August 27, 2007 -
Gamers greeted Friday's surprise announcement that Manhunt 2 would receive an M rating with a mixture of glee and raised eyebrows.Fans of the series, of course, were relieved that Manhunt 2 would see the light of day, and sooner rather than later.
Game violence critics, to put it mildly, were not pleased. Dr. Susan Linn of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood immediately called for a government investigation of the process which led the ESRB to downgrade the game from a sales-killing AO to a marketable M rating.
Jack Thompson was up in arms too. But then, as far as video games are concerned, when isn't he?
Beyond the critics, however, GP was struck by the amount of skepticism in the gaming community. In comments to our Manhunt 2 story, some longtime readers were openly cynical:
The whole timeframe stinks to high heaven... Its gonna sell several times the number of copies than it probably deserves.
I think R* deliberately made a more explicit cut, hoping to get an AO game. That way they could market an M rated version... I find the whole thing distasteful...
I wonder if they originally submitted an “edited” version, got an “M”, and then cranked it up a notch to see how far they could push the ESRB before getting an AO rating…
I’ve come to the conclusion that Rockstar and the ESRB having been playing us in a tag team publicity stunt... Add the Halloween release date and I firmly believe they’ve been yanking our chains all along
Many GP readers took an opposite position, of course, supporting Rockstar and the ESRB process. But even at Kotaku, GP thought he detected a hint of skepticism in Brian Crecente's coverage:
It's official, it was all a publicity stunt. OK, maybe not... I suspect this wasn't much of a surprise to Take-Two and the Rockstar folks. Why else would they have continued to display the game and give press hands-on time with it if it wasn't going to make the cut.
What I'd really love to know is what exactly they cut to make the rating drop. I suspect it will be one or two levels that were easy to dispose of for little or no expense.
In discussions here, GP correspondent Andrew Eisen neatly summarized the possibilities:
Theory 1: The whole things a scam! Manhunt 2's content hasn't changed at all. Take-Two and the ESRB are in cahoots to placate the industry's critics.
Theory 2: Rockstar did something simple but drastic like fading to black during the killings.
Theory 3: There was only one kill or sexual situation that earned the game an AO in the first place. Maybe all Rockstar had to do was remove the testicle trauma or put some underwear on a bordello girl.
Theory 4: Rockstar intentionally put in some truly over the top and obnoxious sex and/or violence that they never intended to have in the game. It was included solely to have something to cut out when the ESRB balked.
And then there's the Strauss Zelnick factor. Take Two's new chairman has an extensive and highly successful marketing background. He has described his aggressive approach to selling thusly:
The strategy is to have a direct relationship with customers and to offer them compelling, high-margin products that they want but don't need through every channel known to man.
Did the AO controversy add buzz to Manhunt 2? No doubt. Will it spur demand for the game when it releases on Halloween? Can't hurt.
Could T2/Rockstar have manipulated the process? While some observers saw the ESRB dishing out a bit of Hot Coffee payback to Take Two with the Manhunt 2 AO, could Zelnick and company actually have been playing the ESRB like a fiddle?
Or, is it all on the up-and-up?
Be sure to vote in our GamePolitics Poll...
Comments
Re: Manhunt 2: Conspiracy Theories Emerge
I played Gta: Vice City when I was 16. My brother played it as well and he was 13. Until now we never killed anyone, but it seems we're bound too, as kids are stupid and dum and automoatically do everything they see on the screen. Duh. I played Manhunt when I was 18, and yesterday I killed someone because it was so cool to pick a knife and kill someone. Incredible!!! C'mon you bloody hipocrites!!! (sarcasm was used before, not to take seriously). If there are bunch of movies with sex, drugs and gore and they get the rating and everyone sees the movie the same, why cant I play a game that is violent? Nowadays Im 22, and I cannt play Manhunt 2 in Portugal because some uptight conservative hipocrites in the states, thought the game was too much? This makes me remember the time in the 80's when the conservative asshouls used to say that rock lyrics couldnt be obscene, and ARTISTS like Zappa were "in the way" because the FCC wanted to take away seven words (as if banning seven words would make people not hear them in the day by day life) its just a bunch of bollocks. If kids kill people at schools it isnt because they heared a certain music, or they saw a certain movie or they played a certain game; its because of the parents you nitwicks! I was six years old when I saw the first Alien movie, from Ridley Scott, a fine piece of art I might add, and My father taught me that it was all a movie, it was fictional. As long parents do their job kids can see and experiment whatever they want without any problems. Oh, Me and my brother played Bully as well (or in Europe as it is called Canis Canem Edit) and the game hasnt annything to do with kids shooting other kids in school, it doesnt even have a deadly gun in the game!!! Its has if I was seeing an American Pie movie!!! Its about kids life in the school, and its a satire, everyone that passed those times will fuckin laugh at it, and not become a murderer. Was American Pie almost banned when it came out? Bloody squares...
