Ban serves them right, not available for PC? cheeky mother fukkers, I payed for & supported Man Hunt 1 on the PC & this is how they repay us? every fucker has a PC what the fuck are they thinking?

To be perfectly honest....we all have a sence of anger sometimes and to play something that releases that anger i think should be allowed the kid that died because the parents of the victim thought the game made the 17 year old murder there son....they think it was the game the kid might have just been mentally unstable and sooner or later done something terrible with or without any "influence" i know it must have been terrible for that to happen to a family...but my city gets murders everyday...and just because some people thought a game "influenced" someone should there really be any more of a uproar about it. thousands die everyday theres no media coverage for them...specially the ones dying in iraq there blood being spilled from the government that banned the game....i guess 99.9% of people would never carry out acts they see in a game...and if they did they would be unstable to be around in the first place. i for one enjoyed manhunt 1 it was a dark scary game...but when am playing it i dont admire it for the gore...more the skill thats put into it....I would really like to see manhunt 2 for PC....this really isnt such a big deal...more should be focused on other things. Sorry for bad grammar its very late extremely tired but hope my point comes across Thanks

I'd do it while the Wii, PS2 and PSP version is recut to be M rated.

I'd buy the AO rated version for PC.

Take Two could also SUE the CCFC for disparagement. If they withdrew their demand, then Take Two could launch action against the ESRB making them lower the rating. It worked with Jack Thompson, so it should work here.

Lovely. I like that idea. They can market it as the "Unedited version" like the movie industry does. If they have enough money, they can tone down the console versions but keep it as is for the PC, release it a few months later.

If they do a PC version they could probably distribute it online and potentially get around the European bans.

The problem is with the AO rating they would still have to overcome the retailers who refuse to sell an AO PC Game.

Their real choices are slim, either cut it down to make it more M rated or release it only through Internet orders like the Postal series.

If Take-Two is serious in that they believe it has an artistic merit they will do the latter and release it through the Internet for PC only, cutting out the retailers who refuse to carry it & the console licenses. Taking a hit in the sales.

If Take-Two is just really in it to make a quick buck off of the controversy it'll be cut down so that it can receive an M rating and release it on all the consoles.

Now if they were into justice they would force any retailer who contracted to purchase so many copies to actually purchase them. I doubt it is possible though it would really depend on the contracts Take Two has signed with their distributors.

In some ways, taking the loss would be good, but from a business prospective, even the performance of games which I don't particuarly like, have a knock-on effect, in a way I'd be pleased to see this genre calm down a little, and not be such a prominent part of the computer game industry, but I also know full well that the ONLY reason it is a predominant part is because of people screaming at the top of their lungs how offensive they find it. The actual number of this kind of game released is actually pretty low, but the attention they get is disproportionately high.

My own suspicion is a general release of an 'M' rated version in a few months time, maybe sooner, depends how prepared Rockstar were for this possibility, followed by Manhunt 2Xtreme or something later down the line. Probably direct from site or limited edition box set from 'select' retailers that'll burn a huge hole in your wallet.

This talk of either not releasing the game on consoles or 'toning it down' to get an M rating...

If Rockstar does either, they'll look like pussies and lose a ton of credibility.

Say "No" to censorship - buy Rockstar Brand games.

This is probably one of the first games tagged as 'AO' for violence alone - rather difficult on the US rating system. It will also increase demand for the age group willing to play the game.

I can't find much information on why Manhunt 2 would get tagged as such, aside from the Wii controller allowing people to carry out the acts of violence themselves. This is rather moot, since people user 17 aren't supposed to play the game under the existing rating system anyway.

Manhunt 2 - Ultimate Gore Edition for the PC... ehh... go ahead, it's not like they can get break even anymore, may as well TRY and sell the game.

Frankly, I think what you'll see a lot of is 'fade to blacks' in scenes that involve tortue in some or the like. The main complained seemed to be along the lines of 'prolonged scenes of torture', which is something, I must admit, I wouldn't miss.

I suspect the gameplay itself would change little, you may see some graphical changes, not just in 'gore' level, but in 'atmosphere' level as well, in essence, making it less 'phsychological' and more 'horror thriller'.

If it comes out on PC i'll port it to PS2!!! Well you'd have to play it via HDD...

@MaskedPixelante

I first read that as Manhunt 2 - Al Gore Edition... O_o

Then I got this image in my head with the main character being replaced by Al Gore sneaking around killing all those who oppose him in his crusade to make sure no one can challenge his position/agenda.

Oh great - be cause this unvarnished piece of dross can't get a market, it get's ported to PC. Bargain bin by, ohh I dunno - September?

Shame on you Rockstar - you've shown you can do so much better than this in the past.

"A toned-down version for Wii and PS2/PSP release and a “Director’s Cut” for either PC or Xbox Live would probably be the simplest solution."

Xbox Live would still require MS's permission, which might be a problem, and those titles are restricted to a small size which Manhunt 2 won't fit in.
However you bring an interesting point: online distribution. Rockstar could release a PC port through Gametap or Steam, which are not as strict on ratings I believe. These online distributors are becoming increasingly more popular and a serivce like Steam could benefit greatly by having exclusive distribution rights to a game like Manhunt 2. It would certainly cement the brand name for the big hardcore PC audience.

@ Silver_Derstin

Is it wrong that it’s being banned and restricted?

