Big Effing surprise Yee..........


honestly, what do they expect, an edited game is resubmitted and rerated, this is what they wanted for the excessive violence to be removed. goddamn hypocrites make me sick.

"Parents can’t trust a rating system that doesn’t even disclose how they come to a particular rating."

...I'm going to take a stab and say the MPAA isn't applicable to this claim by some twist of fate.

The game is not for children. Parents need not worry unless they are the one's playing the games.

"The ESRB and Rockstar should end this game of secrecy by immediately unveiling what content has been changed to grant the new rating and what correspondence occurred between the ESRB and Rockstar to come to this conclusion."

For once, I agree, but for a different reason. I would like to know what R* cut out in order to drop the rating, but that's just because I want to know how big a change it was to go from "most heinous game ever" to "we can sell this to 17 year olds again". Of course I'd also like to know what scenes movies cut in order to avoid NC-17 ratings, but I doubt Yee would demand that of the MPAA... /rolleyes

And I really don't see this conflict of interest. The ESRB collects it's fees WHETHER OR NOT the game eventually gets published. They don't get a "cut" if a game hits the market, nor do they lose financially if it doesn't.

Well, he's currently famous as 'The author of yet another failed Video Game Law', he probably wants to divert attention away from that as fast as possible, as well as get some 'revenge' on the Industry for daring to want First Amendment rights :)

Hey Yee!

You can over-see the process once you get your unconstitutional law passed. Until then, STFU.

"Unfortunately, history shows that we must be quite skeptical of these two entities."

Not really. History has shown in overwheling evidence that people should be skeptical of government officials. Especially when they try to tread over the Constituion.

So the US government is saying you should be skeptical of someone else.. Yeah, I really believe that.

"Unfortunately, history shows that we must be quite skeptical of these two entities."

So what? History shows we can't trust China, he's Chinese, so let's no trust him! Idiot. If everyone drew strawmans like him, we'd be back in the age of the KKK.

Also, this should have NOTHING TO DO WITH PARENTS. Who cares if parents can't trust a rating system? A 17-year old is mature enough to decide what video games he plays and should be mature enough not to be influenced by them; that is what an M rating IS, you tool. This is the difference between a 17-year old buying a game and an 18-year old buying a game.

There shouldn't be such a huge controversy over one fucking game. If a film was initially rated 18 and then downgraded to 15 for the final release (using the UK system here), would there be a huge uproar? Of course not! So why do out of touch politicians, 'doctors', 'lawyers', and fat, useless parents and menopausal old hags insist on attacking games although they have no idea what they're talking about? Because they're all fucking stupid. Argh! Mandatory euthanasia for anyone who says anything stupid regarding video game censorship, it really is the only way to stop the tidal wave of bullshit that I have to suffer every fucking day.

How come they all stand up and scream for an explanation when it gets re-rated? Some of us wanted to know why it got the AO rating but we never got anything over the "Over the top violence." answer.

As for his call to be skeptical of the ESRB and R*, I don't see a reason to be. They are not in cahoots. R* is not giving the ESRB bribes to get the M rating.

Why is he so against the ESRB? What did they ever do to him?

@E. Zachary Knight
"Why is he so against the ESRB? What did they ever do to him?"

Undermine his fear mongering by existing and doing it's job well?

Man this guy and these soccer mom clubs look more and more useless every day. Who wants to get rid of them? /sarcasm

Seriosuly, the ESRB cannot and will not say what was in the game before they dropped it to an M. Its very simple, wait for the game to come out this Halloween and see for yourself.

^ I wouldn't call 'giving a game a rating despite knowing that said rating will effectively ban its sale and then thinking it can backtrack on its decision a month later without earning the ire of idiots and hags alike who still believe only kids play video games and all the GTAs award high scores for killing cops, raping prostitutes and giving children pornography (actual quote there guys)' "doing it's [sic] job well[?]". They should have given it an M and no one would've whined about it. Well, they would've, but not so much.

WWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I'm an inneffective politician who wastes taxpayer dollars and now they're wondering what I've been doing all this time while pushing for unconstitutional laws! So I'm going to make some apparently bold public statement that makes it seem as if I'm working, when in fact it just shows what a hypocrit I am!

Someone call the wahmbulance please, we've got a crybaby-one alert!

@Zigs

That's how the ESRB works. Publishers provide footage of the game that shows off the general tone, gameplay, and the most extreme moments.

@cppcrusader

Right, which is my point, we already know exactly what happened, so who gives a shit? Besides Leland "/wrists" Yee, that is.

