I think its a little shady. I was all up in arms when the game was given the AO rating and banned in other countries. but the turn around on this stinks, people were predicting almost a year and lots of money to cut the content out, and yet they managed it in three months?

"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."

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.

I agree with JB: if this is a marketing move, it was smart and completely reasonable. I mean, it's on the PS2. R* needs the hype -- the anticipation of total gore -- to get people to step back from their PS3s and 360s ' high def, wide screen graphics. If the reviewers give it thumbs up for being a good game too, then there's no reason I wouldn't buy it :)

Theory 5: They designed their game so that it would be easy to censor/reshuffle if the ESRB gave it an AO rating.

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.

Oddly, I think I find the conspiracy theories less disturbing then the defense tactics. Particularly, the "you don't get to choose what's art" line of thought. That's just flaky at best. By that line of logic, somebody at the Wendy's could've taken a dump on my cheeseburger and called it "art", and it would've been protected under freedom of expression.

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.

Theory 2: Rockstar did something simple but drastic like fading to black during the killings.

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....

@ JBourrie

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 :(

"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."

"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...

@blackIce

They could re-submit the edited version to the U.K. and if that gets rated, they sell that instead.

One part to placate the industry critics
one part to fluff the fuss over NC17 game ratings or lack there of
one part to fluff sales


really its win win win.

I kind of think we are making it into something more complicated than it is.

@Terrible Tom

I agree. I don't even remember where these theories started.

@Shih Tzu

"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 think if this IS all a publicity stunt, then the next logical step is to release the AO version for PC. We'll see if that happens -- if it IS all about marketing, I expect that to happen sometime next year.

Thad -

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.

Considering the content descriptors for the game include "Strong Sexual Content" and in light of the sheerly grotesque stuff that was allowed for Bioshock, I'm inclined to believe that at least at some level, there was a conspiracy theory involved. I wouldn't be surprised if they knew ahead of time that GTA IV wasn't going to make its October release date and needed something there, but didn't want to pull the game from its' Spring release for no reason at all.

[...] Manhunt 2: The Conspiracy http://gamepolitics.com/2007/08/27/m...eories-emerge/ Quote: [...]

"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!

What I want to know is what they took out.

@Sidewinder


clearly thats the talk of someone whos in on it!

:P

@Jabrwock
"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.

"testicle trauma"
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?

@Near Fantastica

Saw it in the local independent movie house. Great fun.

@ Black Ice

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.

@ Bildo

Terrible Tom is a complete anti-ESRB. Just so you know.

1 - 16).

3. It is no more the fault of the ESRB, than it is of the MPAA, if parents or other audults buy M rated video games (or R rated movies) for children. The ratings boards exist as a means to make people informed, not to enforce some arbitrary laws designed to censure constitutionally-protected speech from the public.

The "major malfunction" in your entire line of reasoning is the belief that ratings should exist to either be laws, or make laws. I'd guess there is some sort of monetary reason that you, as an attorney, would really appreciate more laws to be broken and legal cases you can get paid for being an attorney on. The thing is, ratings boards do not exist to become legal precedences (in this country) -- the ratings boards like ESRB are an effort for the industry to voluntarily provide useful information so that parents can make a good, informed decision as to if they believe something is or isn't appropriate for their children -- no more, no less. It has worked for the movie industry, and statistics have shown it is working for the video game industry. "M" rated games are no more "marketed for/sold to" children than "R" rated movies are.

What you want is not to protect children, you want to see these games removed from the shelves of stores. I hate to break it to you, but that does more than prevent children from getting the games, it prevents adults from getting them too. Adults like myself, who may want to get a game like Manhunt 2, who have the capability to make decisions for ourselves without having the government stepping in and making the decisions for us. And you seem to be at direct odds with my personal freedoms in general, and the First Amendment specifically. That you can't see this, and have justified your actions so thoroughly to yourself, is pretty sad in and of itself.

"Dennis McCauley can never resist the cheap shot, can he?"

Pot meet kettle.


"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.”"


Explain just how you think its the dumbest thing they could have done. So removing the content that gave it an AO rating, thus making it an M rated game is dumb. This makes no sense. What if they removed all violence from the game and all other questionable content, would you still want it rated only AO? You and Yee seem to want an AO just for the sake of an AO, regardless of the content.