Sure as hell its wrong! Conformity is the disease of society, and not kudos for Nintendo and Sony. You, dear child, are clearly in the wrong. The game was not made to get free publicity, it was made to fill a demand that is on the edge of what currently accept to be the culture limit of virtual entertainment.

It is not for anyone, not Rockstar, not Sony, Nintendo, Wal-Mart, BestBuy, the Government or anyone else to determine what it is I watch and enjoy. That choice is purely and simply mine and mine alone, and anyone who attempts to take the right from me will face the full brunt of my fury.

I've said it before -- I will never play Manhunt 2--ever. It's not my cup of tea, but does that mean others shouldn't have the option to play it? No, absolutely not. My choice is my choice and doesn't extend beyond me.

@ Silver_Derstin

The Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD is a different scenario, they are competing over the movie studios to get the movies to there platform. They aren't denying the studios the ability to make the movie for the platform, they want the studios to make movies for their platform. Plus how do you know Rockstar was pushing the envelope for free publicity, maybe they just kept going with the track they were on and ended at the AO rating.

I like GoodRobotUs's idea about the fading to black. The game got the rating because of prolonged scenes of violence. Maybe Rockstar could make it so that if the player kills so many people in a certain amount of time, or for a prolonged amount of time, they pass out due to some strange reason that might not even be realistically possible. Then the excessive violence is no longer possible because the player can't continue to kill people.

@Silver

You man, you really seem like you have something against R*. I've seen you basically screaming that you hope they die because of this, or do you just hate all game companies that make "distasteful" games?

Shareholders are owners, yes, looking for returns, yes... but there is a reason they are shareholders and not directors or managers - they do not know how to run a company. Especially one in this market.

If T2/R* backs down, their dominating position in the games market and their incredibly big name will go down a notch, or two or twenty. That is the end result that shareholders would really, really, regret. Put it to you this way, if they release a watered down version of this game, not only will it not sell - they will lose a lot of respect at the same time. That loss will affect furture value and future sales.

On the other hand, the credibility and name brand will increase if T2/R* fight the watch dogs, release an AO game and essentially act like rockstars. Which I hope they do.

Distasteful is just an opinion.

Sometimes I wonder why people wish this to be prohibited. They can turn their heads, close their ears and ignore it. Trust me it works. I do it to mainstream pop-culture to the point where I constantly don't know who famous actors and actresses are when friends talk about them. I really don't have any interests in it all either so it really doesn't bother me because I choose not to pay attention to it.

Maybe people secretly want to look at things and in this case play them and that makes them feel guilty so instead of having it there temping them they want to remove the urge by having it prohibited... oh the ever so sweet vision of a character strangling one with their very own entrails while blood flows from their stomach like a geyser from the bowels of a demon freshly and violently violated by Satan himself... just way to tempting and you don't want to feel like your doing something that isn't pure and good.... Just a theory.(sorry, couldn't resist)

There is never too much when it comes to art. Well if you want to say you live in a free country at least. If you think that art can go too far then I guess you should admit that you don't want to live in a free country... Just another theory to ponder.

I'm not so certain orangekrush, you may be right, but in experience, if it's a choice between using the free popularity of a ban to promote a watered down version that can be made freely available, and at the very least draw even under the weight of it's own 'drama', or releasing a version that has limited platform, limited availabilty and low-returns, the decision may not be placed in the 'long term'. I may be wrong, but it was my impression that many shareholders DO own or run their own companies as well, as long as their isn't a conflict of interest that's allowed.

They can always realease a special edition later for more profit, but why reduce your available market by 80-90% on first release? Yes, they'll lose 'rep' with a percentage of the gaming community, but that's a problem to be solved tomorrow, making Manhunt 2 a releasable game is a problem to deal with today.

The amount of people you would need in the boycott would be astronomical--I think that at the moment, as evidenced by even this blog, there's too much dissent among gamers to mount any sort of concerted response to such a banning.

Hence my efforts to spearhead an organization to provide said united front of gamers. With admittedly limited success thus far.

The problem is that Video Gamers are like cats in a bag, they simply cannot get along if you put too many of them in one place, especially online.

If Sony suddenly declared that its DVD players would no longer play DVDs that Sony didn’t deem appropriate, would anyone buy one?”

What’s Blu-Ray and HD-DVD? It’s specifically that

Sony has enacted a similar, if less obvious policy with their Blu-Ray players. As Sony and the other studios that have backed it (Disney, et al.) have told Blu-Ray disc manufacturers not to do business with the porn industry. So in effect they have done with their Bu-Ray players what they have done with Manhunt 2 in that no titles they deem obscene can be played on their players. As a result, the porn industry has gone to HD-DVD - which is why I think that format will eventually win-out as it did with VHS back in the day. But that's an entirely different debate. (Incidentally, Sony also backed Betamax and Divx and look where that got them.)

@GoodRobotUS

I couldn't agree me more. However, unless we want others dictating what we can and can't play, and telling us the rules of our, we need to reach an accord of some sort ...

Kinda like (ha! I love using random references) Pirates 3--put them all together in a room, and they'd kill each other within a week. Same mentality I think -- we are a varied group with different motivations and drives. Its all about finding that common thread ...

Jeez, I sound preachy. Apologies.

Good luck serrentiy - I play Socom online. The thing that game has taught me is that the probability of a united anything within the gaming demographic is not likely.