It's not about the year difference, it's about the pr0n connotation, which it always has been eh?

Not to burst anyone's bubble, but when it comes to movie ratings, at least at the theater I worked at when I was younger, we had a book at the box office that had a list of everything that happned in a movie that influenced its rating. For example, "In scene x character a lights a cigerette" or "In scence y character b uses the explitive f". But when it comes to movies this can be done a lot easier than games. Movies are hours long while some games never technicaly end. So maybe if just listening to all the audio tracks and saying this word is used in this many tracks or saying the character is able to do this act, a list could be made like that.

Well, the Leland Yee PR Train never fails to arrive on time. It's predictable to a fault.

Yeeehaa!

@The_Bobman:

"Not to burst anyone’s bubble, but when it comes to movie ratings, at least at the theater I worked at when I was younger, we had a book at the box office that had a list of everything that happned in a movie that influenced its rating."

That'd actually be pretty awesome.

-P

"Parents can’t trust a rating system that doesn’t even disclose how they come to a particular rating."

Well on that note, how about Yee take his foot out his mouth. The MPAA doesn't disclose how it rates games. It doesn't even disclose who its' raters are (we needed the documentary, "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" for that and we still don't know how they rate). So on that note, if they can't trust the ESRB ratings board, then we can't trust the MPAA ratings board.

"Unfortunately, history shows that we must be quite skeptical of these two entities."

How so? As far as I can tell, History has shown the ESRB has had a probe deep into the far reaches of Take Two and subsidiary companies since 2005 (aka: Hot Coffee).

"Clearly the ESRB has a conflict of interest in rating these games. It is time to bring transparency to this rating system and for the industry to be held accountable. I join the [Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood] in urging the Federal Trade Commission to investigate the process by which Manhunt 2’s rating was downgraded from AO to M."

You know, I'd rather not have more tax dollars wasted on policing an industry which doesn't need it. Perhaps put those tax dollars to better use, for say... Where's our promised 100mbps to homes nationwide, including rural areas, by 2007? How about having the FTC investigate those whom violated that little tid-bit or the little tid-bit known as net nuetrality? Let's put those Tax dollars to actual good usage.

Anyway, at this point, I'm sorely tempted to say something about the Pot and the Kettle...

Does it really matter what content was changed? It's no longer there, and it probably will never be there. I am curious as to what they removed for reasons different than my senator's.

Anyway it seems to me that the only reason they would want to know this is so they could use it as an excuse to bash rockstar and the ESRB, probably blow the whole thing out of proportion to another Hot Coffee (think about it, most of the ingredients are still there, the only thing missing is a modder to discover the deleted content, but they are just trying to replace that with the government).

Anyway, now for some humor

"The video game industry has time and time again said it should be compared to the movie industry, but when the movie industry releases a DVD they usually have deleted scenes as part of the special features. We demand that Rockstart release these deleted scenes to the public so that we may watch the sick slow motion brutal killing over and over again (why do you think we give this stuff so much free publicity).

Or you can look at it as

"We demand Rockstar release to the public, what even the industry thought was way too violent for anyone but adults. We firmly believe that doing this will help shield the exact same kids from the exact same content we don't want them to see. We want to know what the ESRB finds inappropiate even though we will never create a video game, and we will still complain that they are not strict enough regardless of what they do."

And finally:

"We want to Rockstar to release what was cut from the game so that Hollywood may take those ideas and put them in next year's horror movies. Our writers are running out of ideas on what people find disturbing and would like to see what rockstar came up with knowing that they (the movie industry) could make stuff twice as bad and no one would complain."

Sen. Leland Yee. Just another far left-wing nanny-state Censorcrat who wishes to waste taxpayers money on useless agendas that aren't in any way going to solve some sort of problem (if there was one to being with). I'm with Hollywood, tell anyone you know in his district to vote this fucking pro-censorship, anti-gaming, anti-youth, ageist asshole out of power. He sickens me.

Because we all know that there's no way in hell, that R* just edited out what the ESRB said was over the top and resubmitted it with the edits.

seriously? Don't these guys have anything better to do?

"Why don't they acknowledge MPAA?"

Actually, the CCCF and all the other haters have answered this several times - they feel that because the experience is interactive, that it therefore produces greater affects in the child's mind than movies might. In particular, the CCCF (and probably Yee) are all over MH2 because of its release on the Wii specifically: that you would literally be holding the tool of your avatar's destruction in your hands.

