Report: Sega Working Closely with ESRB on MadWorld Content

Sega, publisher of the upcoming MadWorld, is working closely with the ESRB on the bloody game’s content, according to a report on MTV Multiplayer.

Sega’s goal, of course, is to avoid a sales-killing Adults Only rating. It’s more or less a given that black-and-white (and red) MadWorld will be tagged with at least an M rating in the United States.

Of the cooperation, MTV Multiplayer’s Patrick Klepek writes:

Sega is working closely with the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to ensure the game receives just an M rating, they told me. The ESRB receives new builds on a regular basis and Sega notes their feedback. Sega wants them to feel “part of the process” of developing “MadWorld” and isn’t looking to surprise them…

 

But don’t let the ESRB’s involvement make you nervous; “MadWorld” is plenty violent right now. It looks like “Sin City” was bathed in a bucket of blood.

As GamePolitics reported in August, Sega is similarly working with the BBFC on smoothing over MadWorld’s path to a successful U.K. release. It’s unclear, however, whether MadWorld will see release in other violence-sensitive markets, including Japan, Germany and Australia.

Although MadWorld is not scheduled for release until March, the game has already been the subject of at least one call for a ban.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

203 comments

  1. 0
    GusTav2 says:

    I wouldn’t describe the regulatory tradition in Europe as socialist, it goes back a lot further than socialism. It’s also been employed by some fantastically right wing regimes – I need name no names.

    It certainly ture that Europe has a very strong tradition or corporatism, whether the group is defined on a national basis or by way of class. That is quite starkly opposed to the individualistic tradition which holds so much sway in the US.

    Socialism is a form of corporatism which also involves ownership of the means of production, so it’s not really appropriate in this context as we are talking about private enterprise. But then again I’m probably just being a terrible pedant …

  2. 0
    Erik says:

    Screw their money.  For being whore-sellouts who are pandering to the censors trying to destroy the industry they will get none of my money.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  3. 0
    Nocturne says:

    I’ve read the first few lines and it completely ignores the fact that SEGA are an international company trying to make a commercial product to be sold in numerous countries with diferent regulations and who want to make money and are working within the pre-existing guidelines that they have no control over, not an indie developer trying to make some social commentry or some whiney emo bitch.

    Wether they are willing to or not doesn’t matter, to do their business they have to

  4. 0
    Erik says:

    That is irrelevant.  The fact is that the taboo of the AO does give them power.  Furthermore they ARE having direct influence as Madworld is showing us.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  5. 0
    Erik says:

    Then read just the first few lines: "Whether or not they actually cut anything is irrelevant.  The fact that they are WILLING to do so is the problem."

    And I could drop the analogies, but its the only way I’ve been able to simplify my point for those with their fingers in their ears.  I could use caveman speak, but that is even more condesending.

     

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  6. 0
    Nocturne says:

    Try talking to people without the analogies, or at least try ot think of one that is at least vaguely relevant to the point being made, then someone might actually listen to what your saying insted of dismissing it as a meaningless, ill-thought rant.

  7. 0
    Erik says:

    No, not this time.  This time this game is dumed down to please the assholes in the US and UK.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  8. 0
    Erik says:

    Whether or not they actually cut anything is irrelevant.  The fact that they are WILLING to do so is the problem.  Can you say you would be okay if one of your parents told you "You know when you were a baby I was getting ready to sell you for crack, but then I hit that lotto ticket so it was okay!"  Would you be okay with that because, you know, they didn’t actually sell you?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  9. 0
    Erik says:

    I’m not here to get people to see my perspective.  That is a fool’s game.  Hence why I feel much more fulfilled when I state "fuck the BBFC" as opposed to what Chuma has labled "debate" which leaves me feeling emotionally winded.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  10. 0
    Erik says:

    "You expect potential customers to rent the game first to try it out before determining whether it’s a suitable purchase?"

    Yes, its just basic logic.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  11. 0
    Nocturne says:

    I don’t know which is worthier but from my perspective, Idealism is nice, but sometimes the rest of the world is just gonna up and bite you on the ass, you can either accept that or move your keyster and try to do something about it

  12. 0
    SticKboy says:

    A classic argument to value pragmatism over idealism, amirite?

    But in the final analysis, which position is the worthier? This is what I am struggling to reconcile.

  13. 0
    Nocturne says:

    Like them or loathe them, classifications are there so taking them into account just makes more sense, I mean as a developer you can either work within the guidelines of others and produce something your happy with, or produce something your happy with then watch as people outside of your control tell you to change it. With increasing costs and production times, not bearing the classifications in mind is poor business that will lead to time and resources being wasted that you can’t afford. That or you can bitch about it on the internet but that never got no one nowhere.

  14. 0
    SticKboy says:

    Whether or not anything has been cut isn’t really the issue. The issue is whether videogame developers ought to be taking classifications into account in the first place, as opposed to staying 100% faithful to their original vision.

  15. 0
    Matthew says:

    You really serious? You expect potential customers to rent the game first to try it out before determining whether it’s a suitable purchase? Even parents buying as gifts? The ratings boards exist to analyse and present the potentially offensive content in games so that people can make informed choices without having to play the game.

  16. 0
    Father Time says:

    Well it would really help people see your perspective if you did.

    —————————————————-

     God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  17. 0
    Father Time says:

    Oh come off it, just because we like to debate doesn’t mean we have no life.

    —————————————————- God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  18. 0
    Nocturne says:

    I’d rather it not be released at all than having to put up with some lesser, watered down, censored version. 

    And how do you know this is what will be released? There’s been no mention of anything actually being cut at all, your just guessing and flying off the handle because SEGA are bothering to check with someone else first.

    Producing something so ultraviolent that it just sits on a shelf and can never be seen or played by ayone isn’t a gutsy vision, it’s just plain dumb.

  19. 0
    Erik says:

    I really don’t give a flying fuck if it can be produced or not.  I’d rather it not be released at all than having to put up with some lesser, watered down, censored version.  I’m aware that there would be a chance if they didn’t work with the ESRB or BBFC that it wouldn’t get to be realeased, but I would be thankful to Sega for having the guts to stick with their vision.  And it would add just more fuel to the fire about the ESRB and BBFC just being censors which need to be dealt with.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  20. 0
    Nocturne says:

    It’s not really as simple as cuts at the command of the BBFC, or editing to meet the M requirements of the ESRB for that matter (not sure how M compares to 18 tbh in terms of content allowed), it’s about producing something that can legally be released to high street retailers in the first place which may mean having to make concessions to censorship, I understand that you seem to be against censorship of any sort (and the youtube link above is a fair example of why) but it is a necessity of life to get anything in the media done, without the ratings boards and censorship, things would be much worse as it opens up a free for all of blame and accountability whenever something that may be percieved as objectionable is released.

    What if Sega were working with the KKK to see if the game met their standards, but no changes were announced.  What would you think of that?

    I think there’s enough irrelevant analogies floating around let’s not throw another one up.

  21. 0
    Erik says:

    It doesn’t matter whether or not anything IS cut.  What matters is that they are willing to do so at the command of the BBFC.  Sort of like a gift its the thought that counts.  But in this case the thought is censorship on behalf of the BBFC.

    What if Sega were working with the KKK to see if the game met their standards, but no changes were announced.  What would you think of that?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  22. 0
    Erik says:

    Wow, awesome.  You must have completely missed the part about the AO rating and the leverage it gives the ESRB bastards.  Please re-read.  Also as Sega is working with the ESRB as well that is further influence they are projecting when their job should be education.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  23. 0
    Nocturne says:

    Furthermore the ripple effect from that is still being felt in other games such as, oh I don’t know, Madworld. 

     

    This is just utter bullshit, it’s not like Sega are saying, oh sorry that Skull fucking scene we’ve been promising has had to be axed, it’s just posturing BS from a company that hasn’t even finished making the game yet. Until they actually turn around and state we couldn’t include X because of the censors it’s a just a load of crap

  24. 0
    Erik says:

    I consider this to be part of the battlefield for a person’s right to their own mind.  Anyone who defends censorship in any of its forms is the enemy.  Ergo I have no problem being refered to as a cock or a troll.  In fact I welcome it.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  25. 0
    Erik says:

    I really think it should be up to the parents to decide what is innapprorpriate for children and not some assholes in suits that they have never met, don’t you?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  26. 0
    Erik says:

    "That doesn’t however mean that you aren’t at least now coming across as approachable and thoughtful."

    I’ve never stated that I wanted to come across as approachable and thoughtful though have I?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  27. 0
    Erik says:

    "Please. Whenever you have to interact with somebody else, you have to rein yourself in."

    Once again, not with any quality piece of creative work.

    "The ESRB is the government now? When did that happen?"

    I was refering to organizations and countries with age based laws which prevent minors from buying such games.  The ESRB is a whole different can of worms.  The ESRB can’t initiate such direct control as the BBFC, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have any control.

    "Any kind of law puts one set of moral standards over another set. You yourself wish for your own moral standard to be instituted on the populace, whether they want it or not."

    Incorrect.  I’m saying that individuals need to adopt their own moral standards rather than this hivemind bullshit.  Lets say that Manhunt 2 offends your morals.  Congratulations, I tip my hat to your superior morals.  Now since it offends you don’t buy it.  But someone else whose morals aren’t offended can still buy it.  I’m for individual morality, not my own.