Hell, you have people in this room that are cheering on governments whenever those governments threaten or actually do remove their individual freedoms. Cheering them on!!

Great works like "I think the government is right to remove my rights and to treat me like a child. Yes, the government knows what is best for me so I don't mind losing my freedom to choose for myself - there is just too much choice out there, anyway."

Frankly - some people in here scare me.

I like the way you think cash...but it's not realistic. The idea is a great one, but how does an unorganized bunch of gamers and free speech activist go about solving this problem? Any ideas?

Couldn't agree with you more cash...I feel that this is just the beginning of a bigger picture, whatever that may be, and your right it is frustrating, brainless big wigs. I bet JT is as gitty as a school girl right now

[...] Manhunt 2 - Not for Nintendo Nor Sony - PC? 21 06 2007 Manhunt 2 received an AO (Adults Only) rating the other day from the ESRB (Entertainment Software Ratings Board) and was also banned in the United Kingdom and Australia and was rejected by both Nintendo and Sony for inclusion on Nintendo Wii and the PlayStation console. So what will Rockstar do if they can’t release the game on consoles? Spend additional money to change the game and get it back down to a M (Mature) rating, cancel the entire project altogether or release a PC port instead? According to GamePolitics, Rockstar / Take Two can avoid the licensing issues with Nintendo and Sony by producing a PC version, like the PC version of Manhunt 1 that was released about 5 months after the PS2 version. But still, they would face issues because major retailers such as Wal-Mart refuse to sell games with an Adults Only rating. [...]

Black Manta: DIVX wasn't a Sony thing... that was Circuit City and a Hollywood law firm behind that. Also, the studios releasing titles on DIVX were Fox, Dreamworks, and Paramount... none of them are Sony, either. Nice try.

That aside, the PC online distribution system (Steam, maybe?) to get their hands on this title in present form will be making money hand over fist. The game could even be worse than the original Manhunt (which, if you had the stomach for it, wasn't too bad), and it would be almost a license to print money. All this unprecedented rating does is start to make people think "Man, I HAVE to play this game now!".

Needless to say, I grossly oppose using the AO rating for terms relating to violence alone (as the rating was basically designed, as best as I can tell, to allow retailers to duck away from having to stock pornography due to issues relating to perceived blight, kinda like the X/NC-17 ratings for movies), and wonder, if the ESRB is going to use the AO rating to "ban" a game in the US like the European and Australian bureaucratic suits do, if the AO rating has outlived its purpose. If M and AO carry the same figurative weight, but an AO can be used as, in Manhunt parlance, a silenced pistol round to the base of the skull, then AO has got to go in favor of lumping everything into the M rating and letting retailers deal with these issues on a case-by-case basis.

Xbox Live Arcade games have a maximum size of 50MB per download, which is why Lumines 2 was released in the modular chunk way it was. It is highly unlikely that Rockstar would chop the game up into 50MB portions, or even 100MB if they could convince MS to up the size limit. A PC version on the other hand is practically inevitable, and a downloadable one could follow the Postal style of getting around distribution issues.

But will they can the Wii version after all the effort and hype? This is Rockstar. They don't understand restraint.

@ Ace of Sevens

That was the idea. Sony's way of discouraging the porn industry was to make it too cost-prohibitive for them to go Blu-Ray. Call it censorship by economics. That may sound like a conspiracy theory, but I wouldn't consider it outside the realm of possibility. The porn industry may make a lot of money, but they don't have as deep pockets or the other resources (lawyers and such) that major mainstream studios have access to.

That having been said, I still think porn is the unreported deciding factor. I have faith in porn. :)

Signed and Stamped.

@Nick, Dexee, et all:

Thanks for looking at the url. I have sent the petition link to Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Wired.com, the ECA, Rockstar and Take-Two. I am now sending it elsewhere to see how fast it spreads.

Dragon, I'm gonna toss the link around myself.
@ Everyone Else
When I signed, We had only 10 people! Let's start signing it left and right everyone.

That’s total crap, I want to play the game the way Rockstar initially intended us to play it.

L. Ray Porter - DragonBomber > I honestly like to agree with you. I really do. Here's the thing that's wrong with the whole petition. It's not the government thats controlling it. There's no law being passed here that says "No to Manhunt 2." A private organization outside the gov't that rates these games control the content, sure. And that the industry relies on said organization.
IF the the makers of the console doesn't want to support a game, they damn well don't have to. It's there console, and they have a right to put what they want on it, no matter what. They are in it for money, and while this game may make money, they might lose more than they bargained for later.

A PC version would be cool. I bet it would do well just by that alone.

I doubt Steam would pick it up though, but hten again, idk whats their stance on the game.

@ finaleve:

The petition addresses the makers and society in general to generate discussion and support for our rights. It doesn't say anything is illegal or governmentally controlled. I know it's "legal" but that the console license/rating convection loop affected by the outside atmosphere is allowing it to continue.

ill never understand why companies have to give others the ok to make games for their consoles i mean really Nintendo didn't sue me for making a toaster attachment for my n64(hmmmm toast)or ford doesn't tell me what i can or cannot pimp out my car with.

Anyways manhunt 2 is rated AO...big deal not like its the first AO game in history to run into problems.

ps:I say they should give Sony and Nintendo the finger and still release it on the wii and ps3 just to prove a point.

I'll just hack the PSP version to put everything back in. Ahhhh, The wonders of PSP custom firmware.