So I think they do acknowledge the MPAA, but the point that they're asking for a degree of transparency in a similar process is absurd. Just because it's games doesn't mean it needs to be any more transparent than movies.


Remember that this is not for Yee's children, nor anyone he knows. The point of all these cries for legislation is for a certain demographic to feel confident that -other people's parents- will not buy these games for -other people's kids-. I know we're all well aware that rated M means 17+ vs 18+ for AO. Yee and CCCF know that too. AO also meant that realistically the game would not be sold - anywhere. They wanted that. They wanted the game effectively banned because they believe that other people's parents will buy other people's children a game they don't think other people's children should play. That's the truth of it.

I talked with one of these people recently - who are so fervently in favor of video game legislation. After arguing away her points (with a lot of, "Oh, I didn't know that"), we finally reached the fundamental philosophical position upon which I could not move her, and we would never agree. It simply boils down to the 'demo' unit at any video game store. She could not suffer to pass a condiiton where other mothers' would drop off children at the video game store to play games on the demo unit - games of any rating. It simply disgusts her to see someone else's child playing a violent game.

So no, this isn't about the children - this is about legislating "lesser parents than thou."

And yes, here in California, we do have a senator who suggested legislation to outlaw parents from spanking their own children. It didn't happen, but it hit the floor, and she wants to "make some edits and bring it back."

"Not to burst anyone’s bubble, but when it comes to movie ratings, at least at the theater I worked at when I was younger, we had a book at the box office that had a list of everything that happned in a movie that influenced its rating. For example, “In scene x character a lights a cigerette” or “In scence y character b uses the explitive f”. But when it comes to movies this can be done a lot easier than games. Movies are hours long while some games never technicaly end. So maybe if just listening to all the audio tracks and saying this word is used in this many tracks or saying the character is able to do this act, a list could be made like that."

That is more than the videogame industry is doing, granted, and many a peoplr would probably love to have a list like that for video games BUT a couple of problems with your anecdote:
1)
The issue here is not what is actually in the game, it's what was -not- put in.

Nobody went up the director of the remake of The Hills Have Eyes movie and asked what he had to cut for it not to be NC-17 (i use this as an example because I am a pretty jaded 22-year-old horror-movie fan and I thought that movie was pretty damn tasteless). Nobody demanded it.

The only example off the top of my head where a director revealed what was cut to make an R rating was when either Trey Parker or Matt Stone said the MPAA had rated Team America NC-17 for the one sex scene, for it had too many pelvic thrusts. You could do two pelvic thrusts in the doggy-style position, but three put them over. And that was in the commentary showing how arbitrary the MPAA could be. (WITH PUPPETS!)

2.) Like the MPAA, the ESRB is a voluntary ratings board, uncontrolled by the government. If the MPAA keeps records and decided to show them to theaters, that's for them to decide. It doesn't dictate what the ESRB has to do.

No one on the other side ever points out that games look like goofy ass cartoons anyway. Even if the games had ultra-realistic graphics and violence (to the point where the reality line is blurred) this would still be a fools argument. Oh well, I guess I should get used to living under psycho Christian boot heels.

"As a child psychologist, Yee believes that video game violence – where children are active participants, not simply passive observers – has a dramatic impact on our children." - Senator Yee's webpage.

Just providing a source for my earlier allusion that Yee et al are against games - and not movies - because of the interactivity.

@Predatorian234
I don’t get the point of this…

I mean, AO rating means you should be 18 or older. M rating means 17 and older…

Do they really think 1 year is that bad? I mean, regardless of the AO rating or the M rating, its still warns against children playing the game. The only real difference is that instead of being only available on-line or at Adult Book Stores…it can be carried at Wal-mart…where you are still I.D.d to buy it.

Not quite the only difference. The main point of the ratings something NC-17 or AO is that 18 is the age of majority. Thus you side step most of the problems of people complaining about their 17 year old kid's media consumption. It's not a matter of people thinking one year makes a big difference in what a person is able to handle at that age. Rather it's a matter of wanting to make it very clear that something is for mature responsible people.

Want to know why Liar Leland Yee doesn't attack the MPAA but does attack the ESRB? He received campaign contribution from the MPAA. He also received campaign contribution from the RIAA (music industry), but none from the ESRB.

Source: http://cal-access.ss.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1250804&v...

Just search for "MOTION PICTURE ASSN. OF AMERICA" or "RECORDING INDUSTRY ASSN. OF AMERICA, INC."

@Gamer 81

Nice find...maybe we need to add that to the conspiracy theory list.