"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."

First off, I'm over 18. I pay taxes and can vote losers like Yee out of office. That being said, just how is the "get off our back" plea gone? You jokers were applauding the ESRB when they gave it an AO rating, now prove they still aren't as trustworthy as you previously stated. Prove that the content which pushed it beyond the realm of M into AO is removed. For for hell's sake at least humor the idea that maybe Rockstar did remove this content.

Answer this, Is it possible the game was altered? And if so isn't that grounds for a new rating? The movie industry does this all the time. Often they have to cut things out to get them into theaters, only to reappear later in an "Unrated Directiors cut".

"For this guy, it’s all about the money."

Pot meet kettle.

"He has no conscience that I could ascertain. None. He is frightening in that regard, really."

Pot meet kettle.

"Only a functional sociopath such as Zelnick could actually say to the world “Manhunt 2 is a fine work of art.”

Art isn't always pretty or pleasant.


"Great move going from AO to M in short order."

And it might be a "great move" if they actually did remove content.


"Hooah! Jack Thompson"


Translation: Fuck our troops! Jack Thompson

Also I really hope after this investigation and the ESRB shows exactly what content was removed that they don't stop there. After that they and Rockstar really need to go on the counter offensive and put Jack, Yee, and the "Watchdog groups" in their place.

I think its about time I chimed in on this little site and made a few facts up to snuff for a few people, and that specifically means you Jack-O so heeeyer's the deal and don't mistake that word as mispelled ecause I actually want you to know how I would be pronouncing the word were you in front of me:

Its not that hard to change a game's content if you actually know what you're doing, and I'll use some medical anaologies just so you can get a clear picture of things. Specifically questionable content can be cut from a game much like a benign tumor can be cut out of a person under the knife with a scalpel. Content can also be easily closed off from what is actually played to save potential problems in much the same way if I used to a pair of surgical staples to close that flap you call a mouth it would eventually lead to a decline in your ability to constantly humiliate yourself simply by opening it, and would probably save your son a large amount of potential beatings as he progresses in high school and college when people discover who his father happens to be.

Furthermore, I do find it quite amusing for the likes of you to declare someone to lack a conscience, when in fact I don't think I could find a better source of proof that most people are bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling short of Bob Kelso himself. But by all means, don't take anything I say to heart, not like you will anyways, you feel free to go back to that persecution complex you and your ilk like to go to while claiming you're "saving lives" when in fact its the surgeons and doctors like myself who in fact are doing the actual saving of lives.

And don't think I'm anywhere near done with you Jack-O, I plan to make myself know every time you feel the need to chime in with your bigoted and ignorant view of the world. Keep that in mind when you feel the need to bring anything up because I'll be on you like Fox News on a missing white girl. You've been warned.

Theory 4 is my favorite because if it's true, we'll get to play Manhunt 2 the way its creators intended.

Find ol' number 4 hard to believe? You shouldn't. Filmmakers employ that strategy with the MPAA all the time.


Andrew Eisen

@Bildo

"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."

See Indigo Prophesy... the AO version was download-only for the PC

[...] Here’s an excellent compilation of conspiracy theories that I’ve reposted here from GamePolitics.com: [...]

He's the one that put his name totally in Caps, kind of ironic after his complaints about an all-caps post yesterday.

Jack, your incessant whining about this game has helped me decide to buy it. I do not want to play the game. The first one was, in my opinion, a waste of media. However, trying to stifle rights, as you do so indolently, has opened my eyes to the fact that, although my sixty bucks isn't going to get me any return on my Nintendo stock, it will be sixty bucks given in the fight to stifle you.

You cast so many stones I imagine your house is covered with tungsten.

I vote for Theory #4. Plus when Take 2 complained about the rating they purposely got, they got tons of publicity for what will probably be a crummy game. And now with all the anti-game zealots crying foul, they'll continue to get publicity for a crummy game well into November. You want proof? Nobody would have heard word one about the AO rating, if Take 2 hadn't said a single word about it. Think about it.

Thompson, Yee and their ilk have played right into their hands.

Why is it that every time an article is posted here on gamepolitics.com Jack Thompson has to come on and post a self-deluded justification for his actions? Blaming others for twisting his words and taking things out of context or just spinning it into his vast conspiracy.

