Take-Two Suspends Release Of Manhunt 2

[Spartan_X]

Take-Two Suspends Release Of Manhunt 2

Following earlier confirmation that Nintendo and Sony would not release Rockstar's Manhunt 2 with its U.S. 'Adults Only' rating, and the game refused a rating in the U.K., Take-Two representatives have confirmed it has "temporarily suspended" plans to distribute the game.

According to an official statement distributed to journalists, including U.S. consumer website GameSpot: "Take-Two Interactive Software has temporarily suspended plans to distribute Manhunt 2 for the Wii or PlayStation platforms while it reviews its options with regard to the recent decisions made by the British Board of Film Classification and Entertainment Software Rating Board,"

The official Take-Two statement concludes: "We continue to stand behind this extraordinary game. We believe in freedom of creative expression, as well as responsible marketing, both of which are essential to our business of making great entertainment."

Most U.S. retailers, including Best Buy, GameStop and Wal-Mart, refuse to stock AO rated games as a matter of policy, separately of the console hardware manufacturers refusing its release. This makes it almost certain that the title's content will need to be changed and resubmitted in order for it to reach American shelves - if Rockstar and Take-Two decide to take this parth to market.

Additionally, it is unclear, given the extreme nature of the rating board's condemnation in the UK, whether a similar resubmission would also work. The BBFC's comment on the game noted: "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."

[UPDATE: The National Institute on Media and the Family has released a statement on the suspension, calling it "a victory for parents and children."

The statement reads: "Because of the their thoughtful decision to give Manhunt 2 its strongest rating, "Adults-Only," the ESRB has sent a strong message to Take-Two and other game makers that they no longer can push the envelope on gratuitous violence in video games. The ESRB showed real leadership in assigning this rating and further evidence it is making significant progress in keeping extremely violent and graphic materials out of children's hands.

"Hopefully Take-Two has learned from its Manhunt 2 experience and will undertake preventive measures to ensure its future games, including Grand Theft Auto IV, are appropriate for families and gamers.

"As gaming technology continues to change, we hope to continue to work with the ESRB to ensure that future games have appropriate content and context for children. The uniqueness of Nintendo's Wii gives game raters a new challenge when it comes to first-player shooter games. We take the ESRB's decision about Manhunt 2 as a positive step in addressing this new challenge."]

Source: Gamasutra

[cosine]

Great, now that you've posted another Manhunt 2 article somewhere besides the one big thread we had, we can have a third thread for it to branch off into! I really don't understand why you think this or the other article needed it's own thread, considering we already had a big discussion topic about it going. It'd be a whooooole lot easier to, y'know, keep it in one place.

[MrCobra]

^ Don't like it, don't post.

That blows. We can watch movies like Saw or any of the multitudes of "offensive" movies that portray real people doing these things and yet adults are being told they don't have the right to purchase or play freaking game. How about letting me decide on what I will or will not do.

[cosine]

^ Don't like it, don't post.

That blows. We can watch movies like Saw or any of the multitudes of "offensive" movies that portray real people doing these things and yet adults are being told they don't have the right to purchase or play freaking game. How about letting me decide on what I will or will not do.

Uh, we've got two threads running the exact same thing now, practically. And now that you've rolled on in and regurgitated the exact same argument from the other two threads, we'll have a third debate in this one. We just need one big Manhunt 2 thread.

And since people continually post this argument: it's Sony/Nintendo's hardware. They can choose what is and isn't released. This is how it has always been. If you don't like it, take up PC gaming.

[flyakite]

What the hell? A victory because it's rated AO? How about instead of pushing the AO rating stores and parents start actually enforcing the proper restrictions on M rated games?

You're "supposed" to be what, 17 or 18 to acquire M rated games? Yet how often does that get enforced? It's not the rating that's the problem it's the store clerks and parents who don't care enough to actually do what is right for their children.

Instead of taking responsibility for their own children parents take the easy way out and blame the content and the companies that produce that content.

I guess it's a good thing that there aren't violent television shows or stories of REAL violent acts on the news. Phew, thank goodness for that!

And in reality, in the end it's all the same. It's not like when those kids get old enough they won't become serial killers or the like. Raise your kids well and teach them what is right and wrong and there's a much better chance they'll be a decent person even if they do play those games.

[WelshBluebird]

You're "supposed" to be what, 17 or 18 to acquire M rated games? Yet how often does that get enforced? It's not the rating that's the problem it's the store clerks and parents who don't care enough to actually do what is right for their children.

17 for M rated games, and 18 AO rated games.

Honestly, I can't see why Sony, Nintendo and MS have a policy of not allowing AO games on their consoles, as they allow games that are rated in the UK as 18, so why not the same rating (AO or 18+) in america?

[cosine]

Honestly, I can't see why Sony, Nintendo and MS have a policy of not allowing AO games on their consoles, as they allow games that are rated in the UK as 18, so why not the same rating (AO or 18+) in america?