    "I disagree. Manhunt 2 at least tried to have it look like you were killing real (video game) people with easily accesible improvised weapons. Manhunt the series shows the killings in great detail, so if you wanted to emulate them, you could. Thus, I would give it an M."

    Great detail?  Um, yeah I mean it probably would be great detail to a person who was tripping on LSD for every second of their lives.  If there was such great detail why did I not have a damn clue what was going on when I rented te game?  The confusion of just went was happening when everything went all Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds caused me to return a 5 day rental after an hour of play.

     

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  28. 0
    Erik says:

    Having their decision overruled doesn’t make up for the fact that the game was originally banned in the first place.  Furthermore the ripple effect from that is still being felt in other games such as, oh I don’t know, Madworld.  So why don’t you get some perspective and try to grasp the situation before opening your pie hole.  Compared to you, Chuma is the champion of thinking for one’s self.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  29. 0
    Nocturne says:

     Sega are literally banking on MadWorld skirting the boundaries of the banhammer and then, crucially, surviving. It’s how they make money while sticking to the design spec.

    Agreed, being able to tagline a game as "The most violent game you can legally buy in the high street" is going to give the game some ‘street cred’ with certain crowds, which is only going to help to raise the games profile and sales.

    I don’t actually think it will be the most violent game out there, I just think that’s the marketing angle they are going for.

  30. 0
    Chuma says:

    Pretty much, aye.  Can I ask you to scroll down and see what you think of my opinion on the socialist differences of US and UK and if this is the reason ‘we’ (that is to say the bulk of UK posters and the bulk of US posters) can’t agree on this debate?

    This debate has actually because a little more about understanding people’s positions and less about incorrect assumptions and petty arguments now.  I’m actually enjoying it again.  Plus once people have laid out their positions, it is ground you don’t have to keep covering and you can start debating the individual points of an article on merit.

  31. 0
    Chuma says:

    Don’t self-aggrandise.  Having opposing views doesn’t have to lead to a vendetta or a conflict as long as you are willing to understand one-another even if you don’t agree with their point of view.

    Personally, I don’t consider anyone on here an enemy, much less yourself, and I’m pretty sure most right thinking people don’t either.  You’re a name and an opinion on a website.  I don’t even consider Jack Thompson to be an enemy; he’s just another name, opinion and troll on these boards.  True in his case I find his antics abhorant, but he is far too abstract to be an enemy.

  32. 0
    Chuma says:

    WRT the Obama comment, I think this underlines the difference in UK and US perspectives.  Obama is your left wing candidate for the Democrats, but he is still more right wing than our right-wing candidate David Cameron for the Tory Party.

    There *IS* a socialism aspect with the UK that probably isn’t in the US mindset and this was seen more clearly than anywhere else this election with the bailout plans for banks.  The plans nearly didn’t make it through because of the ideology for not paying big corporates money from tax payers, but it had to be done as you also don’t have any state funded pensions so NOT shoring up the stock market would mean nobody could retire without a LOT of capital behind them.

    It’s for this reason I am not surprised that some of you just don’t ‘get it’ when I try and explain the position, not just of me, but your average UK citizen.  We believe in free Healthcare for all, State funded Pensions, and, yes, Protectionist laws for minors to prevent them getting hold of materials deemed unsuitable.  It’s an intrinsically different mindset that we have here but still with a fair bit of common ground between us.

    As for the rest of your comments, can I simply add that I think I agree and add my name to them also.

    @Erik: I’m disappointed you would say you would prefer to just say "fuck this" or "fuck that" over debating something and trying to understand another person’s perspective.  That we aren’t agreeing with one another doesn’t mean it is a failed debate or that you are "banging your head against" anything.  You were never going to sway me to your way of thinking, at least in its entirity, as I believe it to be an extreme in one direction and my thinking is not much for extremes.  That doesn’t however mean that you aren’t at least now coming across as approachable and thoughtful.  Please don’t go back to old ways.

  33. 0
    SticKboy says:

    You can fuck off. Had it occurred to you that some of us may actually have enjoyed taking part in this debate? In fact I exited half way through to visit some friends so that I could thrash out the issue of whether or not supporting something being banned and simply not defending something from being banned were equivalent. That’s called engaging with the issue, rather than laying down some snark.

    You’ve jumped in right at the end and contributed fuck all. In fact, both Matthew and EZK had made the point you fumbled your way around a few posts above. So next time, why don’t you keep your worthless drivel to yourself?

    Tosser.

  34. 0
    Nocturne says:

    Every time you mention the BBFC I can’t help but think you havn’t got the first fucking clue what your on about and start spurting the same tired censorship bullshit again without any real comprehension of why Manhunt 2 was refused classificaiton in the first place. Since then they’ve rated and passed games with equally if not more violent content, they’ve learned from the experience and moved on with their lives, why don’t you?

  35. 0
    Matthew says:

    You’re missing a crucial bit of information here. We do need ratings boards to help to tell us what to think. Why?

    Because when we’re standing in a shop, reading the back of a game box, we have not yet played it. How can we make an informed decision about a game’s content, "thinking for ourselves", before we’ve even bought the damn thing? They’re “content advisories.” The ultimate decision of suitability lies with the consumer, having come to a conclusion based on box art and the various little stickers.

  36. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    "Well in no GOOD work is anyone holding in the reins"

    Please. Whenever you have to interact with somebody else, you have to rein yourself in.

    "Those who should censor the child should be the parents, not the government"

    The ESRB is the government now? When did that happen? To your actual arguement, parents need to be weaned into that mindset. With the onslaught of socialism we’re now seeing (take Obama, for instance), people have clearly slowly started to believe that the government actually does them some good. The populace must be weaned off that belief. But even if they were, ratings boards would still be necessary to tell buyers the kind of content they’d find in a game.

    "I can’t really find a way to put this that isn’t going to come off as insulting or antagonistic but… that is just sad.  You have my sympathy."

    Any kind of law puts one set of moral standards over another set. You yourself wish for your own moral standard to be instituted on the populace, whether they want it or not.

    "Which further proves my point that Manhunt 2 should have been rated T.  There really aren’t realistic looking deaths.  Unless whenever you kill someone a lava lamp gets busted over your eyes."

    I disagree. Manhunt 2 at least tried to have it look like you were killing real (video game) people with easily accesible improvised weapons. Manhunt the series shows the killings in great detail, so if you wanted to emulate them, you could. Thus, I would give it an M.

    "I mean seriously, what the fuck was that?"

    That’s a very, very, good question.

  37. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    Certain age groups have certain content which would almost universally be regarded as innappropriate. The public, as a whole, shares certain ideas of what is and is not appropriate for minors of certain ages. The ratings boards try to reflect this.

    If we applied your approach to law, we would have chaos. Who is to say, for instance, that a murder, a rape, an instance of fraud, etc. isn’t justified? 

  38. 0
    jbonner71 says:

    152 comments and nobody here seems to get it. You guys need to get lives rather than writing 1000 word long diatribes about this crap. This happens a lot more than you think because money talks and bullshit runs a marathon. Some companies, like Rockstar don’t care about the ratings process. They basically say, "Here’s our game, deal with it." Other companies are VERY cognizant of the ratings process…the last big game that I recall a similar thing happening with was Bioshock. We saw several different versions of that game, especially the sequences on how Adam was harvested from the Little Sisters. You should have seen the original version…

    "A man chooses; a slave obeys," right?? Oh, the irony of that statement did not escape me while through playing that game. :^)

    Sega is just playing it "smart" here because the want this game to sell. End of story.

     

  39. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    This ideal world you speak of. I think I have seen it somewhere. In a country that has two words, the first beginning with U and the second beginning with S. In this country there is a ratings board that impartially rates games. I think their names is an accronym. ESRZ no wait, it is ESRB. THey assign ratings with no manner of dictation of content. They simply rate games and let console manufacturers, retailers and publishers decide what to do with those ratings. They hold no control beyond assigning ratings. I have seen the light. This ideal world does exist.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  40. 0
    Erik says:

    "The creative input argument I think is false.  You better believe that in all media there is someon holding the reigns and deciding what can and cant be done or should or should not be done.  You may not like it, but it is how the world works."

    Well in no GOOD work is anyone holding the reigns.  Any real artist would look to go beyond what the censors deem appropriate.  Whores pander to said censors and garbage is produced.  Think the controversy that has been Ozzy Osbourne’s career and compare it to the more "censor safe" Backstreet Boys.  I know which I would rather listen to.  Ergo I am not going to waste my time with Madworld.  The devs have shown they have no respect for their work, so neither do I.

    "I see the difference between children and adults.  I don’t believe that a young child should be able to purchase soemthing that they are not mature enough to comprehend fully or that might disturb them."

    I partialy agree.  You see I don’t think a young child should be able to play them.  But those who should censor the child should be their parents, not the government.  The more responsibility that the government takes away from the parents the lazier parents are bred.  Frankly, lazy parents are more likely to be the cause of a Columbine than video games ever could be.

    "The slippery slope argument is actually one of the logical fallacies I often refer to.  Just because you do one thing doesn’t mean you have to go further.  In actual fact my opinion is the opposite.  We currently HAVE both in the UK; I would probably reduce the adult side of it for all but the most extreme cases, but unfortunately I don’t make the laws."

