make up the majority who play M rated games. But yes I agree with placing blame on the parents. The stores are also at fault, I've seen them sell to kids.

Eh, not around here.

Kushan said,

And what statistics are you using to make this bold claim?

None... lol.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/top_10_facts.php

"3. The average game player is 33 years old and has been playing games for 12 years."
..
"8. Thirty-eight percent of all game players are women. In fact, women over the age of 18 represent a significantly greater portion of the game-playing population (31%) than boys age 17 or younger (20%)."

Dale said,

thats why i need to educate my uncle on what games he should buy for his son.. but he just doesn't understand it.. ESRB ratings are good.. but i think they need to advertise themselves a lot more than they are.. 40 year old can tell you what R stands for.. but can they tell you what AO means?

umm Adults Only, if you can't work it out maybe you shouldn't be watching/playing

Thing is if games were actually sold with a bit more regulation it'd be different, but they are rarely monitored. I understand giving it a really hardcore rating but i do not see not selling it at all. I for one don't like manhunt but i could careless if people played it. Children should not have access to this game until the age of 18, but as we all know there are too many stupid parents who will buy it for their kids and if their kids do anything wrong they'll blame it on the game and rockstar for the things they've done.

It's a sad sad world we live in folks.

It's a game! it's a game for 18 and over! if your 18 and buy this game for u or someone you know, you should be responsible enough to know what's good for them. Preferable I wouldn't get it for my kids since their not old enough but I would def get it for me . Hence, being responsible. It's ridiculous how their trying to put restricitions on games.

Calling it a piece of art is a slight stretch I think...but I agree with letting us choose what we want to buy and what is 'too much'

And yes, we need more parental decisions when it comes to these games and younger kids

The problem with this series is that the first game received very bad press after a Manhunt-style murder was commited by a teenager on his "friend" in the UK.
Therefore, unless Rockstar drops the game series completely (or maybe changes the name) I can't see it being approved by the BBFC (or any other ratings body). Whether that is a right or wrong decision I am unsure, but I have no interest in this type of game...

However, I do wish Rockstar would bring us some more PSP games - currently (other than this game) there are NO new PSP games from Rockstar announced for release. Remember, there are 22.5 million PSPs worldwide (that's more than XBOX360 and WII combined) so Rockstar should try to bring us something better than Manhunt...

However it doesn't mean the PSP has more people actually "buying" games. in my experience 360 and Wii owers are more likely to buy more games than PSP owners. and that's without even counting hacked firmwares.

HawkMan said,
However it doesn't mean the PSP has more people actually "buying" games. in my experience 360 and Wii owers are more likely to buy more games than PSP owners. and that's without even counting hacked firmwares.

That's because the games that come out for the PSP suck. Hence, asking for more games, so they have something decent to buy.

is this game coming out to next gen systems? to my knowledge i thought it was a PS2 game. I think realism as far as graphics is concerned shouldnt be a problem at this point, lol

iconboy said,
is this game coming out to next gen systems? to my knowledge i thought it was a PS2 game. I think realism as far as graphics is concerned shouldnt be a problem at this point, lol

It's a PS2 and Wii game.

I don't know if you noticed, but the PS2 and Wii are out-selling all the other systems right now.

The fact that it now looks brutally realistic.

I'm not saying i support the whole no rating thing, but they do have somewhat of a point.
On the other hand, people should be allowed to buy and play whatever they want. If they're old enough, they should know doing it in real life is wrong. If they're not old enough, one word: PARENTAL DISCRETION

I agree with Rockstar. If movies like 'Saw', 'Hostel', 'The Hills Have Eyes', and pretty much every other horror movie around are allowed to depict horrific and brutal death scenes; then why isn't it ok for videogames to do the same thing?

And don't give me that "It's different because it's interactive" BS argument. Every gamer has been committing digital murder in videogames for years now. What has changed?

I'm on Rockstars page here, but it's because you interact with the game and choose what will happen to certain characters in the game. You make the decisions. That's what's different from the movies.
At least that's what I've come up with. ;p

spacer said,
I agree with Rockstar. If movies like 'Saw', 'Hostel', 'The Hills Have Eyes', and pretty much every other horror movie around are allowed to depict horrific and brutal death scenes; then why isn't it ok for videogames to do the same thing?

And don't give me that "It's different because it's interactive" BS argument. Every gamer has been committing digital murder in videogames for years now. What has changed?

It's different because it's interactive.

Pip'