Jack is a visionary.........

Just out of curiosity.....

How many people didn't know this was the case since 2 generations back?

@Diceman

The reason console manufacturers must license a game before it can be published for a console is the fact that part of the operating system for the game must be contained on the game disk itself. This means a game developer must license this OS before they can publish the code.
You see the game disk actually contains more than just the game itself, there is code on the disk that is provided by the console manufacturer to the developer. In order to get this code (and support for debugging your game on the console) a game developer must sign a license agreement with the console manufacturer.

In addition all of those Wii, PS2, Xbox, etc logos on the packaging have to be licensed, as they are trademarked logos and names.

So no Rockstar can't just release the game for the consoles anyway, and thumb their noses at the console manufacturers. They signed a legal agreement with Sony, Nintendo, & Microsoft to be able to publish games onto their respective consoles. Part of that agreement is that the console manufacturer has to approve of any game that is released onto the console. All three of the console manufacturers have policies not to allow AO rated games onto the consoles. Rockstar knew this before they developed Manhunt 2 so they shouldn't be overly surprised when they get told that Nintendo & Sony are going to refuse to allow the game to be published on the Wii, PSP, & PS2.

Also everyone Microsoft has the same policy for the Xbox & Xbox 360 regarding AO rated games as Sony & Nintendo, so don't look for Manhunt 2 as it currently is to be released on Xbox Live.

For everyone whining & crying about this and saying that Sony wouldn't do this on a DVD, yada yada yada please remember the following:

DVD, Blu-Ray, & HD-DVD are all open format standards. Yes even Blu-Ray as Sony is not the sole developer of the standard, just it's primary supporter. Because these are open standards anyone is allowed to use them for what ever content they wish.

The Wii, PSP, Playstation (1, 2 & 3) , Xbox, & Xbox 360 all contain proprietary Operating systems. These are not open standards, and the manufacturer has complete control over the content which can be published to it. These companies feel it would hurt their overall sales if they allow certain content to be published onto their systems. It's their decision, and economics supports this decision. Whine, bitch, moan all you wish but in reality the vast majority of people who own these consoles do not really care that Manhunt 2 is not going to be released unless it gets edited down. Call it censorship if you like, but in reality it's called economics. Video games & consoles are a commercial product, and if the product has the potential to cause economic harm to the company they are not going to pursue the product.

Rockstar knew upfront that none of the consoles would allow publication of a AO rated game, yet they decided to push the envelope of violence in Manhunt 2 knowing it could potentially get an AO rating. Rockstar dug the hole they are in with Manhunt 2 and considering their past behavior, I think the rest of the ESA is content in letting them get themselves out of it.

Personally, I still think its a bunch of BS and that Nintendo/Sony/MS and the companies that don't carry AO games like Gamestop, Wal-Mart, etc, just don't have the nuts to deal with it.

Bah, thats what the PC is for, I think Rockstar should revoke the Wii and Playstation games and just release it on the PC.

This is bullshit, Nintendo and Sony need to grow some balls and allow AO rated games on their systems otherwise they're pretty much lying when they say they're trying to attract gamings of all ages and such, but not allowing AO games is just a cop out. Guess my Wii is going to be collecting even more dust. I liked it at first, but there are practically no games on it at the moment that I want, and this would have been one of the games that would have given me a reason to use the damn thing. I regret even getting a Wii now.

Our chain of retail stores DOES carry all games, regardless of how controversial they may seem. We believe the consumer (not retailers, the government, or large corporations) should make personal purchasing decisions. It is a shame that other companies do not have this same view of America and our basic freedoms. In America we have the basic right of the pursuit of happiness as long as it does not directly harm others. This reaction from the major retailers and Sony/Nintendo infringe upon this, not to mention our freedom of speech.
Anyways, signing a petition will not help in this fight. The only real impact would be a boycott of sorts. The best boycott would be to only purchase used games for your PS3 and Wii systems. This will continue to stimulate the economy and the game industry, allow you to play your favorite games, and yet not provide profits directly to Sony and Nintendo.

@Dorkmaster Flek

If they do release the AO version on PC then all you need a bluetooth adapter and GlovePie and you'll have your definitive version.

The more I think of it, it seems the console manufacturers also think games are just for kids, and will only license Manhunt if it's not rated Adults Only because they don't think Adults should be the Only ones playing such games.

If they really want adult consumers to buy their games, why wouldn't they allow adult content?

And if they really care about keeping such content out of kids' hands or whatever, why are they undermining the rating system by blacklisting AO titles and forcing them to be down-rated?

@ RM:

There's no telling what signing a petition will do, but it's a step. I bought the first Manhunt game because it was cheap ($10) and used (BlockBuster). It wasn't a great game but I own it. It was different to be certain and for some, its genre is novel. I didn't even consider buying the game (I don't even have a Wii, PS3, or 360 yet) until I saw what was happening. I didn't want my lack of freedoms throw in my face. I am free to not buy a console of course, but no company having the guts to stand up for the principle makes me sad. I'm not angry, but bothered. I know this is only the tip of the iceberg.

I don't think buying used software is going to help. You are only supporting the used software chains then, who often have horrible customer service, lame prices and a lack of selection. I wouldn't want to encourage their expanding along the same business model and inventory selection any more than they have already. A national boycott isn't a bad idea, but it has to hit all points of sale. That means no GameStop, no BlockBuster, no Wal-Mart, or online vendors. A day would be a chore to manage, but a week would be even more of a feat.