    I’m telling you I would have to go further would I share your belief of age based and legally binding censorship.  I would extend it to adults as well as children, and I would chisel the dong off of Michelangelo’s David.  Sorry, but I don’t beleive in doing things like this half-assed.  To me GTA4 and MH2 are completely equal in content.

    ‘The BBFC are obliged to judge on the basis of prevailing standards within the social fabric of the UK."

    How… hivemind.

    "In the case of both Carmageddon and MH2, they were overturned on appeal.  These are however a minute amount of cases in the sea of games they rate.   So overall, yes I am happy with their work within the laws they are bound by."

    I don’t care how many thousands of other games they have rated.  Those two examples are inexcusable.  And it didn’t stop with just those two games.  The chilling effect is now being felt in this Madworld debacle.  Only two games were banned, but how many hundreds of other games down the road will this effect?

    "Not really.  I am putting the moral standards of the general population above my own because THAT is what the law requires."

    I can’t really find a way to put this that isn’t going to come off as insulting or antagonistic but… that is just sad.  You have my sympathy.

    "As for the filter, I haven’t played the game yet, I only played the original, but any realistic looking deaths in a computer game is usually an instant 18 rating in the UK;  I see no reason this should change."

    Which further proves my point that Manhunt 2 should have been rated T.  There really aren’t realistic looking deaths.  Unless whenever you kill someone a lava lamp gets busted over your eyes.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fdLtjAbjEE

    I mean seriously, what the fuck was that?

    "We are at least debating now though which is good."

    I prefer things as they used to be.  Saying "Fuck the BBFC" is just so much preferable than banging my head against a wall, aka debating.

     

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  41. 0
    Chuma says:

    We are at least debating now though which is good.

    The creative input argument I think is false.  You better believe that in all media there is someon holding the reigns and deciding what can and cant be done or should or should not be done.  You may not like it, but it is how the world works.

    1.  I wouldn’t trust the BBFC blindly either.  Thankfully there is a full appeals process already set up with has been proven to work in the case of Manhunt 2.

    2&3.  I see the difference between children and adults.  I don’t believe that a young child should be able to purchase soemthing that they are not mature enough to comprehend fully or that might disturb them.  The slippery slope argument is actually one of the logical fallacies I often refer to.  Just because you do one thing doesn’t mean you have to go further.  In actual fact my opinion is the opposite.  We currently HAVE both in the UK; I would probably reduce the adult side of it for all but the most extreme cases, but unfortunately I don’t make the laws.

    "And if they judge so fairly why the bans for Carmageddon, MH2, and Visions of Extascy?"

    The BBFC are obliged to judge on the basis of prevailing standards within the social fabric of the UK.  In the case of both Carmageddon and MH2, they were overturned on appeal.  These are however a minute amount of cases in the sea of games they rate.   So overall, yes I am happy with their work within the laws they are bound by.

    "I don’t know.  It still sounds like you are putting the "moral standards" of the BBFC before your own.  I on the other hand make it a point to try and NOT agree with the ESRB.  Case in point, I think that the technicrapper color filter version of MH2 should have been rated T."

    Not really.  I am putting the moral standards of the general population above my own because THAT is what the law requires.  I also DON’T make a point to disagree with someone on principle just in order to be at odds with them.  Being contradictory on principle rather than on merit I don’t believe helps your case.

    As for the filter, I haven’t played the game yet, I only played the original, but any realistic looking deaths in a computer game is usually an instant 18 rating in the UK;  I see no reason this should change.

  42. 0
    Erik says:

    I have no problem with you thinking I’m a cock.  It is quite normal for enemies to have such an opinion about one another.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  43. 0
    Erik says:

    "To take your analogy, let’s say that we replace the orange with a cake.  Let us also say that I have a nut alergy.  Should I be eating the cake without knowing what type of cake it is or if it contains traces of nut or should I have this information handed it to me on the packaging?"

    That is all well and good, but as everyone who is paying at least some attention is aware the ratings boards have long since devolved from givers of information to manipulators.  Yeah, they should tell you that the cake has nuts in it, like the BBFC should have rated Manhunt 2.  But ultimately they really shouldn’t have a say in whether or not you eat that cake.  As an adult it is your decision.  In an ideal world I might support the ratings boards, but as things work in the real life I cannot without kowtowing to Thompsonites.

    1) Once again, to try and make this an issue about merely education means that you would have to turn a serious blind eye to all the ways these ratings boards have stepped over from merely rating to having direct influence in the creative process.  You know, like Madworld.

    2) I disagree that age ratings need to be enforced by force of law.  Once again this is taking something that should be merely informative, such as saying which cakes have nuts, and eschewing it for control of the populace rather than educating them to make their own choices.  So pretty much any headway you made with me in the cake analogy you seriously lost in this part.  This is not a list of ingredients, this is breaking your hands so you can’t eat cake.

    3) Why?  I mean if you support the ratings boards eschewing education for manipulation for the under seventeen crowd why not just take the last plunge down that slippery slope and let it expand to adults.  If I supported bans for under seventeen I would fully support those for over seventeen.  All or nothing.

    "I like PEGI because they don’t ban games"

    I don’t buy into that.  I fully expect they would be just as much of freedom-killing control freaks as the BBFC.  People are far too trusting of PEGI.  DON’T think that any ratings board is "pure" and don’t trust them or turn your back on them.  Lest they stab you in the back that is.

    "I believe that within these laws the BBFC judge games and films fairly and with an up to date moral standard of the society we live in."

    And if they judge so fairly why the bans for Carmageddon, MH2, and Visions of Extascy?

    "I HOPE this clarifies the position of myself on this issue once and for all."

    I don’t know.  It still sounds like you are putting the "moral standards" of the BBFC before your own.  I on the other hand make it a point to try and NOT agree with the ESRB.  Case in point, I think that the technicrapper color filter version of MH2 should have been rated T.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  44. 0
    Chuma says:

    To take your analogy, let’s say that we replace the orange with a cake.  Let us also say that I have a nut alergy.  Should I be eating the cake without knowing what type of cake it is or if it contains traces of nut or should I have this information handed it to me on the packaging?

    Let us seperate up the arguments because I think we can find some common ground here if I can explain my position without having to come up against an attack on 4 fronts:-

    1.  Rating games.  I think rating games is both useful to those who want to know what a game is like and who it is suitable for.  Yes I agree that parents should be able to exercise discretion over those decisions so that a mature 15 year old should be able to play GTA, but the information of who it is aimed at and what kind of game it is still should be on the packaging.  It is in this role I defend the BBFC with all my might because I think they do an excellent job.

    2.  Preventing minors from purchasing games rated above their age range by law.  Here I believe it is right and sensible to do so in the UK.  I am aware that the US differs from a legal and constitutional point of view to the UK ideals so there is some difference of opinion, however I believe that not allowing minors to purchase certain games is a good thing.  This is me making a rational decision and not just agreeing with government because they want me to (for the record I vote Liberal Democrat and they are pretty left wing as a party, so my ideals are not conservative values as a whole).  What I object to on the US side is the notion that games should be prevented from sale to minors but other media should not because there is some extra need to protect them from games.  This is why I think Jack Thompson and others are scaremongering, explotative idiots trying to make a career off ignorance.

    3.  Preventing adults from purchasing certain games.  This may surprise you, but I’m not actually in favour of this.  There are certain things I don’t think should be sold as entertainment, such as snuff films (beheadings and so forth) or exploitative dvds like, for example, a compliation of people beating up unsuspecting others to record for entertainment.  I have no issue with Saw, Hostel, or Manhunt 2 being released, but I DO think they are pathetic attempts at media and are only there to court controversy.  If the day comes where something is released that I think is genuinely harmful to adults then I will change my mind.

     

    So actually where do I think the argument stems from?  I think it is because I support the BBFC *given the legal framework that the UK has*.  A lot of people on these forums say "I like PEGI because they don’t ban games".  These people have no idea how the UK works and despite being told 100 times fail to hear that even if PEGI were in charge, they would HAVE to refuse classification to some games because that is the law in place and the moral majority view of UK citizens is one that this law should remain, or at least the politically minded majority.  I believe that within these laws the BBFC judge games and films fairly and with an up to date moral standard of the society we live in.

    If you wish to debate the merits of the UK law that means that some games are refused classification and thus refused sale, then I do so.  I HOPE this clarifies the position of myself on this issue once and for all.

  45. 0
    Erik says:

    On a rather strange side note, whenever the topic of censorship and the BBFC comes up I can’t help but think of an episode from the most recent Dr. Who series.  Where the Doctor ends up in a giant media sattelite that is used to manipulate the people.  Also a line where the Doctor responds to someone who says they were just doing what they were told, "With that you have lost the right to speak".

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  46. 0
    Erik says:

    "The ESRB and BBFC don’t guess your level of enjoyment of the game, they measure its suitability for certain sets of people."