Is Thompson so deluded that he needs to rationalize every single one of his actions to a supposed "paranoid" audience of "brian dead drug addicts"?

I don't think there's a conspiracy...Why would R* bother with making a version it can't release on time? They've already missed out on a ton of cash from the game not releasing a month ago and you know time's money.

Congrats, Jackie boy...you just helped sell several hundred copies of an "ultra"-violent game. Way to play right into their plans...

And because I support the troops and you do not...I have the right to say this. Hooah...hooah, indeed.

Don't worry about Jack Thompson. Even he doesn't know what he's doing anymore. I don't know if he ever really cared or not when he started out claiming to be trying to protect children and such, but the fact of the matter is that it's boiled down to nothing more than a grudge against Take Two/Rockstar and that is it.

There has never been a factual study that proved causation of real life violence from exposure to video game violence despite Thompson's and other's claims, and it's even been documented by the state that the gaming industry is at least on par with the movie industry in keeping violent video games from being sold to minors, etc.

There really is no rational reason to be attacking the video game industry anymore, not that there was much to begin with but I at least understood the worries that people had before. But now these same people ignore the facts and twist them into their own delusional reality to try and censor what they don't like or understand.

It's a fact that it's the parents duty to decide what is right or wrong for their children and then make the decision whether or not to allow them to view/play/listen to whatever media they do not feel is appropriate for them.

It's a fact that most major retail stores are strict when it comes to their policies of not selling inappropriate video games to minors (i.e. I at 24 got carded several times even when sporting a full beard and being six foot).

It's a fact that the newer consoles now sport parental controls so parents can keep the more Mature titles from playing on their child's gaming console. So even if a child did somehow get a hold of the game their gaming console wouldn't allow them to play it.

They always ignore these facts and tell lies that suit their needs. They claim that every Mature title (aka "ultra violent video games") are being marketed and sold to underage children. They claim that there are concrete studies that show that video games cause real life violence yet never seem to have these so called concrete studies available for proof.

#2 or #3 seem most plausible. I know someone who plays WoW with at least one of the Manhunt Wii guys, and he was telling me that Rockstar basically freaked out when the AO rating hit. They weren't expecting it, and initially, they didn't know what they were going to do.

The thing that a lot of gamers don't seem to realize is that Rockstar is a very poorly-managed company. Pretty much everything I've heard about them from current or former employees has been bad. This basically means that when they fuck up, it's for real, no matter what their PR people like to pretend. Every time this happens, they try to spin it to LOOK like a clever (and daring!) publicity stunt. They want the public to see them as the shameless bad boys that Jack Thompson loves to hate, not as they actually are -- a company fraught with poor management, low morale, and woefully inadequate lines of communication.

I'm always a little dubious though Hannah, just about everyone describes their own employer as being poor at management etc, even Jack Thompson does it with the Florida Bar. Whilst I find it perfectly plausible that this was as much a surprise for R* as this guy claims, I wonder how much of the poor image of Rockstar from its own employees is simply because people will listen to them, whereas no-one cares if a Programmer for, say, Sierra gets pissed off.

@ Jack Thompson, Soon-to-be-ex-attorney

Wow, I couldn't tell which pile of monkey crap was the bigger crybaby, you, Leland Yee, or those chumpstains from Harvard.

You're the last person who should talking about karma, since you're the one in danger of losing his license to practice law because of your bad behavior(as Earl Hickey from My Name Is Earl so eloquently put it: "Do good things, good things happen; do bad things, bad things happen).

Game Over, you lost again. You must really suck at this Perry Mason stuff.

Practice what you preach, jabroni: Grow up and get a life.

Well at the con the guy who was supposed to be someone working for R* said that very little was changed between the AO and the M version. Apparently it was just adjusting the blood content and camera angles. Take it or leave it, I guess.

I bet you anything the game wasn't edited at all. 3 months to re-do code and re-test the came for bugs again? I don't think so. So why the M rating appeal and delay? They do this with some of the Satanic Death Metal albums' artwork I buy: Cover the game box with a slipcase (usually made out of cardboard.)with alternate artwork and a huge warning in red that the content is not for children. Not enough? Well if your a responsible parent and can read I'm pretty sure the parent can finally be liable..