In particular I'm skeptical of malice afore thought on Zelnick's part. I just don't think there's enough time for him to get settled in and then influence what R* submitted for an initial rating.
This would be my guess. But like the JFK assassination - we'll never know for sure what really happened. ;)
Does it bother me if Rockstar did go through with these marketing techniques? Not a bit. They have a marketing team and they did their job. Got a crap load of press and they didn't have to do a lot to do it.
Although there may have been malicous intent on R* behalf, the opposite is just as likely.
I wouldn't put it passed them, but I don't think I could give them that much credit either.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
OK Game Devs
Random Tower
Any intelligent design team has a backup plan. Any intelligent team know that if you have a game where you literally put somebodys balls in a vice, you should probably make sure it's possible to remove that stage if it becomes a stop-ship issue.
With a good backup plan, censoring your game WOULD only take a month or so. A week at most to remove the offending content, then a week for QA to bug-test the changes and two weeks for resubmitting to the publisher/console manufacturers.
If you see a vast conspiracy, you don't understand how creating controversial content in entertainment works: you try and push the limit, but ALWAYS have a backup plan.
Personally, I'm hoping Rockstar/Take 2 makes the original AO version of the game available via direct order. For what it's worth, and fully cognizant that I'm just a voice in the wilderness, I'd love to buy and play Manhunt 2 in its original form, but I won't spend money to support a process that emasculates games and pretends it's not outright censorship.
I guess I'm still inclined to believe such as a thing as over-the-top violence in the media - and Manhunt is over that line. (shrug) The bottom line is I hadn't planned on doing any more powerful form of protest then withholding my $$$'s. Didn't plan to buy it before it was banned, still don't now that it's back.
This could go either way.
If movies are any example, implicit violence can get harsher ratings than actual violence. Take the movie Cupid for example: it had a scene where someone was stabbed off camera repeatedly, and an overturned lamp slowly made the room 'red', which implied it was getting soaked in blood. The movie was rated X until the director re-shot the same scene, but instead showed the actress actually being stabbed. Go figure...
At the same time, games like Freedom Fighters got T ratings because shooting people produced no blood. Seems unlikely, but could manhunt keep its realistic human figures and violent actions as long as their was no blood?
Only the ESRB will know....
Anyway you have to remember one thing when it comes to Rockstar, did they call Bully a Coumbine simulator? Did they hype up GTA as a cop killer? No.
The way I see it, is this, Rockstar went too far with Manhunt 2 only because that's what everyone expects, (I mean really if Manhunt 2 was tame compared to manhunt 1 then everyone would be disappointed). They went too far got an Ao and then edited it. I mean hey it's there job, what else are they going to be doing, monday through friday for 3 months? They have to put out an eited version or all that work on the PS2, PSP and Wii would have been all for nothing.
You also have to ask yourself, if the game is finished and ha an M rating why are they still waiting till Halloween to release it. Methinks they are not quite done eiting the game. After all they don't have to submit gameplay to the ESRB only videos of the worst things in the game, and if they decide to take out gruesome kills 34, 78, and 92, then submitting videos of what will now be the worst things shouldn't be that difficult.
I just hope they remove the content completely if that's the case. No one wants left over textures and code ala hot coffee again. at least none of us shareholders do :(
T2 can't afford another Hot Coffee... not after the steep fines that were imposed after their last irresponsible fuckup.
@Malygris
It would be nice if they could have the AO version for direct order, but storefronts are not the only barrier to entry for an AO game. They would have to port it to the PC, because Nintendo and Sony both refuse to allow AO games on their consoles.
I think the lesson the industry needs to learn from all this is that we need an NC-17 rating. That separates the "Adults Only" content from the pornographic content, while still appeasing the pixel-anti that refuse to see that an "M" rating IS 17+.
"could Zelnick and company actually have been playing the ESRB like a fiddle?"
There's my vote. TT hypes it up, submits something they know won't pass, cries foul when they get an AO, parades around talking about how the ESRB is being strict because of Hot Coffee, "boo hoo it'll take lots of time and money to fix this". Then after the ESRB is feeling all good about itself for "shaking down the worst offender", TT submits the tamer version, gets and M, and ships, knowing that the controversy has one again provided it with free publicity...
But it's still banned in the UK. Oh damn.