    And thus my point was missed again.  What I am saying is that who would know what games suit them best rather than that person themselves?  They don’t know you personally so they honestly have no idea what would suit you.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  47. 0
    Matthew says:

    The ESRB and BBFC don’t guess your level of enjoyment of the game, they measure its suitability for certain sets of people. A more suitable analogy would be if the orange was some sort of processed meal, which the food standards agency had analysed and slapped one of these on it:

    http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/multimedia/images/document/virgin.jpg

    You can then make the informed decision that you should not buy this product for your child because you don’t want them to have a high-salt diet.

    Does it suck that the BBFC and ESRB can de-facto ban a game by refusing a rating or hitting it with an AO? Yes. Can they change that? No. The law says games must be rated (BBFC) and console rules say no AO games (ESRB). The ban is the result of the law in the UK, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo in the US.

  48. 0
    Erik says:

    In an idealistic world, yeah, I think that ratings guides would be not only acceptable but a useful tool at that.  In this ideal world these rating groups would be completely impartial.  They assign a rating and that is it.  In this ideal world this group, as they are only for education and not for control, would have no right to not assign a rating.  Nor in this ideal world would there be a "taboo" (AO) rating that the rating boards can use to put leverage on the industry as a form of a pseudo ban.  Furthermore in this ideal world the industry wouldn’t have to work with the ratings boards to get  a particular rating, as whatever rating is decided will ultimately have no negative outcomes.

    But unfortunately we don’t live in an ideal world.  We live in a world where these groups CAN ban games and ARE dictating to the industry what they can and can’t do.  Then add on top of that we have politicians turning what should be a tool of education into a tool of control by making these ratings have some sort of legal meaning.

    The ratings boards really need to be more detatched and mechanical in what they do.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  49. 0
    Erik says:

    I see that you are still completely misunderstanding what I am saying when I say "Think for yourself".

    I don’t think I know how to word this any better, but here goes.  Lets say there is an orange on the table.  And now lets further assume that you have never eaten an orange.  Would you prefer that some company makes an assumption on your palate or would you rather peel the damn orange open and try it for yourself?  Why aren’t you offended that the BBFC decided that you aren’t enough of an adult to handle Manhunt 2?

  50. 0
    Chuma says:

    Okay.  Let’s ignore the potential for banning a moment.  Do you not think that rating a game with a guidance rating like an age or T,M etc helps the buyer know for who the game is intended and help you avoid giving little johnny something you don’t think he is ready for?  A game like "Conkers Bad Fur Day" with a cute squirrel on the front and platform game style graphics on the back looks innocuous without the 18 rating.

  51. 0
    Erik says:

    For your point to be relevant I would have to own only M rated titles and only those who were part of some controversy.  But I own games of every rating you see.  But once again those ratings don’t factor into what games I buy at all.  The ESRB can rate it whatever the hell it wants.  But I will not play a game if the devs make it known that they sold out on a creative level.  If they have so little respect for their own artistic vision, why should I have any respect for it either?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  52. 0
    Chuma says:

    For the record, I’m a big fan of B movies and some of those have quite a lot of gore, even humourously so.  I just found Saw… pathetic?  It was an hour long version of a joke/story I was told as a kid (the saw and the metal ankle bracelet).  Beyond that, it was just taking the death scenes out of Cube but without all the indie film plot and goodness.

  53. 0
    Chuma says:

    Just because I agree with the BBFC and adovcate their usage doesn’t mean I am told what to do.  You seem to be under the delusion that unless people agree with your way of thinging they are in someway bereft of thought.  You’re wrong.  What you can accept that I will stop thinking of you are juvenile….

    … which is a shame really because when you actually answered the questions you offered something to the debate.  Try and stop being derogatory where it is neither warranted nor applicable and we might be able to have some meaningful discourse.

  54. 0
    Matthew says:

    I’ve long since come to accept that you need an organization to tell you what you should or shouldn’t play.

    Disagreeing with you in any way is a result of being brainwashed by the establishment. The only way to think for yourself is to agree with you entirely.

    I can say that the ESRB doesn’t factor into the decisions of what I want to buy one iota.

    You’re an idealist anarchist. One significant reason you want to play MadWorld is because you think the ESRB doesn’t like it. Are you sure that you don’t need an organisation to tell you what you shouldn’t play?

  55. 0
    Matthew says:

    So much of this. Sega are literally banking on MadWorld skirting the boundaries of the banhammer and then, crucially, surviving. It’s how they make money while sticking to the design spec. If you want to see true unrestricted, unrated freedom of gaming expression then look to the indie PC market. Don’t expect to see those games on consoles, because the consoles’ catalogues are controlled by their manufacturers and they want big sales.

    As for point 3, games are under media attack at the moment. Violent games are under seige, and the best way of surviving a seige is not to stick your head over the battlements and suggest that the invaders’ mums are less than wholesome. Instead you bust out Wii Fit and World of Warcraft and the odd round of Team Fortress 2. OK so I dropped the analogy, but there have been too many of those today.

    If I must disagree on something though, I kinda liked Saw. I love a bit of the old ultraviolence and imagination but almost literally couldn’t stomach the sheer gratuity of it. With what was arguably its USP removed though, I actually thought the story was pretty clever.

  56. 0
    Erik says:

    1) There is some difference, but ultimately at the end of the day it has the same result: Censorship.  They should make the game without concern for the BBFC, PEGI, ESRB, Thailand Department of Jerking Knees.  I’d rather not see their creative potential squashed by external or internal forces.

    2) In all honesty in on a purely financial level of thinking they should probably just pander to the lowest common denominator.  At the time being being the whipping boy of the BBFC, PEGI, ESRB, TDJK is the most sound strategy financially.  But my interest isn’t invested financially.  I’m looking at this from a viewpoint of freedom and artistic integrity.  If you eschew creativity for finances you get, the Wii.  Great for Nintendo, not so much for gamers.

    3) Yes

    And as a side note as far as you go I wouldn’t bother with the "Think for yourself" line.  That ship has long since sailed.   I’ve long since come to accept that you need an organization to tell you what you should or shouldn’t play.  Myself on the other hand I can say that the ESRB doesn’t factor into the decisions of what I want to buy one iota.  None of these organizations have shown themselves to be of any benefit whatsoever.

    Banning Manhunt 2, even for a short time and being overturned, served NO purpose whatsoever.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  57. 0
    Chuma says:

    A few questions to those who deem Sega’s willingness to appeal for input as wrong:-

    1.  What is the difference between paying someone from within Sega to determine what has gone too far or likely to gain an AO/refusal of classification and going direct to the source of those that actually have the decision?

    (My opinion here is there is a very little difference except that the ratings board aren’t going to refuse an M/18 cert. if the person employed by Sega gets the boundaries wrong or tell Sega they need to tone certain sections down)

    2.  Why do you believe that Sega or any other company, particularly in the current economic climate, should risk spending tens of millions of dollars on a game’s production that might not get a release or potentially go over budget due to costly delays due to legal rammifications on AO/certification refusal or just failure to release the game at all?

    (My opinion is that Sega are a BUSINESS.  Businesses are there to make MONEY.  Period.  This is the same reason why Nintendo didn’t put a huge processor in the Wii, Microsoft didn’t put wireless in their Xbox360 and Sony… well they aren’t making money so I would suggest that to be BAD business sense.  This is the product of a corporate led commercial society and the reason why we get Star Wars I to III, Indiana Jones IV, Madden ’09 and a bunch of other safe bets that make oodles of cash rather than risks.  If you don’t like it… don’t buy it!  Just don’t suggest that these companies owe you anything or have some sort of obligation beyond their shareholders)

    3.  At a time when games are under the microscope and the ignorant vocal minority are scaremongering do you want to court more controversy with games that are all about violence and not about the important aspects of gaming; playability, graphics, storyline(where applicable), value for money and appeal.

    (My opinion is that being controversial for controversy’s sake is downright pathetic and juvenile.  Trying to defend such actions on tghe basis of free speech will only get you so far before you look dogmatic and equally juvenile.  If I see gore, I wan’t it to have a context.  I found the Saw movies as pathetic as the original Manhunt and neither had any credibility in my book and if they were never made, neither industry would have lost anything)

     

    Please, when answering these questions, do not debate the merits of if the BBFC should be able to deny a rating or that the ESRB should given out AO if they know it won’t be authorised and DEFINITELY don’t start on crap like "think for yourself".  Let me tell you something about thinking for myself… I weighed up everything I know and everything I believe and came up with these opinions.  If you don’t like them?  fine, but the day I listen to someone here making repeated pathetic one liners in every single post and change my viewpoint based on them – THEN I would have failed to think for myself, NOT before.

  58. 0
    Chuma says:

    May I be so bold to suggest that if such a game were made today that it wouldn’t have ay trouble receiving an 18/M rating?  Society adopts a moral code equal to the majority viewpoint whilst taking into account those of differing views surrounding it.  Sometimes the majority are out of touch with reality and sometimes it is the fringe groups who are out of touch or ahead of their time dependant on what their view is.

    Thrill Kill wouldn’t have a problem being released, even with updated graphics.  I don’t think there is much different between the scenes in that and say Mortal Kombat vs DC.  Certainly the Catwoman character is a lot better looking than the one in Thrill Kill :)

  59. 0
    State says:

    First of all I am constantly amazed that people consider films like Saw and Hostel to be the most extreme of films that push the boudaries of on-screen gore. There are many more films they are routinely cut even banned for their on-screen violence and gore. ‘Unrated’ films are a marketing ploy where the makers release a film that receives no cuts and then add further scenes to the films (which do doubt wouldn’t be cut) so that they can be called ‘unrated’.