@Predatorian234

"Shouldn’t the “M” rating be enough to convey that image? I mean, what are the MAJOR differences between M and AO? The ability for it to be sold at Wal-mart, GS, EB, Ect."

Same as the difference between R and NC-17... retailer-wise anyway.

@Gamer81

While it's interesting that he took money from the MPAA & RIAA but refused a check from the ESA, the contributions were still piddly. so rather symbolic only.

When the system encounters a hitch ... these guys complain.

When it works exactly like its supposed to ... these guys complain.

This particular fight has always been about censorship of game content, not ratings.

@Hollywood ... "if the ESRB is anything like the MPAA’s ratings board they probably don’t even disclose what they found objectionable to the developers. " Actually, they do tell the developer what things crossed the rating threshold. Nobody is well-served by a ratings board that makes you guess what cards are in their hand. That's how developers know what to fix, or to leave in if they think the requested compromise would be worse for them than a more restrictive rating.

The thing is, nobody's entitled to know what's objectionable about content that's not for sale. Nobody outside of the ESRB or R* needs that information, and in any other industry such a request would meet outrage.

@Jabrwock

I hadn't heard that he refused money from the ESA (I remember hearing this about Obama only). Whether the amounts were "piddly" or not, the fact that they gave him money and he refuses to regulate movies and music, even though parents are also concerned about these mediums as well, only worsens his credibility ... assuming he has any credibility to begin with.

The important thing to remember here is, if a Politician was pro-gaming and got donations from the ESA, then you can be certain that a stink would be raised, why should the rules be any different in the other direction?

The outrage Yee and other groups have over the re-rate is the fact the game will be sold at all. You can bet that if Sony and Nintendo allowed AO games to be published (even if no stores would stock them), they would have been all over the ESRB after the initial rating.

Bottom line: Yee & friends want the game BANNED, not "rated".

Heh, I did jokingly comment some time ago that the MPAA and RIAA might be pissed that the Video Game market is now outselling them. I'm not ready to start shouting conspiracy theory by a long shot, but Yee's contribution record certainly doesn't do anything to dispel that observation, especially considering every single one of these laws hasn't even gone near the Movie or Music industries.

@Gray

Alright, I see where your getting at. Sorry, its Monday, my brain is still on holiday.

On the issue of "interactive" vs "non-interactive", it has been proven time and again by mere Observation that the inability act, ie non-interaction, can actually be more dangerous than the ability to interact.

The inability of spectators at a sporting event who are angry, frustrated, or even excited to change events directly or affect events directly does tend to lead some individuals to strike out, sometimes at other spectators, sometimes at players.

The inability of a "spectator" who is watching what they feel to be an injustice on a video news report may actually increase the chance of the individual acting out in an aggressive manner because they could not act directly to prevent the injustice which they witnessed. One very well known event, among many, was the Rodeny King beating. While a great many individuals showed their anger in non-violent ways, a great many individuals, because of their anger and frustration, acted out in violent ways against other persons who had nothing to do with the injustice witnessed.

The fact is, that there are complex reasons for how each individual reacts to very specific situations. Senator Yee and others may describe a lack of aggression towards a video game as being desensitized, while the individual may actually recognize the Reality of the Fiction of the video game and not be concerned. Or, they may say someone is desensitized because they show little concern for real events, such as the Rodney King beating. But, in reality, it may be that the individual will show less concern for someone they don't know versus someone they are closer to. Or, the individual may recognize their inability to do anything about an event that had occurred and their personaility type may be calmer in certain situations versus other similar ones.

Quite frankly, if Senator Yee is happy with the ratings system offered by the CCFC or even the PTC, then he is free to use those rating systems for his own use or his own family's use. But he does not and should not have the Right to dictate to me which rating system is appropriate for me or my family, either because of his personal, religious, and/or political beliefs.

Quite frankly, it's looking more like Senator Yee may have a Conflict of Interest in pushing one particular rating system over another. I'd demand an investigation into financial contributions from or to the CCFC from his office.

Whether it's the ESRB, the MPAA, the TV Ratings system, or some other industry rating service, I'm satisfied simply because I don't limit myself to the industry ratings. They're useful, but certainly not the end-all-be-all of informational resources. And whether someone wants to supplement their ratings resources with the CCFC, PTC, GamerDad, GameSpot, or any number of other rating systems is fine by me. Whatever works for each individual. But dictating to me that ONLY this rating system or that rating system is all I'm allowed to use... Not gonna happen.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

Non-Interaction is like a pressure valve, those emotions build up, but don't release, so yes, personally, I'd say a movie is more influencial than a game, watch a racing movie, and you'll probably want to go home and play Need for Speed, not to increase your tension, but to release some of it. You're basically acting out the movie using the Video Game, not acting out a Video Game.