They could re-submit the edited version to the U.K. and if that gets rated, they sell that instead.
It doesn't matter whether there was some sort of "conspiracy" or not. Conspiracies occur in the shadows and can rarely be proven for that reason. As to what is obvious in the light of day, please note, and you'll learn something, gamers:
Regardless of method or motive, this is truly one of the dumbest things Take-Two and the ESRB could have done, particularly as to the ESRB. The whole Manhunt 2 fiasco, prior to the "M" rating allowed the ESRB to plausibly say to Congress, to parents, to watchdog groups (and to alleged "retards" in Miami, who are supposedly irrelevant but you all can't get through the day without) that "You can trust us. The rating system obviously works. Just look what we did to Manhunt 2."
But now that plausible "get off our back" plea is gone, utterly swept away by the latest gaffe. You have a powerful outfit in Boston, chocked full of Harvard faculty (they are screaming rightwing lunatics like me, kids) calling for a federal investigation. It will happen, and this will expose the ESRB and Take-Two to subpoenas, and they will be served and obeyed.
As to how dumb for Take-Two: very. I have met with Strauss Zelnick. I have spoken with him for two hours. Not one of you can say that, so listen up. The guy is really, really, really smart. And he is really, really, REALLY full of BS. For this guy, it's all about the money. Period. He says so. Strauss doesn't take the "long view" of any of this stuff, because he couldn't care less about the long view. He wants what is the most for his kids and for him and for his wife, and that's it. He has no conscience that I could ascertain. None. He is frightening in that regard, really. Only a functional sociopath such as Zelnick could actually say to the world "Manhunt 2 is a fine work of art." Only someone totally devoid of any moral compass could say that. And that is what Zelnick is.
People like Zelnick have great runs for sometimes quite awhile, and then the world and the truths God has built into it destroy them.
Take a good look at Zelnick and Take-Two. They're both on a collision course with what Hindus call kharma and what the rest of us know to be God's immutable laws. Great move going from AO to M in short order. However Zelnick did it he did it. And it is the noose by which he and Take-Two and the ESRB will be hung.
Hooah! Jack Thompson
one part to fluff the fuss over NC17 game ratings or lack there of
one part to fluff sales
really its win win win.
they figured the first version wouldnt make so they allready had another toned down version ready to go
I agree. I don't even remember where these theories started.
"As seductive as the conspiracy theories are, I find it unlikely that the executives could actually be convinced to gamble with their earnings forecasts (remember, the indefinite delay of the game had a serious effect on their overall financial outlook)."
Not really. Everyone expected the ESRB would play hardball with MH2. The delay announcement barely cause a blip on the stock price (it took a week to drop $22 to $21). The announcement that former execs were found guilty of backdating stocks? THAT hit them harder ($20 to 18). As did the delay of GTAIV. ($18 to $13)
The stock has been going up since Bioshock has been selling well. So far it hasn't reacted at all to MH2's release date announcement.
I'm happy they did make Manhunt 2 because it made a lot more people aware of the problems the industry faces in terms of developing games for consoles. Even if the theory that they were using it for publicity turns out to be true I think they could have released it on an earlier date and gotten a lot more sales out of the publicity.
Since I know I'm not always right and its very well possible that I'm wrong when I say everything was legit I really hope it turns out that T2 and ESRB was both in on it. It will be a serious blow to the credibility of the ESRB and will work in favor of either replacing it or eliminating it all together. Or perhaps at the very least a reform. I don't think it will really effect T2 that much.
Zing! XD
I think that the only logical step in terms of PC is to release a AO rated version. I don't see the connection with publicity stunt and releasing an AO rated game. I honestly hope they spend some money and expand the PC version a bit, release it a year later and refuse to submit it to the ESRB.
An AO-rated game should be treated the same as any other game - packaged, sent off and sold to customers over the required age-rating. Instead, giving a game an AO rating, a legitimate rating, effectively bans the game and gives it lots of publicity, both amongst gamers, who will instantly crave it, since it is 'forbidden fruit', whereas game critics will chastise the industry for allowing such sick filth to be made (despite never having seen the game, they will just instantly hate it for having an AO rating, since games are for kids, not adults, obviously).
There should be no rating, for games, films, DVDs, TV shows, books, music or otherwise, that bans or effectively bans it. There should be an independent reviewing panel, yes, and there should be a highest rating for a product, which should be strictly 18+. Anything higher than that and you're in a police state or a nanny state, more or less. If a certain rating becomes demonised and as such is not supplied by sellers or licensed onto certain platforms, such as the AO rating does to games, the independent panel should protest against the chastisement of their legitimate rating and simply put a game that should earn an AO rating as an M rating. Yes, the critics will whine that marketing a game intended for over 18s to over 17s is evil and immoral, but frankly, so is denying adults their right to choose what media they can and can't view or purchase.