    Sega aren’t going to attempt to push boundaries with Madworld. They will state that certains scenes weren’t put in the game for fear of being cut, but the fact that they weren’t included in the first place means that they weren’t tested against the censors. They are making it seem like the game has been edited.

    It is more PR from Sega who state that the game has already been banned in certain countries (when I fail to see how that is possible because the game hasn’t been completed and so hasn’t had the chance to be rated). We are being made to believe that this game is so violent that it will be cut, Sega saw the publicity generated off of Manhunt 2 and knows that controversy sells. I reckon Sega could put in all the content they wanted and it would get passed uncut 18 or uncut Mature, but they fear that because the game hasn’t been seen to be cut it would lose the self-imposed title of "most violent game ever". Sega lost out on Condemned 2, when they put out similar feelings that the game could potentially get cut, it didn’t, there was no publicity and so sales were poor. They are trying a new strategy this time.

    People want to think they are getting a game that pushes the boudaries, and Sega are making it seem this way by stating that all the censoring bodies are definitely going to censor the full game, and yet this will never be proven or proven against because they won’t try to push it. It actually shows a high amount of arrogance on Sega’s part by saying that the game will definitely get banned.

  60. 0
    BlackIce says:

    This game has been described as a factor in the erosion of Western Society. I think we’re onto a winner.

    ~You Could Be Mine, But You’re Way Out Of Line..~

  61. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Explicit sexualized violence like Thrill Kill? Oh come on, Thrill Kill had ONE character along those lines, and she was far from explicit. She wore PVC, moaned sexually a bit when she won and had a tazer….

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  62. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    The second I saw it being compared to Sin City I just knew it was going to end up all hype and no substance.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  63. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    As long as they don’t plan to put explicit sexualized violence (ala Thrill Kill) or have a guy waving his wang around, I don’t see what they have to worry about.

  64. 0
    Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    God, I love the look of this game. However, I really hope that Sega won’t tone down the violence too much; it’s supposed to be "“Sin City”…bathed in a bucket of blood", not My Little Pony Adventures: Trouble in Ticklebug Meadow. A comment to European countries: lighten the hell up. It’s a game, not mind-controlling propaganda. Let those who wish to play, play…’kay?

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  65. 0
    Erik says:

    I never stated why that the ESRB has this power, just that they do have it and are willing to use it.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  66. 0
    Father Time says:

    If you insist that the ESRB is truly hellbent on censoring games then fine. But who’s fault is it that the Ao rating has so much power? That would be the big three for not letting it on their consoles and game retailers for not selling them.

    Although I guess you could fault the ESRB for assigning them a rating usually reserved for porno games (and I mean de facto reserved).

    Perhaps I should keep quiet though so that I can avoid an argument with EZK I swear we’ve had before. 

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  67. 0
    Erik says:

    Then by worming their way into the industry the BBFC and ESRB has already won.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  68. 0
    Erik says:

    And I think it goes without saying that surrender, as in the case of Sega, also is not an effective way to fight them.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  69. 0
    Father Time says:

    Yes I’m all for fighting back too but I don’t think the most effective way to fight them would be to make the most sickening game we could think of then rub it in their face when they can’t get it banned (although that would be really amusing and the resulting game could be very fun). They’ve all ready failed so many times yet they keep coming back and a really sick disturbing game would just give them media attention. Changing less rapidly into the very violent games won’t give them that boost of attention.

    Although I don’t know why we’re arguing about this as we don’t control which way the game industry will go.

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  70. 0
    Erik says:

    "Don’t mind him he thinks we can incite drastic social change by making one really loud noise instead of just slowly turning up the volume. Just look how well it worked for the hippies."

    No, I am talking about fighting back.  Not rolling over and dying like Sega.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  71. 0
    Father Time says:

    Don’t mind him he thinks we can incite drastic social change by making one really loud noise instead of just slowly turning up the volume. Just look how well it worked for the hippies.

    Now me I sometimes like really violent games and I don’t mind a ton that they are demonized by the media (unless being demonized means fewer sales thus fewer ultra violent games which doesn’t seem to be happening). So in my view I don’t see why we can’t have Corpse Mutilator IV right now, if enough people want it to warrant making the game. I’m all for social change too, and I also wish the games would become more tolerated.

    I am realistic though and I do know two things.

    1) If we are to take a cue from histroy games will be tolerated eventually (other mediums had worse moral panics than us).

    2). If we insist on making all the mainstream games Manhunt 2, that day will come later than it normally would.

    So yeah go ahead make Corpse Mutilator IV but hope that the media doesn’t pick up on it although really their favorite whipping boys have always been GTA and Rockstar, (no really count the number of times they complained about GTA vs. Postal 2 which is far worse).

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  72. 0
    Erik says:

    Okay, no analogy.  Games like that need to be made to offend the ignorant soccer moms, massacre chasing lawyers, and fear-mongering politicians.  Not to push the bounderies, but to destroy them.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  73. 0
    Erik says:

    Such games are needed in a manner that sometimes the best way to learn to swim is that someone needs to throw your ass in the water.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  74. 0
    SticKboy says:

    Exactly why are such games "needed"? What makes them so vital? Furthermore, to whom do you refer when you say "we"?

    I’m not criticising you for wanting such games, far from it – I just don’t grasp your choice of words. 

     

  75. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Well Postal 3 must be nearing completion sometime soon….

     

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  76. 0
    Erik says:

    Also, forget small changes.  What we need is a game that will make Manhunt 2 look like Sesame Street and Hostel look like National Lampoons Spring Break.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  77. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Why not? It’s worked for me in Civ 4 quite a lot! The trick is to get the catapults there fast and not allow people to dig in.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  78. 0
    Father Time says:

    I still say the anti-gaming crusaders are all bark and no bite … at least in the U.S. Although even if it seems like the anti-gaming countries ban individual games instead of mass bannings with the exception of Thailand and probably China.

    —————————————————-

     God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  79. 0
    Erik says:

    "I do stand by my assertion that the manner, tone, and context of expresssion is important."

    And I stand by my assertion that I disagree.  You really should detatch yourself from this context and approach it in a more mechanical manner.  I think the acts themselves need to be judged for what the are without regard for context.  Ergo shooting someone in the face in MGS4 should be equivalent to doing so in MH2.

    Therefore if somehow any of you convinced me that there should be bannings I would put some violent documentary on the History channel (love those) on par with MH2 and demand that both be banned.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  80. 0
    Father Time says:

    Are you basing whether manhunt 2 is sick and elderly based on the quality of the game or the level of violence in it? A really violent game can be really fun.

    —————————————————-
    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  81. 0
    GusTav2 says:

    I don’t see either GTAIV, MGS4, or MH2 being the same, they are very different in many ways; however, I don’t see them being different enough to warrant different treatment or classification as a matter of law.

    I do stand by my assertion that the manner, tone, and context of expresssion is important. Words or speech in one context may be entirely lawful, whereas in another will be unlawful. The only difference is context. To try and deny that is facile. On to the facile example, if I were to perform an erotic dance for the benefit of my partner in the privacy of my own home it would be distatsteful perhaps, but a form of protected expression. To undertake the same performance in the playground of a primary (5-11 years) school at lunchtime would be treated differently.

    The context of an act in any form of media is vital to its nature. The way the events unfold, the point of view used, and the aftermath of the scene all effect the way it wil be viewed.

  82. 0
    Father Time says:

    You implied it.

    I said those censoring moral majority types are no threat.

    You say that they must be some threat because Sega is castrating themselves.

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  83. 0
    Erik says:

    I never stated for whom they are castrating themselves for, rather that they are castrating themselves.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  84. 0
    Father Time says:

    They’re doing this to appease the retailers and Nintendo not the anti gaming clowns.

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  85. 0
    Erik says:

    "The manner and tone of the expression is important."

    I disagree.  I don’t see the difference between say, GTA4 or Manhunt.  Or I suppose a better comparison would be staying within the stealth action genre and saying I don’t see a difference between Metal Gear Solid 4 and Manhunt 2.  Both have you using cunning which is often followed by lacerations, bleeding and death.  Ergo if Manhunt 2 was banned then Metal Gear Solid 4 should be banned.  MGS4’s pompus commentary be damned.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  86. 0
    Matthew says:

    I don’t think Manhunt 2 is a sick or elderly member of the herd. Manhunt 2 is more like the calf who runs around and taunts the predators for fun. It has never really been a useful member of the group and would have been abandoned at a young age for being a liability.

    Provocatively adult titles have a place on the pixelly savannah and we want to see them flourish. It’s just very ultimately more hassle than it’s worth defending those members who make life difficult for everyone else. Nature is cruel.

    And I want to play Darwinia now.

  87. 0
    GusTav2 says:

    In my view it shouldn’t make any difference. There is no such thing as private expresssion, by definition is must be passed on to be an issue. If something is controlled as it is viewed to be harmful the fact it is only shared in a small group doesn’t change the nature of the harm, just its extent.

    The different treatment of broadcast media is more to do with the manner of delivery, and the way that the contnent is delivered directly without the viewer makng the same active choice to bring the content into their home.