I've had enough of trying to defend the games industry from baseless attacks. There are always going to be baseless attacks, baselessness is infinite.

I say we go on the offensive and ask SERIOUS questions of Senators like Yee. Like why is he constantly going after violent games when he could be promoting parental locks? He seems to be intentionally avoiding the issue in order to boost his own agenda. If he truly believes that children shouldn't be playing these games, ignoring the parental locks is PUTTING OUR CHILDREN in danger!

I remember when I was a kid I found my parent's stash of porn. With the gov't current solutions, kids could find stashes of violent videogames and play them or share games with friends. If Yee pushed the parental locks, kids wouldn't even be able to play them if they found their parent's "stash of M rated games".

Defending against these attacks is pointless. We need to go on the offensive in a truthful yet emotionally convincing way.

Politicians like Yee are in fact putting our children in danger for their own agenda. They are evil and trying to take over raising our children for their own nefarious reasons.

@Ben

You assume ppl read warnings now a days.

@GoodRobotUs:

Rewind (pun intended) to 'The Fast and the Furious: TOKYO DRIFT's theatrical release... and subsequent news reports of increased police activity due to inevitable 'copycat incidents' involving the same hi-speed vehicles as seen in the movie.

@Ben Ambroso:

Exactly. Though they may as well move the descriptors to the front of the box, cause

I wish politicians would fuss over real issues like healtcare and minimum wage and not over hobbies.

What better for vote hunting than creating a social dilemma so that you can deal with it?

They are lovely ideals, but require a commitment of resources and energy and funds, whereas blaiming it all on video games takes little more than some vague rhetoric and the swipe of a Biro. Hence politicians prefer the easy route ;)

"We demand to know what Rockstar didn't put into the game so that we can bitch about it and pretend it's in the game even though it is not. After all facts never got in our way before, why should they get in our way now?"

oh dear... you know I forgot to finish my thought:

Exactly. Though they may as well move the descriptors to the front of the box, cause they can't be bothered to look at the back.

Basically, if they want to know how violent the game is, they can damn-well wait until its release on October 31st like the rest of us, it's not their concern anymore. They got their own way, to a degree, but like a child, compromise is never enough.

What an idiot! Seriously! Disclose how they changed a rating?!!! This guy needs to get his head out of his ass. Is he aware how many times this happens in the film industry? Where was he when they changed Hostel or Hostel II down to an R. Also the ESRB has said this has happended several times before. Face it Yee, you lost! Your law was defeated in the courts and Manhunt 2 is going to be released. Deal with it and shut up!

trying to get rid = trying to get hold.

Sorry :)

.. that was sarcasm by the way

You know, if we remove the children's eyes they cannot see porn or violence.

I mean if a child sees themself naked wouldnt that be porn?

Remove thier eyes to save them!

@Picho

Your plan is faulty...they can still hear bad language, gunshots and people having sex. We need to destory their ear drums too, then your plan is flawless.

@Picho & Bildo

Actually they can smell the gun powder and can speak the swears(it is possible) and touch/feel a weapon or sexual organ. Technically the only way we can keep violence away from children is too remove all sensory input. Politicians promoting baby-killing?

the only reason im intrested in knowing what was dropped is i because i just want to know what types of violence separates a M rated game from an AO rated game. but im not going to whine and cry over it if i dont find out. unlike some people...

I kind of feel sorry for the next generation, I have the feeling they are going to spend 18 years living in a bubble and then get thrown to the wolves of reality. I wouldn't rate their chances if that were the case.

I want to meet Lee just so I can pinch his cheek and say "Poor Schnookums" in my most condescending voice.

Then I would present him with a dildo. I doubt his dick is long enough for the suggestions you all are making to be physically possible otherwise.

@ Rigor Mortis

Or, if you've seen Deuce Bigelow: European Gigolo, give Yee a mini Tootsie Roll.

I just sit and wait for Jackass Thompson to claim he gave the idea to Senator Yee.

Am I the only one that fills with glee when I come across his name under the comments of a story? Can't wait to see what he says next? Is it just me?

@Father Time:

Well they must certainly have enough practice in the field of law, considering who they're constantly in the courtroom with. ;)