The ESRB should've just given it an M rating in the first place, since the AO rating is more or less defunct and obsolete. I don't care if there is an interactive rape scene where you dress up as Hitler, recreate 9/11 and then rape the victims of the Columbine shootings while smoking crack and downloading copyrighted films of bitTorrent and editting Star Wars so Greedo shoots first (sorry to be hyperbolic; that was simply the most evil, outrageous thing I could think of in about ten seconds); I, as an adult, have the right to choose what I view and I am allowed to make my own opinion on something, and I'm not going to let someone decide that I'm not allowed to make my own decisions about my life just because every so often, a really bad parent buys inappropriate content for their child and then the industry gets blamed for not doing enough to protect the children.
The problem is is that there is still no word that Manhunt 2 will be released in the UK, and, unfortunately, because the original game was mentioned in a case of one teenager murdering another (despite the police time and time again assuring the anti-game crowd that Manhunt was found in the victim's bedroom and there was no evidence at all linking the game to the crime, or in fact any evidence that the murderer had ever played the game or even owned a PS2), it will probably remain banned here just to placate that bastard crook Keith Vaz and his ethically-skewed agenda. He should fuck off back to his own country, the fucking deadshit.
i call on every game company to produce one AO game that is worth playing (no Guy Game, please) and put pressure from both sides.
Don't forget to urinate on brain stems!
clearly thats the talk of someone whos in on it!
:P
you said, "Anyway you have to remember one thing when it comes to Rockstar, did they call Bully a Coumbine simulator? Did they hype up GTA as a cop killer? No."
Well of course they didnt, thats because they don't have to. Thats what the media is for :P I have no idea if it was a publicity stunt but I can certainly see it being the case. The guys over at Rockstar know how to get attention and they know all they have to do is make there game offensive then the publicity train just rolls in. If it was a stunt, then they know how to manipulate the media very well!
@ Terrible Tom
I hope to god they don't do what your suggesting. What good could come out of it? If rockstar refuses to submit anything to the ESRB (or any other company at that) that will just fuel the fire for the government to step up their attempted regulation of the industry. I mean, if Rockstar does release the unedited version of Manhunt on the PC its not like there is a PC manufacturer that will refuse to release it like the consoles manufacturers. If Rockstar was smart they would try and release an unedited version on direct download sites.
After reading some of your comments it seems as thought you want to get rid of the ESRB, thats just me reading between the lines though.
@raw steel
I agree! However to save face with the politicans, all consoles should have a default setting to block AO games unless you enter a password or something.
"I don’t care if there is an interactive rape scene where you dress up as Hitler, recreate 9/11 and then rape the victims of the Columbine shootings while smoking crack and downloading copyrighted films of bitTorrent and editting Star Wars so Greedo shoots first”
Don’t forget to urinate on brain stems! "
While performing a gay marriage and allowing testing on stem cells.
Personally, I don't know if it was intentional or not, nor do I care. It's not like Rockstar broke the mold by using sensationalism and public reaction to drive whatever their selling home. For Toast's sake, that tactic dates back before the black plague!
Come on, how many lousy movies have you gone to see because of public reactions? How many people bought because of it? This isn't a new idea, but it sure is an effective one. And if was all staged to hype their sales, I would like to cite hermetic thinking on the matter: "If you're dumb enough to be fooled, you deserve to be fooled."
I keep seeing people refer to this, and, considering the person who originally made such a claim, I have to ask if it really was there to begin with.
Then there is the fact people around that time were making up all sorts of similar claims as to what was really cut...
Is there some proof that such a thing existed in the game well BEFORE the "blogisphere" got a hold of it and kept passing it around as fact?
Saw it in the local independent movie house. Great fun.
The BBFC, according to PC Gamer UK, has just released a report stating the importance of video games in British culture and their cultural significance in general, and generally seemed to be on the ball, at least, according to the journalist.
I still think the real reason that the game was banned in the UK is still because the original was wrongly implicated in that murder a few year back, and Keith STUPID FUCKING CROOK Vaz hasn't shut up about it since. If that stupid kid hadn't bought the game before being stabbed, I'd probably be sitting with my Wii swinging the Wiimote around murdering virtual people on a screen instead of this bullshit.
Terrible Tom is a complete anti-ESRB. Just so you know.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
OK Game Devs
Random Tower