Because even if they did, no US brick and mortar stores will carry AO games. And that includes their online stores. Also, if they allowed a game like this to be released, they'd have to endure the gigantic media backlash this game is guaranteed to cause. It's really not worth it. Especially in Nintendo's case, since they're already doing perfectly fine this generation.

And the debate starts once again, for the third time!

[Lexcyn]

I don't even understand why they have an AO rating if NO ONE will sell them or carry them. Also like someone said above, I wish people would stop deciding what I will or will not want to purchase.

[PermaSt0ne]

I don't even understand why they have an AO rating if NO ONE will sell them or carry them.

indeed. that's what bugs me the most. why have the rating if no one will allow it?

[acies]

"As gaming technology continues to change, we hope to continue to work with the ESRB to ensure that future games have appropriate content and context for children. The uniqueness of Nintendo's Wii gives game raters a new challenge when it comes to first-player shooter games. We take the ESRB's decision about Manhunt 2 as a positive step in addressing this new challenge."

Do they think this game is for children?? Seriously though, if it's a violent game just put a high rating on it. Sure, some "underage" kids will get there hands on it that's inevitable, but doesn't stop them from putting ratings on other games and movies.

I am also surprised that Rockstar Games didn't have a backup, toned down version.

[Sheppard]

Im glad i have people like this telling me what games i like to play, its great. </sarcasm>

I have the free will to choose what games i want to play, not some pencil pusher behind a desk whos idea of videogames is the crap mini pick up and play games that are built into windows.

They need a ratings board full of people who are the same age group and actually have a clue.

[cosine]

They need a ratings board full of people who are the same age group and actually have a clue.

I'm confused. How does rating a game that allows you to remove someone's testicles with a pair of pliers Adults Only mean they don't have a clue? Please, enlighten me here. Because, to me, it would seem that they are in fact spot on.

[WelshBluebird]

Because even if they did, no US brick and mortar stores will carry AO games. And that includes their online stores. Also, if they allowed a game like this to be released, they'd have to endure the gigantic media backlash this game is guaranteed to cause. It's really not worth it. Especially in Nintendo's case, since they're already doing perfectly fine this generation.

And the debate starts once again, for the third time!

Then whats the point of the AO rating? Is there really that much difference between 17 and 18 anyway that means two separate ratings are needed?

[spenser.d]

I don't like the idea that a 20yr old like myself can be told what I absolutely can't play just by a rating given to a game, that rating causing the game to not be released.

-Spenser

[neoadorable]

indeed. that's what bugs me the most. why have the rating if no one will allow it?

you're right. it's just hypocrisy to maintain the illusion of choice and creative liberty.

of course it's all a voluntary system, you don't have to submit your game (or movie for that matter), you're free to create anything. we're sure you, your family and closest friends will have a blast making the most of the five mill you just sank in development!

[FlibbyFlobby]

Its pretty clear the classification board made this decision based on more than just the content of the game. The media have whipped up a fictitious story of how Manhunt influenced a killing, and now the board are revoking its sequel based on that. Its pretty much that simple.

The lengths the media will go to to sell papers and MPs to get votes astounds me sometimes, it really does.

[cosine]

Its pretty clear the classification board made this decision based on more than just the content of the game.

Okay, for real - do you have any idea what you can do in this game? It absolutely deserved the AO rating.

[Sheppard]

I'm confused. How does rating a game that allows you to remove someone's testicles with a pair of pliers Adults Only mean they don't have a clue? Please, enlighten me here. Because, to me, it would seem that they are in fact spot on.

They dont have a clue, i choose wether i want to remove someones testicles with a pair of pliers or not, im talking about here in the UK the BBFC refuse to give it a rating therefore it would be illegal if it was to go on sale.

[FlibbyFlobby]

Okay, for real - do you have any idea what you can do in this game? It absolutely deserved the AO rating.

Yes, I've played the original. So what? Personally I found the game boring. The game is intended for adults though not children.

In case you hadn't noticed I was talking about the BBFC's refusal to classify it anyway. They're supposed to be an independent board, but clearly they have been influenced by the the UK's unrestrained media on this issue, not just the games content.

[WelshBluebird]

Yes, I've played the original. So what? Personally I found the game boring. The game is intended for adults though not children.

In case you hadn't noticed I was talking about the BBFC's refusal to classify it anyway. They're supposed to be an independent board, but clearly they have been influenced by the the UK's unrestrained media on this issue, not just the games content.

QFT. If they had rating it on just content alone, then it probably would have got an 18. However, because of the media circus about violent games, the thing about that kid who got killed (which was later proved to be unrelated to the game) they wouldn't rate it.

Also, I have a feeling that another reason may have been the fact its so easy for an under 18 to get hold of an 18+ game anyway. But as I heard on one of the podcasts I listen to (I think it was gamespots), you can't rate games in the mindset that the rating system doesn't work. To rate a game properly, you have to believe the ratings system will do its job, otherwise, the whole idea of a ratings system is pointless IMO.

[acnpt]

Yes, I've played the original. So what? Personally I found the game boring. The game is intended for adults though not children.

In case you hadn't noticed I was talking about the BBFC's refusal to classify it anyway. They're supposed to be an independent board, but clearly they have been influenced by the the UK's unrestrained media on this issue, not just the games content.