We have the technology and networks for such an endeavor. Youtube and other sites provide free advertising so really once organized there would be nothing you could not do if you really wanted to nudge a console maker to support a rating class you may in fact wish to purchase. Given enough effort and time of course.

@ Serrenity

Either way you cut it, you will need to somehow "hit their pocketbooks". In this capitalist society, every single decision they (Sony/Nintendo) make is financially motivated. In this case, they felt that the negative press would hurt them financially more than it would benefit them. So either more than half of the video game purchasing community needs to declare that they would purchase an AO game or they have to find some other way to directly affect their profits.
The reason why I recommended the new game boycott was because it is very public knowledge that Sony despises the used game market. In fact, Sony has proposed ideas to eliminate it entirely to increase their personal profits. If Sony is so worried about the used game market that they would patent technology to combat it, there is something to be said for this form of a boycott.

I just sent a letter to my congressman.

This is the start and continuation of censorship in gaming. I am disgusted. Feel free to cut-and-paste this to send to representitives:

Mr. Cohen, I want you to know how proud and satisfied I am with your performance thus far in Congress. I campaigned hard within my community to see you elected and still sport one of your fashionable bumper-stickers on my truck. I have recently moved outside the ninth district into the Bartlett area, but I still consider you my representative! I know I live outside of the ninth district now... but, please, if you can, respond to me... I hate being represented by Marsha Blackburn. She hates who I am, wishes to oppress my voice in Washington, and illustrates how democracy ignores my values and interests to cater to the wealthy.

You stand for true American values and work hard to ensure that America remains a diverse land of equal and great opportunities. Please continue supporting progressive taxation, gender equality, separation of church and state, protecting the environment, pro-choice, gay marriage, and other progressive values.

I send you this letter on behalf of free speech advocates who wish to address an issue that seldom comes up on a national level. Within the entertainment media, there are enormous forces at work to censor and impose subjective "morality" on American consumers. The ESRB, a privately owned company responsible for rating the content of video games, has recently issued an "AO" (Adults Only) for the video game "Man Hunt 2." This is the first time a major game has received the "AO" rating. Games that have contained vast graphical violence -- Grand Theft Auto III, Gears of War, Mortal Kombat -- have received the lower "MA" (Mature, 18+ only) rating in the past. "MA" games can only be purchased by adults over the age of 18 and are not intended to be viewed by children. MA games contain enormous amounts of graphical violence, partial nudity, and adult themes. The "AO" rating, given to games that are more violent and sexually explicit than MA games, rating serves no objective function. The amount of violence that shifts a game from "MA" to the more extreme "AO" is so subjective and vague that it does not practically exist. Man Hunt II, a game that contains little value within itself, received the "AO" rating for containing enormous amounts of graphical violence that occurs within the context of a plot that unfolds like a horror movie. The "AO" rating is being used on a corporate level to censor adult-oriented content across the video game industry. The "AO" rating cripples game development for several reasons.

At the highest level, console manufacturers, through dubious liscensing agreements, do not allow third-party video game developers to publish "AO" games on their consoles. To illustrate the hypocrisy of this concept, I ask you to entertain the following thought: envision a company who produces DVD players. This company suddenly gains the power to censor, control, and manipulate the content that an independent film company wishes to incorporate into a film that will be made into a DVD that can be played on said company's DVD player. Console manufacturers are virtually censoring intellectual content, "software," that will be processed by the hardware they provide.

At a lower level, many retailers refuse to sell "AO" games (killing supply has virtually made "AO" games, or games that address adult issues or content, not exist until Manhunt 2). Such a decision comes as a shock when many of these same retailers sell movies, literature, and art that contain the same level of violence and sexuality (films such as Silence of the Lambs, Braveheart, etc).

The ability to supply adult-orientated content in video games has been all but crippled by a industry that seeks to keep gaming in the domain of children. Gaming has expanded far beyond a child-oriented industry and is attracting a wider range of consumers every day. Nothing intrinsic to video games makes games more childish or different than any other form of entertainment media, but games are judged by different and alien standards.

Great adult-oriented films -- such as Braveheart, the Passion of the Christ, The Shining, etc -- would be banned if an organization like the ESRB were allowed to impose their standards and ratings. Game developers should be free to supply adult-oriented content without the threat of commercial censorship. I have loved games since I was a young child and hate to see them bound to such dubious, fear-mongering, and ridiculous standards.

Video games as a valid artistic medium are constantly enduring the unethical assault of legislators and private companies who feel that they have the right to regulate, manipulate, and impose their personal morality and values on American consumers. I am not sure where congress could act to protect free speech and consumer freedom in the video game industry. One tactic could include changing the ESRB rating system to be less discrimatory against adult content in video games. Another could involve examining the legality of the licensing agreements that console manufacturers use to censor content produced for their hardware. The courts might also pursue rulings that prohit retailers from discriminating against games if they also sell "R" rated movies.

Thank you for your time.