  88. 0
    SticKboy says:

    An excellent post. However I was more trying to make the point that we, as consumers, serve a vital role in the free market: to weed out unworthy products from the worthy ones, or producers will not have the incentive to improve their wares (or warez). But I take your point on board 100% and it still applies

  89. 0
    GusTav2 says:

    I know what you mean. That’s the reason I picked the example. It’s a really tricky area where artistic expression and State control meet and conflict. Different jurisdictions will end up with different results. 

  90. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    My personal opinion is that Manhunt 2 is a 3 legged 80 year-old cancerous antelope. It is best left for dead.

    But that is part of the herd mentality. Not every herd member will protect the young and female. Not every herd member will abandon the sick and elderly. But those who support the wrong members will receive more and more injuries and become themselves sick and elderly. Those who support the sick and elderly will be faced with more battles more often than those who suppor the young and female.

    Hope that makes sense.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  91. 0
    SticKboy says:

    But then, I suppose in the idealist’s worldview, all animals would be saved? Furthermore, is MH2 – in your opinion – young and female, or sick and old??

  92. 0
    GusTav2 says:

    So once more, why is shooting someone in the face in Manhunt 2 oh so much of a tragedy that it must be banned, but in GTA4 suddenly its sacred and must be protected?  By defending only that that some people deem of some social benefit do people inflate their egos with this insipid pseudo-intellectualism?

    I have never stated that there was any difference between the two. Disagreeing with one part of you view does not mean that I disagree with all of your views.

    What I think it is important to realise is that the mere fact that both are games, and that both are violent, does not mean that both are intinsically the same. The manner and tone of the expression is important. Once you recognise that there isn’t complete freedom of express yourself in any way you want, at any time, the more difficult question is how do we choose what to protect, and what not to. An understanding of why the freedoms are considered important is one part of that bigger picture.

    Nothing is intrisically scared; no medium or person or view. All must be equally liable to control or censorship on the same basis.

  93. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    I like this analogy. I do want to tie this to the animal analogies up above.

    In nature, herding animals will protect members of their herd that will provide the most future benefit. These are the young and the females. These same herding animals will often leave for dead those that will only drag the herd down and damage it. These are the sick, injured and old.

    So when faced with a predator, the herd will protect the young and females while leaving the sick and elderly to be ripped appart by the predators.

    As an industry, we need to learn which games and companies are the young or females of the gaming herd. We also need to learn which games and companies are sick and elderly. By learning these key facts, we will be better equipped to grow and eventually over power the predators that attack us.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  94. 0
    Erik says:

    Well they must have some threat if Sega is willingly castrating itself now don’t they?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  95. 0
    Father Time says:

    So the press will demonize video games again. Whoop de do. Wake me up when something new happens. Video games are big business we have the first amendment, games have been declared free speech, it’s been ruled repeatedly that the evidence saying games cause harm to children is insufficient. With this in mind what threat do these fear mongering creeps have anyway? It’s been said time and again that as time goes by games like all the previous moral panics will become accepted. Corpse Mutilator V now with necrophilia will not change these facts.

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  96. 0
    Father Time says:

    "How are we to raise the bar for entertainment if we, the consumer, will put up with – defend, even – any old tripe?"

    It’s something for everyone, you and others like you may want more quality entertainment but I’m sure lots of people are fine with the quality as is and some people get a kick off of the sickest stuff they can find. Different people will cater to these three groups. If you insist on spending your entertainment dollars on top notch games or theatre and opera go right ahead. Who knows if enough people join you then the quality of that stuff will probably improve. There’s enough consumers out there that you don’t need to get everyone involved.

    Oh and if you could recommend any good games or some great theatre let me know. I really enjoy a good play every now and then. I can also enjoy hockey and saw at the same time (well not literally at the same time, then it gets too confusing as I try to follow the adventures of a psychotic madman trying to tame a bunch of rabid hockey fans through starvation, sleep deprivation and sickening traps).

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  97. 0
    Erik says:

    If they get a stronger leash, get a stronger dog.  This won’t be won by pandering to the ENEMIES such as the BBFC or ESRB.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  98. 0
    Matthew says:

    And then what does society do to its next dog? Gets a stronger leash. We need society to trust that violent games don’t turn people into killers. Pushing the envelope too hard hurts that cause, because when a murderer is found to have played Corpse Mutilator IV the press has a freaking field day and we lose our save. By getting milder violent games on the shelves and into everyday media, violent games become just another part of life.

    Oh, and no viewpoints are binary because stances and opinions are made up of lots of little substatements. On any given topic you will rarely find two people who either agree *entirely* or disagree *entirely*. They will always have a grey area that they agree on.

  99. 0
    Father Time says:

    I didn’t like dfending that Virginia Tech rampage game esoecially after the creator’s rampage note (even if he did claim it was a parody afterwards) but I still defended it. I have nothing against the concept of making fun of school shootings but it seemed so low quality and like it was nothing but pure shock value (for an example of humorous ways to make fun of school shootings see George Carlin). But yet I still begrudgingly defended it although perhaps not as much as I defended other games.

    I do believe that mostly all free speech should be defended whther it be whatever measures the most on your personal yardstick to the sickest dead baby joke you can find (which consequentially measures high on my yardstick because of the amusement it brings to my friends). Heck even the most sickening piece of filth you can find is allright with me so long as it involves consensual adults, is harmless or involves virtual things (or a combination of all three), I’d try to avoid that stuff myself though.

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  100. 0
    SticKboy says:

    That’s an excellent point and may lead me to rethink my position completely!

    GusTav2 – if you’re reading this, what would you say in response to the position that certain questionable/objectionable content is privately sold for personal possession, rather than for public broadcast? Should it therefore not be afforded more liberal regulatory measures?

  101. 0
    Stoli says:

    If this was something on say, public television, that’d be one thing (though even with today’s TV filters even that’s up in the air), but this is fiction to be enjoyed in one’s home.

    Based on TV shows and movies, society has acknowledged that violence in the media is acceptable. So why would it not be acceptable on a different platform?

    It just comes down to Nintendo wanting to protect it’s image. They’re well within their rights to not allow AO-rated games on their console, no matter how much I disagree with it. Just means that my disagreement equals less dollars for Sega and Nintendo.

  102. 0
    Erik says:

    But the dog who gets put down at least gets some taste of freedom before hand now doesn’t he?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  103. 0
    SticKboy says:

    Ugh – I take your point Matthew, but I dislike either dog. All I’m saying is that I’m happy to think for myself rather than setting rules for myself. I suppose to make the point fit the analogy, sometimes it’s good to take the treat, and sometimes it’s good to bite through the leash. It just depends on the situation or context :)

  104. 0
    Matthew says:

    If you insist on carrying the analogy to the straw, then allow me to expand on it. We are all on the leash of the society in which we live. The good dog knows what to do to get the treats and improve his life. The dog who chews through his restraints and runs amok probably gets put down.

  105. 0
    Father Time says:

    "The creation of psuedo-images of child sexual abuse: creative artisit expression, but not protected."

    Err that depends where you live. Here in the U.S. as far as I’m aware you can have images of child sexual abuse as long as they’re drawings or computer generated images etc. If it’s a photo of a real child then it’s illegal. Although I think two midgets pretending to be children is legal though, but I’m getting off topic.

    —————————————————- God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  106. 0
    Erik says:

    "I, personally, don’t find games like Manhunt 2 to be worth defending. I never said I wanted them banned!"

    I don’t see the difference.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  107. 0
    Matthew says:

    It ain’t about choosing sides, it’s about choosing battles. The war to get the general public to accept ultraviolent games is not a winnable one at present. The battle to get them to accept GTA is far easier. First we need a strong foothold in the forested hills of San Andreas.

    Here, have some pretention (courtesy of WikiQuote): Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win. He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious. The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.

    For the guy doing Manhunt 2’s accounts: There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.

  108. 0
    Erik says:

    Then choose a side.  This supporting stuff like GTA4 but not Manhunt 2 seems rather wishy-washy.  The sort of freedom of expression you seem to be touting reminds me sort of those retractable dog leashes.  You know the dog thinks it has the freedom to run around wherever it wants, until its master clicks the button and the leash reels in and chokes the mutt.  I’m talking about freedom of expression, not just a good amount of running space.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  109. 0
    Matthew says:

    And we do want freedom of expression. We just also know we’re not going to get it right now just by shouting for it. You’re not the only guy to have a dream that’s worth fighting for. Dreams just take time and effort.

  110. 0
    Erik says:

    Well when it comes down to it you have to decide if you want freedom of expression or not.  And like all things you have to take the bad with the good.  Want freedom?  Grand.  But you have to fortify yourself to be prepared for things such as the KKK being able to present their opinion or crap like Manhunt 2 being made.  If you don’t want to put up with that, fine, I hear Cuba is nice this time of year.

    Many soldiers have died in many countries so the people in those countries have the freedom to call them baby killers.  Think upon that.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  111. 0
    SticKboy says:

    I suppose I’m just not prepared to defend crap, as you put it. I realise that renders my views highly subjective, but I’m not espousing them as prescription (the ultimate difference between me and a JT/Julian Brazier). How are we to raise the bar for entertainment if we, the consumer, will put up with – defend, even – any old tripe?