It seems both TT and ESRB had to meet half way on something and thats the best Consipracy/Compromise theory for both companies I came up with.

@Jack Thompson

'(and to alleged “retards” in Miami, who are supposedly irrelevant but you all can’t get through the day without)'

Well then, I think we deserve, for all being so corrupt and part of the conspiracy to 'get' you the punishment of you vanishing and never, ever darkening these boards with your presence again.

Please.

Well, no-one compelled R*, not in any direct sense, but market forces DID force the edit, they didn't really have much choice, they could have stood by the AO rating, but it would have cut out a large percentage of their market, thanks to the console release ethics. I'd suspect that most fans are happy, it's just that the unhappy ones tend to be more vocal about it.

Personally, I couldn't care less, I might buy the game just to prove a point to censors that jumping up and down and shouting 'Look at this! Look at this!' is an excellent way of increasing sales, not reducing them.

@ scrutinizer

oh cry me a river. Just be grateful your getting the game at all, don't be a brat about it.

There's an old trick that some filmmakers use when they're afraid their movie will receive an X/NC-17 rating. They submit a version of their film that contains scenes of sex and/or violence that are completely gratuitous and over-the-top that they know fully well will get their movie a hard rating. They do this in the hopes that the MPAA will be so overwhelmed by the scenes the filmmakers had no intention of keeping in the first place, they'll overlook the scenes the filmmakers do want to keep. I had heard that Paul Verhoeven had used this trick when making "Total Recall." It's possible that the developers of "Manhunt 2" also resorted to this tactic. While I really don't know what the true story here is, I'll admit I have difficulty believing that there wasn't some kind of publicity stunt going on behind the scenes. I just hope that we do get the facts of why "Manhunt 2" got an M rating and we're told exactly what was cut, if anything (because it could have been re-rated on appeal).

"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."

What did they do that was so dumb? Their jobs?

"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.”

The ESRB still can be trusted. What has led you to believe otherwise? I believe it's just a poor grasp of what actually happened. They gave a game called Manhunt 2 an AO rating. That game has been scrapped, and now there is a new game called Manhunt 2 which was rated like any other game and the content was found to merit an M rating.

"But now that plausible “get off our back” plea is gone, utterly swept away by the latest gaffe."

See above. It is not a gaffe, they were given two different games, one had content that warranted an AO rating, the other one had content that warranted M.

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.

"He has no conscience that I could ascertain. None. He is frightening in that regard, really."

No conscience? Wow, he sounds like the kind of person who could go on a message board where people are grieving the loss of a friend who commited suicide, insult everyone there and never apologise or feel bad about it. Wait a second......


"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."

Slander?

"Great move going from AO to M in short order."

I don't know how many times it has to be explained... They didn't go from AO to M. There was a game called Manhunt 2, the content of which called for and received an AO rating. Then they changed/removed whatever content prompted the ESRB to give the AO rating. So now, there is a different game called Manhunt 2, the content of which is rated M for mature, but is not strong enough to warrant an AO rating.

Quick metaphor: A student hands in a substandard paper on a topic and receives a D-. He asks to resubmit the paper, but this time works harder, and rewrites a paper on the same topic so that is very good. He hands it in again and this time his grade is an A. His grade has not gone from D to A, there were two seperate and distinct papers, one that deserved a D (which was scrapped), and one that deserved an A.

The same for Manhunt 2. There are two distinct, different games, both on the same topic and with the same name. One which deserved an AO rating, and one that deserved an M rating. The M rated one will be sold in stores.

"However Zelnick did it he did it."

Zelnick did not "do it". You are implying he went in and persuaded the ESRB to change their minds and give the orginal cut of Manhunt 2 a different rating. If anyone is responisble it is the the programmers and artists at Rockstar who made the necessary changes to remove or tone down the AO content, creating a different game which received an M rating.

I don't see what the big deal is. The only difference between an AO-rating and M-Rating is an AO rated game will not be sold on the shelves of major stores like gamestop, etc. The ratings have a 1 year age difference in the minimum age you have to be to buy a game and a 17 year old isn't going to be much different when he turns 18, so it really doesn't matter. The problem isn't the game or the rating it's even when the game is clearly rated Mature for 17+ parents go out and buy these games for their 14 year old kids, etc. and they try to make a big deal about it afterwards like they didn't know what they were doing.