@ Silver_Derstin:

I don't suppose you care to list the games you have bought in the past 6 months? I imagine at least one of them could be affected by the ratings going sour at the last minute. Any shooter despite "rust-colored" blood (historically accurate or fantasy), a realistic car sim, and other types of games is not safe from potential issues. This is not a win for anyone other than those who want all violent games put down. All of them. Not only Rockstar, but every developer now who makes games that contain a trace of offensive material. For all we know the Manhunt IS utter rubbish but that isn't the point. Larry Flint's court cases allowed us a lot of freedom, despite his offensive-to-some magazine. Plenty of cases against rappers did the same. In the end they died out or lost steam that had been generated due to the publicity. If Rockstar makes rubbish games that don't sell, they will die regardless of how much people love them.

Great letter Pandas... if it was actually accurate and stated the proper information rather then your own propaganda.

I know about "fight fire with fire", but really, the best way to fight fire remains to smother the flames by removing all oxygen.

"At the highest level, console manufacturers, through dubious liscensing agreements, do not allow third-party video game developers to publish “AO” games on their consoles."

This is probably the biggest part of misinformation you're trying to push here... It's not "dubious liscensing agreements", it's called "agreements between developers and manufacturers". I'd love to see a dev contract for Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft, and what it says on the question. It's probably a nice little part of the agreement, which both parties have to sign.

Silver, do you know a good online forum, or BIG online gaming community, that I could post that message on?

And I consider controlling content to be quite dubious, =P.

@Pandas

I find it amusing that in the first few lines of that letter, you hit on exactly why government should have nothing to do with it. Everyone involved in this little brouhaha is a private entity. Governments censoring speech is a dangerous thing, because of the forces they have behind them. Private entities have no such force, it's merely annoying or inconvenient.

Am I disappointed in Sony, MS, Nintendo, Wal-Mart, and God knows who else? Yes, I am. Are they censoring anything? Not really. Rockstar can still make the exact game they want to, they just can't rely on those aforementioned entities to get it out there. If I don't buy the game, am I censoring them? I mean, they're not getting money from me, and that will hurt their bottom line. That's what we're talking about here. I agree that Rockstar have all the right in the world to make Manhunt 2, but they have absolutely no right to make money off it. If they do, good for them. If not, TS. Freedom of speech and censorship is about the right to say something, not the right to get rich doing it. It's certainly not about using the government to force people to listen to you, that's really what you're advocating.

By the way, your conclusion about the ESRB and various films is false. The ESRB places no restrictions on the sale of games. The retailers do that themselves, voluntarily, separate from the ESRB code of conduct. It's like blaming the MPAA for a theatre not showing an NC-17 movie. The MPAA doesn't do it, the theatre makes a choice based on the info they have.

The real question I'd have for retailers would be, if Manhunt 2 showed up as an "unrated special edition", would they carry it?

"Am I disappointed in Sony, MS, Nintendo, Wal-Mart, and God knows who else? Yes, I am. Are they censoring anything? Not really. Rockstar can still make the exact game they want to, they just can’t rely on those aforementioned entities to get it out there."

That's the point. There aren't really any other profitable entities out there. So it basically is an effect ban.

Like I said, they have the right to make it, not the right to make money off it.

They can make the game they want. They can sell it to whomever they want. Wal-Mart is not, and should not be, obligated to make Rockstar/T2's life easier by carrying the game. Trying to get the government to force someone to sell a game is the second worst thing you can try to get the government to do (the worst thing would be trying to have them ban it).

Just as Rockstar has every right to make Manhunt 2 however they want, Wal-Mart has the right to not carry it. Just because you have the freedom of speech doesn't mean I have to give you a loudspeaker.

@Scoops

haha Good point. I think what we want, or at least my perception, is for those big corporations to see that it would be beneficial, financially, for them to run the game. Much more so than the fact that ulta-right wing conservative would boycott them.

The only issue I have a qualm about is that for Wal-Mart et al, it's not a matter of Freedom of Speech, but rather what they think they should do in order to ensure the highest possible profit. If put on the greater Serr greater chain of being, I place freedom of speech much higher, nobler perhaps, than making more money. But then, as my esteemed friend implied, perhaps I'm just pushing my own personal propaganda in terms of suggesting that the moral prerogative of being able to express myself in not be stifled in that expression is of a higher order than purely fiscally lucrative prerogatives.

@MacBoy

Brother :-) actually

haha
I know I'm getting preachy, I just don't care at the moment I suppose. Take what I say with a grain of salt :-)

Which brings you right back to getting organised in the US, because nobody, but nobody, is going to take a bunch of annoyed Emails as anything to pay attention to. Wal-Mart and other companies only accept what is, metaphorically, shoved up their noses.

Jack Thompson, The Peacaholics, they all get their agendas across by campaign and being publically visible, as distasteful as it may seem, you have to meet him on his own ground, you have to make protests, not just in small groups, not just Emails signed by a few hundred people, but a vocal, visible crowd that can be seen and filmed.

Will you ever change Wal-Marts et al's mind? Don't know, the Stigma attached to 'Adults Only' is a strong one, but if you want these double standards to stop, simple fact won't do it, it's too dry and no-one pays attention, you need a show.

The day I see a group of a thousand or so voting-age gamers outside a Courthouse that is discussing yet another unconstitutional game law, the day the Politicians can see and count those votes they are walking away from, that's the day that these attempts will start to stop.

Will it ever happen. Don't know, we've got enough to worry about here in the UK apparently, so it's really up to you.

@ GoodRobotUs (and other indirectly):

I am just pro-choice. If I have to buy said game at FYE (which is a chain I was going to bring up when someone else did so) or some other vendor I will do so. I don't even know if I would otherwise CARE about this game, but I see it being important. The same as I see volunteering to be important, and so forth.