    As I said above, I’d much rather choose to defend a particular product based on its merits, as judged on a case-by-case basis, rather than take a hardline (almost fundamentalist) stance. But as I’ve said plenty of times now, I’m not an idealist.

  112. 0
    Erik says:

    If you are into censorship I suppose.  The rest of us just shake our heads at such posts.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  113. 0
    Matthew says:

    And fair play to you for doing that. Rock on and all that rubbish. But – and I’m breaking the universe here by being on the same page as EZK – campaigning for a society to accept Manhunt when they only barely accept GTA is trying to dam the wrong end of a river.

  114. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    I saw Hostel in the cinema and my mum owns all 4 Saw DVDs so I’ve seen them. I’ll repeat: They have no plot. Learn all about what I have and haven’t watched and then comment.

    Don’t get me wrong, I liked Hostel and the first Saw film, but they are essentially turning into new Friday the 13th franchises.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  115. 0
    Erik says:

    But in the end its annoying, as even Tolkien has pointed out.  And I really don’t see the need for it.  I ignore such things when deciding what to defend or not to defend.  To me, as I have stated, will put forth just as much effort for crap like Manhunt 2 as a masterpiece as a sculpture like David.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  116. 0
    SticKboy says:

    Hang on a minute – I never said that all games without social commentary should be banned, so please don’t put words in my mouth.What I said is that I, personally, don’t find games like Manhunt 2 to be worth defending. I never said I wanted them banned!

    What I meant to imply is that I do think some games carry greater intrinsic social worth and artistic value than others. In this case, I would state that GTA IV is a more worthy game than MH2 as measured by my own, personal yardstick. I’m no authority and your mileage may vary, so to speak.

  117. 0
    Matthew says:

    Social commentary is a means to an end.

    You: "We want ultraviolent games and we want them now!"

    Society: "Um, no. We don’t like that."

    You: "OK, what about this one? It has a nice story behind the action."

    Society: "Hmm, OK. Hey, is that Samuel L Jackson?"

    You: "Yup. Want a go?"

    Society: "You know, this is kind of cool."

    You: "Told you. Can we play this other game now?"

  118. 0
    Erik says:

    So once more, why is shooting someone in the face in Manhunt 2 oh so much of a tragedy that it must be banned, but in GTA4 suddenly its sacred and must be protected?  By defending only that that some people deem of some social benefit do people inflate their egos with this insipid pseudo-intellectualism?

    This is a pretty simple concept really.  If I will defend GTA4 then I will defend Manhunt 2.  If I don’t defend Manhunt 2 then I will not defend GTA4, or hell, even the penis laden sculpture that is Michelangelo’s David.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  119. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Films like Saw and Hostel regularly feature gore, ‘unremitting bleakness’, torture and very little to absolutely no plot, sorry, I meant social commentary. But when a game follows the same rules, suddenly it needs to be supressed.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  120. 0
    GusTav2 says:

    Why?  What is so damn important or necessary about "social satire" or "thought-provoking commentary"?  It doesn’t change what the violence is.  You mean to say that you would snub a virtual representation of someone getting their skull bashed with a hammer, but would defend it of the same scene had the murder saying "LOL, Bush Administration" because of some irrelevant social commentary?

    The importnace of ‘commentary’, social or otherwise, is vital. The reason that this issue of such import in Western democracies is the importance of free speech and other forms of expression as part of the political process. The nature of the speech, and its position in wider political discourse, is part of the process whereby States decide what speech/expression is protected.

    A few examples to show what I mean:

    Shouting ‘Fire!’ in a crowed public space: cleary speech, but not protected speech.

    Hate speech from a neo-nazi organisation: arguably objectionable, but protected political speech.

    The creation of psuedo-images of child sexual abuse: creative artisit expression, but not protected.

    The medium chosen to articluate the speech/expression is not important, what is important is the nature of the speech/expression itself, however it is expressed.

  121. 0
    Erik says:

    "But I must ask, who said that social commentary was the deciding factor in whether a game gets banned or not?"

    Stickboy, a few posts up.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  122. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Well, StickBoy for a start. Eric was saying that in response to what he said.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  123. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Not everyone shares your opinion. Many people like social commentary. But not all social commentary is equal. Good social commentary blends itself seemlessly into the narrative and the audience does not realize it is there if they are not looking for it.

    Shows like the Simpsons and Dinosaurs were excellent examples of social commentary.

    But I must ask, who said that social commentary was the deciding factor in whether a game gets banned or not?

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  124. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    I agree, the GTA series is in big danger of disappearing up it’s own arsehole as it starts taking itself increasingly more serious as the ‘bastion of interactive social commentary’.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  125. 0
    Erik says:

    I never said that Manhunt 2 is worth playing.  But social commentary shouldn’t be a deciding factor in whether or not a game should be banned or not.

    To be quite honest I wish that all games would completely abandon that heavy handed social commentary crap.  I play to relax, if I wanted to torment myself with current goings on I would watch Cspan.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  126. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Oh, you mean we need to support our opinion with fact? I wasn’t aware that was how it worked.

    While I agree  that any game should be able to be released in what ever form the creator wants it, I cannot believe that every game will or should get the same level of mainstream support as any other. That is not how the world works. I have stated in the past, that Manhunt 2 should have been released unedited in all regions. I did not however say, that I would buy the game. I actually find such games disgusting and quite juvenile. So I don’t play them.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  127. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Because you’re right Eric. He finds it easier to try and make a personal snarky remark about you then defend the holes in his argument you pointed out.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  128. 0
    Erik says:

    "The social commentary of GTAIV is not contained in the violence. It is in the world of GTA. Manhunt had very little context to its world and violence. GTA as far as I can tell has a compelling story and world to explore that makes it worth having. Manhunt does not"

    To be quite frank, so what?

     

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  129. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    The social commentary of GTAIV is not contained in the violence. It is in the world of GTA. Manhunt had very little context to its world and violence. GTA as far as I can tell has a compelling story and world to explore that makes it worth having. Manhunt does not.

    If a game has nothing worth while besides the level of violence, it is not really something you will get a lot of support for.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  130. 0
    Erik says:

    And just what would you consider constructive?  Furthermore why are you dodging my question about what is so different about shooting a person in the face in Manhunt 2 as compared to GTA4?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  131. 0
    Erik says:

    "if it had been GTA IV that had been banned I would have been furious"

     

    Why?  What is so damn important or necessary about "social satire" or "thought-provoking commentary"?  It doesn’t change what the violence is.  You mean to say that you would snub a virtual representation of someone getting their skull bashed with a hammer, but would defend it of the same scene had the murder saying "LOL, Bush Administration" because of some irrelevant social commentary?

    Really, if you aren’t willing to defend a game like Manhunt 2 then frankly we don’t need your help with GTA4.  I can at this point only assume you are one of Jack’s "thousands of friends" he mentioned in his latest email to Dennis.

    To put it even more bluntly: Fuck social commentary.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  132. 0
    SticKboy says:

    I think I share the same position as GusTav2 on this matter. At some point, a society has to draw lines about what is and what is not accceptable in terms of all sorts of things if it is to be coheseive, functional and integrated – be it behaviour, creativity and more besides. These lines usually aren’t fixed (even constituations have amendments or a Roe vs Wade to contend with), but they do set temporily-constrained boundaries.

    IMHO, so long as freedom of thought is not impinged and the disciplines of science and philosophy are not interfered with, I tend to take the view that one particular generation’s taboo is the succsessor’s cause celebre. Consequentially, restrictions  on something like the cinematic release of the South Park movie, or questionable games such as Manhunt 2, don’t really bother me – if they’re truly worthwhile, the following generation will make them freely available. For a reference case, see Lady Chatterley’s Lover as published by Penguin books.

    I understand, Erik, that you are an idealist and therefore view these things in the all-or-nothing terms of a slippery slope. I tend to plump for a more practical, case-by-case view. Believe you me, if it had been GTA IV that had been banned I would have been furious, but a game like Manhunt 2, which brings no interesting social satire or thought-provoking commentary, isn’t really worth the objection, IMHO.

    Mad World may well prove to be a different case, but so little is known about the game it makes it difficulty to judge. Personally, I think violence has been done to death in videogames (if you’ll patrdon the pun) – surely there are more interesting, thought-provoking boundaries to push? Mass Effect, for example, almost provoked an interesting argument about the role and depiction of sex in games. Whilst I’m not suggesting pornography, I do think that this is an area that has yet to be fully explored by games for grown-ups. If the BBFC, PEGI or ESRB (i.e. the liberal ratings boards) were to challenge a game like Mass Effect over sexual content, then I would be sounding the rallying call for gamers to get up in arms!

  133. 0
    Erik says:

    Of course I would find such censorship problematic.  What astounds me is that you don’t.

    I mean I think that Eminem’s music is sleezy, ignorant, verbal garbage.  But still I would be angry were he censored.  People far too often get in the habit of only protecting the freedom of those things they like, not realizing that they let the predators get too close in their inaction.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  134. 0
    Father Time says:

    A better idea would be to write a letter to Sony Nintendo and Microsoft asking them to allow Ao games on their consoles. Point out that unlike retailers they don’t have to worry about poor sales of the game. If you’re writing one to Sony remind them of what helped make BetaMax lose.

