Manhunt 2 - Oh dear...

[Alf17]

I find games like Manhunt, GTA or bully just tasteless. I'd much rather play a good Mario or RPG or FPS than that but that's personal preference.

Whether or not it should be banned for being tasteless and offering gratuitous violence is another thing: on the one hand I'm opposed to censorship, on the other hand it's a game not worth it anyway and perhaps some people in society need to be protected from this kind of content ... so it's half-half.

 

[DiscoInferno]

It was?

http://games.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1416/Bomberman-ActZero/

News to me.

Well that particular title is a relative departure from the Bomberman norm, but considering that it only got a 12+ rating (and a PEGI ratng at that meaning that it likely wasn't even submitted to the BBFC) I doubt that the violent content is anywhere near that of Manhunt (or any other game with a BBFC certificate).

 

[Astray]

I find games like Manhunt, GTA or bully just tasteless. I'd much rather play a good Mario or RPG or FPS than that but that's personal preference.

Whether or not it should be banned for being tasteless and offering gratuitous violence is another thing: on the one hand I'm opposed to censorship, on the other hand it's a game not worth it anyway and perhaps some people in society need to be protected from this kind of content ... so it's half-half.

I think you're being very closed minded with GTA. I used to know a kid who played it like a driving game. He'd not try to kill people just drive around.

People act like GTA is all hookers, sex and crime, but it's open enough to play it legally. Hell if you stole a cab/bus you could just drive around that way quite easily

As for the whole "I'd rather play an FPS", FPSes are violent as hell and only getting worse or is beating people with a crowbar normal now and good behaviour now?

 

[Alf17]

I think you're being very closed minded with GTA. I used to know a kid who played it like a driving game. He'd not try to kill people just drive around.

People act like GTA is all hookers, sex and crime, but it's open enough to play it legally. Hell if you stole a cab/bus you could just drive around that way quite easily

As for the whole "I'd rather play an FPS", FPSes are violent as hell and only getting worse or is beating people with a crowbar normal now and good behaviour now?

Well, it's not so much the violence factor that gets bothers me, it's the morality behind the story of the game. For example, in a game like Resistance Fall of Man, you're defending the human race against evil alien invaders. Basically, you're one of the 'good guys".
In the GTA games you're trying to climb up the ladders of the underworld/mafia, making you one of the 'bad guys'. Of course, the same applies to FPS games (so not all FPS games are up my alley)

I don't mind a good dose of violence in my games as long as the purpose or goal isn't immoral. It's very hard for me to identify myself with a gangster in a game but I can easily identify with a soldier fighting for the survival of the human race. But like I said, that's just my preference.

 

[Astray]

Well, it's not so much the violence factor that gets bothers me, it's the morality behind the story of the game. For example, in a game like Resistance Fall of Man, you're defending the human race against evil alien invaders. Basically, you're one of the 'good guys".
In the GTA games you're trying to climb up the ladders of the underworld/mafia, making you one of the 'bad guys'. Of course, the same applies to FPS games (so not all FPS games are up my alley)

I don't mind a good dose of violence in my games as long as the purpose or goal isn't immoral. It's very hard for me to identify myself with a gangster in a game but I can easily identify with a soldier fighting for the survival of the human race. But like I said, that's just my preference.

Once again I call the ignorant card.

GTA:SA : Guy gets stuck in jail, his friends/gang/whatever all become druggies. He decides to sort things out and get his friends off drugs.

Corrupt cops force him to do ****, he ends up getting them back, stopping drug dealers and tries to get a stable set up for his family.

Could also point out CJ saves a suicidal guys life and such, but hey why bother? It's all evil and immoral.

 

[The Big One]

I honestly don't give a dead moose's last **** about this ratings crap anymore. Rockstar has now shriveled up into "that game developing company that makes controversial games just for the lulz". Even if it is for publicity stunts, it's all just a cover-up for the reality of the fact that the game will suck all around. The first Manhunt became tedious and really repetitive to play, and I'm sure that its' sequel will be no different from that of its' predecessor. I'll admit the first few GTA games were kinda nice to play, but that's just about the only good thing I can say about Rockstar and Take Two. Everything else went to hell afterwards.

As far as the U.S. goes, they'll still publish and sell the game here in the states, but I don't know any major retailer or gaming store that will even carry them. Hell, even my local GameStop store that I go to will refuse to sell Manhunt 2 because of that stupid AO rating.

And besides, the Wii version of Manhunt 2 is really nothing to cry afoul about. Just because you can use the remote to execute certain actions in the game, it does not mean that the Wii version will be somewhat more realistic than the PS2 or PC versions of the game. It's all juvenile fantasy, and killing a human being in real life is alot more harder to accomplish than what a game like Manhunt can actualy portray.

 

[Yellow Stranger]

Unless they withdraw the game for editing, there WON'T be a Wii or PS2 version. Sony and Nintendo will refuse Take Two the license needed to publish the game.

I'm probably going to make a lot of enemies with this statement but I kinda find the whole situation a bit stupid. Yeah Manhunt 2 will probably be "tasteless" but still, I find it morally wrong to keep something out of the hands of people who can handle it.

So yeah, it makes me wish consoles would allow AO games to get published on there systems.

 

[SaikoDragon]

God dammit just release the fucking game. What the **** could it hurt. You know what I dont fucking get? Nintendo AND Sony saw this game. Doesnt Nintendo have it's own quality assurance system? They're always nosing in on projects that are planning to be released on their system. Are you telling me Nintendo allowed Rockstar/TakeTwo to waste their fucking time and money making a game, only to be denied from publishing it? What a big "**** You" to receive.

RockStar/TT have made it clear, from day fucking one, what kind of game this would be. We knew about it's content and you know damn well that Nintendo and Sony knew it's content more than anyone else if they had any fucking brains to check up on the project.

But nope, the dumbasses sit there and go "you makin violent gam? sur, go ahead. we wun yer biznes" "Wuts dat? you done and it's AO?! DUR HUR HUR NO SALE FOR YOU DUR HUR HUR BY!!!"

IMBECILES!!

That's fine, they can just edit out whatever the **** was making it AO and then release it but they shouldnt have to.

All I'm suggesting, is that Sony and Nintendo should have known better and maybe said "hey you know, this sounds like a good game. But remember to not go crazy, ok? Haha, we don't publish AO games so, just letting you know. Some of the content looks risky."

 

[JustAnotherBlueRanger]

Freedom works on all levels I think here...

A company like Rockstar has to be free to make their game, their way. Within reason of course...

And consumers should be allowed to buy what they want with their own money should they so choose to do so.

But the companies like Nintendo and Sony are perfectly within their rights to ban the game for their systems.

 

[SaikoDragon]

They are within their rights but they're assholes for letting Rockstar waste their money and time on a game that you know both Nintendo and Sony probably knew would get such a rating or was dangerously close to it. They had the opportunity to see the content and throw a little warning. "Hey, that's lookin a bit hardcore. Remember if you get a AO rating we cant publish you. Juuuuust a reminder, carry on".

But no. It just seems like the dick thing to do to just let the company continue making the game and only after they finish, say "oh well we arent going to publish you. Sorry, good luck with that".

You know, I hope they go to Xbox and get published on that system and forever remain exclusive because of it.