Our choices come done to money of course, which is what it always seems to come done to. The industry wants to make money off us but not lose money from their detractors too much or by pissing off the biggest markets for their games. Wal-Mart being 25% is huge obviously, and I want some people to wake up a bit. It isn't just about some game that may be crap making it to a system that some will never play or even see. Motivating people to do just what you suggest is priority. Building gamers who vote and stay educated is a goal.

Getting people interested in other valid movements as well is a goal. Community involvement, discussion, and education. Right now, there is a HUGE wall of people chattering about how bad games are, with very little actual support being given those who disagree. It's legal now, but difficult based on the system and the politics that get played. Right now videogames don't have the content that movies and television do in terms of photorealism, however it is getting damn close. Videogames shouldn't be any different, and that's what we need to strive toward as movies and television continually converge with the Internet and videogames to create something entirely new.

It's easy to make parallels between this debate and the abortion debate--at the heart, the issue of contention is the same. One school of people think it should be the choice of the individual to determine what games should be played and by who and at what age.

The second school of people that the governing body should decide what is best for us. The greatest, and arguably the only political division to ever exist: One believes in the decision making power of each individual for themselves, the other group believes that for society to function, we must sacrifice personal freedom for the betterment of the whole.

At the heart--we are having this debate. Is the individual capable of making a decision that is in there best interests, or does the individual need a governing body to make the decision as to what is in the best interest of the individual.

There are those who clearly take the latter stance, believe fundamentally that humans are incapable of making decisions in their own best interests, and that those who have been elected by the people should be responsible for the idea of "best interests."

The former group eschews the intrusion of governing body, much like an petulant who wants to be free of his parent's rules in favor of his own. Obviously, I belong to this school of thought. My primary desire is to be make what decisions I know to be best for me, and not have those decisions made for me. I knowingly and willing break laws everyday for precisely that reason.

The debate is this: does the governing body know better than we do, what is in our best interests?

...Something is disturbingly wrong if we're comparing this to the abortion debate.

…Something is disturbingly wrong if we’re comparing this to the abortion debate.

I said that the underlying question is the same between this debate and the abortion debate, not that they were on the same moral plane.

Id do it, you'll get swarms of people like me parting with a bit of cash to buy it just because its been censored at every other port.

Go for it rockstar i'll buy your barbaric violence for shits'n'giggles.

The trick, I think, is not to fall into the Thompson Trap.

Look at how he operates, when he doesn't get his own way, he vitriolically attacks anyone that deems 'responsible' for it, when things are more in his direction we get the whole 'It was never about banning Violent Games' speech, his opinions are never fixed, he doesn't have focus, he still, as his own book states, blames the world around him on 'Things'.

The problem in the US isn't the ESA, the ESRB, Walmart or even the laws that are being created. The ESRB works within it's own framework and provides the service it is created to provide, my own feeling is that it has done it's job within it's own definition and has rated the game appropriately for the violence in it, it is Adult Entertainment.

However, that is NOT the problem at hand, any more than Nintendo's unwillingness to sell AO games, the thing that needs to be dealt with is the underlying mindset that has been created about gamers, that they are loners who live in their parents basement, have communication problems and are tomorrows potential 'School Shooters'. It's that 'greasy' stereotype that Thompson and others play on in other people to perpetuate their goals, we've seen Thompson sink to many depths, even to suggest that banning games would be a good idea to appease Islamic Extremists, would any other culture or form of entertainment be allowed to endure that level of insult or prejudice? Lose the Stereotype and you have a voice.

Is the corporate work environment, economics, moral code, and ethics more important than individuality and freedom?

I'd have to say that this is a bad move by Sony and Nintendo. They are really shutting a lot of potential customers. The porn industry is huge, why wouldn't they want some of that money? Do you really thing they would lose that much money because people dumb enough to think their children are going to be playing it? No, sorry they arn't going to, but they will continue to get porn of the internet for free without you knowing.

It's not THAT Nintendo won't market AO games that is the problem, it's WHY, and that's nothing to do with Nintendo.

"It’s not THAT Nintendo won’t market AO games that is the problem, it’s WHY, and that’s nothing to do with Nintendo."

Because they don't want to.

Not hard to understand. If I don't want kids to read a certain book, I will not stock it in my private, members-only library.

thats just their opinion though its nothing more than an educated guess.

Silver if we are whining and crying then you are doing the exact same thing, ony from a different angle.

We are trying to get that policy changed because we are consumers are concerned for the future of the game industry and the progress of ensuring that game developers are not forced to censor themselves.

They'll probably just release an AO patch for the PC version or have a direct order disc that has the AO version.

Nintendo used to be in the illegal gambleing and sex hotel business. Kind of a hypocritical stance considering where they came from.

Yea really its not Nintendo but Sony who I think should allow AO games. I understand the Wii is for family and all that good stuff but Sony well right now its only for people with enough money to buy it. The high price distracts people from buying it and that distracts developers from making games for it. Which is a shame because it looks like such a good machine.

So if they would allow AO games I'm sure they could attract more developers. It seems like they've been losing a lot of exclusives due to poor sales maybe its time to start rebuilding that with new policy. I think it could help a failing system. Would also be great for the market cause it would balance the competition more and Sony M$ and Nintendo would have to compete to keep up with eachother.