So your saying they should never ban games/movies, if the media also agrees that they should be banned.

Click here to see other banned games

[cosine]

Yes, I've played the original.

So you don't.

Look. All this comes down to one of two things:

1. Planned publicity stunt, already planned to remove content later or have M version waiting. Not quite as likely now with the announced delay, but we'll see.

2. Rockstar figured they could push the envelope and wind up with another M. If this is the case, it obviously didn't happen. However, this game really is a lot worse than any of their other ones and probably one of the most violent games I've seen, personally. Even moreso with the Wii controls. Rockstar knew what every major console company's policy on AO titles was, and they chose to push their luck anyway. They wound up with an AO in the US which is an effective ban because of store/console company policies, and yeah, that sucks. However, they knew exactly what everyone's policy on AO titles was, and they decided to push it anyway. It blew up in their faces. It sucks, but it's their problem.

And honestly, please, shut up about your choice to play this game or not. You may have a choice to play what games you want, but retailers also have a choice on which games they'd like to carry and console companies have a choice on which games they want under their brand name. Nobody is going to endure the media circus so you have the choice to buy a mediocre game which brings nothing to the table besides the gratuitous violence gimmick.

[thedoors27]

"including Grand Theft Auto IV, are appropriate for families and gamers."

why in gods name would I want to play gta with my family???

Manhunt 2....hmm...I dont see why its been banned/refused whatever when there's plenty more sick things out there.

Stupid parents.

[FlibbyFlobby]

So your saying they should never ban games/movies, if the media also agrees that they should be banned.

Click here to see other banned games

The media are trying to shift units or get viewers, nothing more. In the 'Manhunt murder' they clearly stated the game was responsible because they knew it would spark outrage and controversy (the best way to sell anything!). The police actually concluded the game didn't relate to the murder (the killer didn't even own it).

My point is the media in this country are irresponsible and inaccurate. Why do you think there is so much tabloid trash and twisted facts daily? Because it makes the media outlets money. The BBFC are supposed to be entirely independent of media and political influences and should only be rating games based on their content. Its clear this wasn't the case, they've taken the media's opinion into consideration.

So you don't.

Look. All this comes down to one of two things:

1. Planned publicity stunt, already planned to remove content later or have M version waiting. Not quite as likely now with the announced delay, but we'll see.

2. Rockstar figured they could push the envelope and wind up with another M. If this is the case, it obviously didn't happen. However, this game really is a lot worse than any of their other ones and probably one of the most violent games I've seen, personally. Even moreso with the Wii controls. Rockstar knew what every major console company's policy on AO titles was, and they chose to push their luck anyway. They wound up with an AO in the US which is an effective ban because of store/console company policies, and yeah, that sucks. However, they knew exactly what everyone's policy on AO titles was, and they decided to push it anyway. It blew up in their faces. It sucks, but it's their problem.

And honestly, please, shut up about your choice to play this game or not. You may have a choice to play what games you want, but retailers also have a choice on which games they'd like to carry and console companies have a choice on which games they want under their brand name. Nobody is going to endure the media circus so you have the choice to buy a mediocre game which brings nothing to the table besides the gratuitous violence gimmick.

Once again (because you clearly aren't reading my posts) I'm discussing the UK BBFC's refusal to classify the game. Its a decision influenced by the media not by the content of the game. It should be rated an 18 and be allowed to be sold to adults. Its then up to the retailers to decide if they will stock it or not. The fact remains it should still be available for the appropriate age group to purchase. No 'independent' board has the right to censor something based on the distorted monetary motivated opinion of the media.

If you don't like the game, fine. Personally I don't own the consoles its coming out on, and I won't be buying it either. I found the original boring. Just because you don't like it, or what it entails, doesn't mean you have the right to prevent others from playing it though. If you don't like it vote with your wallet, but stop trying to take that freedom of choice away from others.

[craybox]

( my 2p worth cut from the initial thread )

regardless of what games 'I' play this is pure violence on mindless scale.

to understand what I mean i would relate it to Resevoir Dogs. Most violence in films/games is a means to an end.

The Resevoir dogs scene with the ear being cut off had no meaning behind it which made it all the more shocking.

Manhunt 2 is the same in game form and an overdose of it too.

( i really don't want to start this debate again, but there was an experiment here in the UK recently where several families had all media devices removed from their house for 2 weeks. This included games consoles TV's, PC's laptops e.t.c.

over that two week period all the childrens were much calmer and hardly any sibling rivalry compared with beforehand. Families were much calmer all round. These were children who watched about 3 hours or played 3 hours of games a day. )

someone has to make a judgement on what is released into the wild is it going to be you!

This is only one study but this has backed up what is pretty damn logical to anyone who understands how people are desensitized. I agree there are movies out there equally to blame, a good example is Captivity.

But you can't go on forever say 'it's not fair cause the movies got a away with it, what about ME.' It has to start somewhere and if it has to be video games then movies then sobeit.

It is however unfair if games are the only ones that are picked on.