    Although if you want to get money involved somehow I guess the best idea would be to buy more Ao and M rated PC games.

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  135. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    PC games can have an AO rating as there is no regulatory body dictating what rating are allowed. The only hurdle there is retailers but that can be easily bypassed with DD.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  136. 0
    Erik says:

    "So because they’re censoring the game to avoid retail suicide you’re boycotting them?"

    Yes.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  137. 0
    Stoli says:

    Seems like an excellent reason.

    There’s no reason that AO-rated games shouldn’t be allowed on modern consoles. That’s what parental controls are for.

    While we probably need to send messages to Sega directly, the main issue is about censorship. I (as well the grandparent) disagree that this game should be censored, hence the boycott.

  138. 0
    Father Time says:

    So because they’re censoring the game to avoid retail suicide you’re boycotting them?

    Sorry but that doesn’t seem like a good reason to me.

    —————————————————- God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  139. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    I consider them more of an advisor role in trying to get Mad World to conform to Nintendo’s regulations.

    But we are arguing semantics at this point. So I am done.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  140. 0
    SticKboy says:

    I agree that it is more accurate to describe the BBFC as a censor than the ESRB by far, however that does not absolve the ESRB of a censorial role in this particular instance.

  141. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Actually, I disagree. It is inaccurate to cast them in the role of sensor as they are not the ones censoring. It is accurate to cast Console manufacturers, retailers and publishers as censors.

    It would be more accurate to cast the BBFC into the role of censor than the ESRB.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  142. 0
    SticKboy says:

    I agree with you completely. I agree that the position the ESRB find themselves in is not one of their own choosing, moreover I fully imagine it’s something they’ve done their best to avoid. Neverthless, in all practical terms they hold same level of power and influence as PEGI and/or the BBFC, at least in this particular instance.

    It’s a sucky situation for them, but in practical terms, that’s how things lie. It’s therefore not inaccurate to cast them in the role of censor, even if they aren’t sanctioned as such by the state.

  143. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Sure the ESRB knows what will happen to a game that gets an AO rating. But they have no power at all to change that out come. They can tell console manufacturers to allow them, they can tell retailers to sell them, they can tell developers and publishers to make them, but untill all those parties change their stances on AO rated games, the ESRB can do nothing about what happens to an AO rated game.

    What do you propose the ESRB do to fix the AO mess beyond what has already been done? As far as I can see, they have done everythig and it is the whining "for the children" policies of Retailers, publishers and console manufacturers that need to change. Not the ESRB.

    Also, I should add, the only Reason Sega is working with the ESRB in this case, is because they know Nintendo won’t release an AO rated game on the Wii. They also know that Nintendo will not help them in anyway to avoid an AO rating. The yalso know that only the ESRB can give the necessary input needed to avoid an AO rating. If Nintendo would allow AO rated games in the first place, Sega wouldn’t need to take these steps.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  144. 0
    Erik says:

    Of course I will be boycotting it.  Also, if their PR stunt was to make themselves look like sissies, then the stunt worked.

     

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  145. 0
    SticKboy says:

    Oh come off it – the ESRB know *exactly* what power the AO rating wields. It’s true the ESRB can’t impose cuts in the same way the BBFC can, but the effect is still the same – just take a look at the USA release of Manhunt 2. And in this particular instance, one would assume that SEGA are altering the contents of Mad World to better fit within the ESRB’s guidelines – if that’s not cencsorship, wtf is?

    Now if we’re going to argue semantics on this issue, it’d only be fair to argue the semantics over wheter or not the BBFC is a Government or Independent agency – either way, it matters little. What counts is the way these bodies utilise their powers.

  146. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Actually, the ESRB is not a censor. They are a ratings board. They assign ratings. What Retailers, console manufacturers, publishers and developers do wit hthose ratings is up to each respectively. The ESRB does not control nor dictate the policies of those other organizations.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  147. 0
    SticKboy says:

    But the BBFC and the ESRB (and PEGI – Sega’s in touch with them too, don’t forget) aren’t critics – they’re censors. However, I take your point that 19th century art critics wield the same powers as modern day regulatory boards.

    So – will you be boycotting this game now? Personally, I still think this smacks of a PR stunt – otherwise they’d keep schtum about involving the various ratings boards.

  148. 0
    Father Time says:

    Castrating a virtual man with a pair of pliers, that I would’ve liked to see. Oh wait I’m trhinking of a different M game that I still need to pick up.

    —————————————————-

    God created alcohol so that the Scottish and the Irish could never take over the world. -Chris ‘Jedi’ Knight

  149. 0
    Nocturne says:

    Considering the level of violence that’s already been passed by both the ESRB and BBFC in games with more realistic graphics than Madworld, is there really anything they might want removing that you’d want to see anyway?

  150. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    The ECA is doing something. They have already stated that AO games should be allowed. They are trying to get reps from the ESA, EMA, ESRB and ECA together for a sit down. Actually getting that meeting together is another story.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  151. 0
    VideolandHero says:

    Whoever said that Manhunt 2 was not social commentary because it pushed violence to a new level, but Mass Effect had great social commentary because it pushed sex in video games, stop picking and choosing which games should be released and games that should be forgotten.  Every game is a part of the first amendment and we need to fight to stop the censoring.  We need to fight for the AO rating to be accepted by stores and video game console makers.  The ECA needs to actually do something about it.

    — Official Protector of Videoland!

  152. 0
    SticKboy says:

    *clap clap clap*

    Personally, I don’t find such censorship problematic or offensive in the slightest (it’s not like they’re editing a work of science or philosophy) – Erik would disagree, I’m sure.

  153. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    Consider this: Trey Parker once said that when he appealed the NC-17 rating for Orgazmo(which was turned down), he was only given 3 minutes to present his case. But when he submitted South Park: Bigger, Longer, & Uncut a few years later, the MPAA explained to him which scenes to cut down to get the R rating.

    Is Sega’s working with the ESRB to ensure an M rating really any different than a movie studio working with the MPAA to ensure an R or even a PG-13 rating?

    Back in Black from a forced hiatus by Hurricane Gustav.


    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  154. 0
    Matthew says:

    While I’m on it, social reform is usually a slow process. A bunch of whiny kids demanding the right to be allowed to play ultraviolent games isn’t going to push back the boundaries any more than throwing rocks at the sea will expand the coastline. Devs have to gently poke at the boundaries of social morals, causing small controversies that eventually give way to acceptance. Blood. Realistic humans. Realistic humans leaking blood. Realistic humans leaking blood based on hit location. Decapitation. Mutilation based on hit location. Fully deformable humans based on simulated physics. Face it, acceptable levels of violence in games have been increasing for years. Have patience and fight for small changes.

    We didn’t go from Elvis to Shakira overnight, and The Exorcist to Hostel in a weekend. We still have a glass ceiling and racial profiling. And you don’t go from Postal to Entrail Juggler 3D in the course of a few years just because you really, really want to play it.

    Or to put it another way, you don’t roll your small band of catapults into Thebes and expect to take over Egypt.

  155. 0
    Matthew says:

    Sega knows that an AO rating will kill MadWorld. Sega does not want MadWorld to get killed. Sega wants MadWorld to get an M rating. Sega pushes alongside the ESRB to find the Ao threshold.

    Face it. What’s easier? 1) Sega convincing the console guys to allow AO content, and the shops to stock it, or 2) Getting their game as close to an AO as they can by having it pre-rated often.

    It is not Sega’s fault they’re working with the ESRB and BBFC. It is in their best interests and much easier than campaigning for change. It’s all very well calling for freedom of expression, but shouting at Sega isn’t the direction to point in. They are potentially limiting their artistic expression in order to make money. Take it out on the consoles and retail giants by all means, but leave Sega out of it. The idea of the “starving artist” is a cliche for a reason.

  156. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    It’s funny isn’t it Eric, the way people seem to think making jokes about you is in someway a valid response to questions you ask them about their viewpoint, and yet they try to make you out to be the arsehole.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  157. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    You have such a powerful intellect only BOLD text can convey your awesomeness, M I Rite? 😉

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  158. 0
    Erik says:

    You still haven’t stated just why you don’t support Thailand’s decisions on video games, but why I should support the UKs.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  159. 0
    Cheater87 says:

    Beardogg you are right but remember after the edited movies come out they can release the unedited and unrated versions on DVD. That is something that can not be done with games.


  160. 0
    Pug says:

    Ofcourse there is also the chance that no censorship will be applied and that this is just Sega being on the safe side.  Bearing in mind that the BBFC have only ever in very rare cases asked for content to be changed (Man hunt II, Carmageddon). 

    This is just Sega’s way of making sure that they dont get stung after development… when they might not have done anyway. 

    Just because they are working with the ratings boards does not mean that they have changed their design or development…

  161. 0
    SticKboy says:

    Doubtful – it’s far more likely they’d follow Bethesda’s move and just create an international ‘one-size-fits-all’ edited up version.

  162. 0
    Erik says:

    Now you are getting it.  What Sega is doing with the ESRB and the BBFC is essentially creative suicide.  Just imagine if Van Goh would have worked with his critics who said he was a drunk and a madman.  We would be stuck with more boring ass 19th century realism styled works with nothing to set it apart from the rest of the herd.

     

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

Leave a Reply