I don't think Sony has much to lose at this point. Its not a just a family machine and I don't see how anyone could claim that.

And now we are back at the rating system needing to be changed.

Ignore the Nintendo reference in my last post, it's getting late and I wasn't paying attention....

This is all about freedom of choice, and with the exception of the U.K. and a few other European countries, not about censorship. Rockstar CAN make their game, nobody is saying they cannot. And just as they have the right to make it, I have the right to say it's sick and stupid, Nintendo has the to refuse publishing rights the Wii, DS, or any other system they own, and Wal*Mart has the right NOT to carry it in their stores. To force Nintendo to sanction MANHUNT 2 for the Wii is no different than forcing Rockstar to modify or scrap their game. Freedom swings both ways folks.

Also, the ESRB is an independent capitalist organization created for profit, not a governing body. Publishers in the US are NOT required by any laws to submit their products to the ESRB for ratings. The problem is places like Best Buy, Wal*mart and other retailers will not accept a product from a publisher that does not have an ESRB rating on it. They have the freedom to do that. So publishers comply to get the products in the stores.

Despite the strong-arm, you must comply if you want to sell you game, tactics of the ESRB, it does do some good in easily informing adults of what kind of games their kids want to play. Personally I think parents of children (17 and under) need to get off their lazy asses and start being parents when it comes to video games, and just parenting in general. Stop blaming video game developers, publishers and stores for your kid playing some game you don't approve of. The tools are there for you to research (internet, ESRB, magazines,etc). Take an interest in your kid's life and hobbies. And adults who like video games should have the freedom to make their own choices.

Oh and as far as this game being art, well that's subjective, and a pretentious snobbish ploy to get around negative moral criticism. And you people writing your congressmen about censorship in gaming, why don't you write them about real issues like poverty, murder, hardcore drug trafficking, homeless people, supporting education.

Is this one a friend of Dr Alexander, he's got the same level of imagination.

Honestly, if the Wii version has controls where you actually perform the killing moves as shown it probably should be rated AO.

However, the other versions should definitely be rated M.

Make the PC version a digital distro, thus avoiding retail as much as possible, and send a small numbers on hardcopy to brick and mortar stores to see if there is an audience, while cutting the game down for the Wii/PS2

[...] This really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Thanks to Nintendo and Sony not allowing AO rated games on their system and the BBFC banning it all together, Rockstar had to delay the release of the game. So what's going to happen now? Like I said yesterday, if Rockstar wants this game to come out, then they're going to have to appease the ratings board. That, or do what some of you readers were suggesting yesterday and make a PC port of the game.      [...]

Appeal and try to get an m without censoring

I second the idea of releasing it for PC, modified to use the GlovePie Wii scripts, in order to have the ultimate in freedom for the game. Keep it AO, release it online, and make the Wii controls a valid option in the game.

This sucks for those who enjoy the horror genre as it really does fit in that genre. I mean yea some people say "oh this game was just made to piss people off and offend peopel to gain publicity" no it was made for fans of the horror genre. People that actually enjoyed Manhunt 1. Are you guys really so vain to think Rockstar's main concern is to offend you?(We all know Silver_Derstin is) No with this game they wanted to entertain the fans of the horror genre. The game obviously would fit into that category.

@Serrenity

Most gamers, let me repeat myself gamers are a fairly united group. They like games, sure they argue but at the end of the day they still like games. They can sometimes be heard saying things like "good game, just not my kind of game".

Consumers on the other hand like certain games, and you damn well better like them too, they also tend to spend tons of time arguing why other games suck compared to their games.

DO IT, PC IS THE FUTURE FOR AO RATED GAMES. F**K SONY AND NINTENDO WITH A GAY VERSION OF THE GAME WHILE WE, PC GAMERS, KILL AND KILL AND KILL...

err not joystick, gamepad(ps2 style logitech would be nice)

Hey, guys, maybe someone knows if some petition can be written about manhunt 2 on PC. I realy loved the first game and already love second - there gona be a lot of fun stuff there for sure(enviromental kills, woman kills). So please guys lets make some petition and get our game! Sorry for my English (I am from Belarus)

i really don't care what certificate a game has as long as i can enjoy playing on it

Look i cant believe people are so worried about the games violence. Why not worry more about kids getting liquor drugs and ciggarettes instead. Its just a video game people.

It's unfortunate that so many PC users cannot obtain a PC version of Manhunt 2(in it's originally intended form). I'm sure that the original Manhunt had considerable sales with the PC version. It's sad to see that folks would be forced to purchase a Wii, PSP, or PSP portable just to have the abiltiy to play the new game. Take Wii for example, most Wii users are well below the age of playing Manhunt 2. Most Wii users would be too busy playing WEAK Mario Bros. titles. I think it's sad that the PC gaming nation should succumb to competition and eventual loss of capabillities of playing such titles. After all, it was the PC genre which put most game titles on the map. Don't disgrace us by porting games explicitly onto such consoles. Besides, PC games don't need to adhere to the strict licensing/rating restrictions as console games requre. PC gamers NEED to be considered for ANY release....not just Manhunt 2 but EVERY title!

So it hasn't been released on PC? wtf
I can't believe it, why wouldn't they release it for PC?

Find yourself an PSP emulator software,use it to instal PSP version of Manhunt 2 on your PC and play.

when will the pc version be released? ROCKstar & ROLL is dead ;/