@VenomandCarnage
Wow way to be a brat yourself. seriously grow up. he was voicing a complaint and stated a reason, and what do you do, throw out a "BRAT" statement that he should just be happy the game comes out. Many many people don't like to have their media edited, even if you aren't one of those people don't be a brat to those who are.

@ VenomCarnage: umm I wouldn't buy that game if you paid me and then gave it to me for free. Its not only NOT the kind of game I'm interested in, it comes from a company whose only contribution to game culture was the popularization of non-linear game play. My point was and is that no one is filled with "glee". No one. on either side. I'm not crying, I'm laughing at all the hub-bub on both sides over the game equivelant of the movie Water World... in other words... crap by any other name or form, is still crap.


@ GoodRobotUs: My point is that R* & TT said the game was now unsalvageable once it got the AO, then almost overnight it got salvaged. wtf?

I really dont give two damns, I love the first manhunt and am quite stoked about a sequel. Yet, if this whole ordeal indeed was a publicity stunt, then thats great! Clever ass marketing! Kudos to R*. Dont knock their hustle for real.

[...] Conspiracies here [...]

@ HUNTING MANS:

Fair enough but why then did TT & R* make such a stink and say the game was unsalvageable and would have to be completely redone and may never see the light of day due to the extent of the required edits?... the answer is, they knew damn well they could fenegle just as you described it and making a stink served them well as a marketing ploy.

Film directors do this "slight of hand" thing all the time: put in more sex/violence than they want in order to get a more restrictive rating from the MPAA. Then to get their desired rating, they are "forced" to edit out all the bits they didn't want to begin with. This allows them to keep the, perhaps, more controversial elements they were after in the first place.

Related: On the calls for more transparency in the ESRB's ratings process, why is no one asking for the same of the MPAA? Re: This Film Is Not Yet Rated.

I found it funny that Jack points that we can't go a day without him, but who's the one who keeps coming here and posting?

Here is something interesting for you all to mull over. About 2 weeks after July 10th, I walked into my local GameStop and struck up a conversation with the worker about Manhunt 2. And I shit you not, he told me that Take-Two had already notified all of the GameStops that Manhunt 2 had recieved an M-rating and that GameStop was taking pre-orders. It is common knowledge (as per their employees) that GameStop would NEVER take pre-orders on an AO game, or a game that was not yet rated. 2 weeks, thats it. As far as these conspiracies go, I don't know what Rockstar did. As far as I am concerned, the game is getting released and that is all I care about. The first Manhunt was a VERY strong M, in my opinion. And from the few reviews I have read Manhunt 2 is way worse. My brief opinion is that very little, if anything, was changed. And what was changed was insignificant. My two cents.

So what? They wanted to see what would constitute an AO rating. They wanted to see how far the proverbial envelope could be pushed.

As far as the conspiracies go it's easy to be a conspiracy theorist. You never need any concrete proof and as long as your story/theory sounds good you can get away with it.

In fact I can play the game too and say all the Manhunt 2 conspiracy theorists out there are paid employees of Jack Thompson in hopes of lowering sales.

[...] Manhunt conspiracy! [...]

[...] Recently, Rockstar has had one big up for advancing the medium and one even bigger down. The high point being Bully. I’m yet to play this game as I don’t have a PS2 and haven’t picked up the 360 version yet. This is the game that was mostly famous for letting you (a school age male character) kiss other boys. I think this is an amazing choice and an awesome nod to the gay gaming community. There are very few things for them in games unless you count Mass Effect, but they didn’t even go as far as to include a dude on dude relationship. On the way low other end of the spectrum is Manhunt 2. This has been talked about to death, but it needs another quick word. The original Manhunt was a great suspense/horror game and one of the few that really got into my head and scared me, not with gore but with atmosphere. Manhunt 2 took this idea and made it into a gore fest with a crappy story. You can only justify the kind of game that it was with the right tone and story, it lacked both. The entire debacle with the AO rating knocked Rockstar down a peg, unless you believe in vast conspiracy theories. [...]