Around the offices of Take Two Interactive, they're likely calling this "Black Tuesday."
In the wake of this morning's word detailing Britain's ban on Manhunt 2 comes more bad news for publisher Take Two and developer Rockstar.
Citing concerns over the Nintendo Wii's popular motion control system, the Center for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) has demanded that Manhunt 2 be rated AO (adults only) by the ESRB. The game is scheduled for release in North America on July 9th.
Although Manhunt 2's rating has not been made public to date, the ESRB says that it has already informed Take Two and Rockstar of the game's rating.
The watchdog group's demand was made this morning via letter to ESRB president Patricia Vance. In a press release, CCFC also says that it will launch a letter-writing campaign "so that parents and advocates for children could share their concerns."
AO ratings for commercial video games are virtually unheard of and are considered the kiss of death at retail, since many stores won't carry AO-rated titles. The only commercial game to receive an AO in recent memory was Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas following the 2005 discovery of the notorious Hot Coffee animations and the game's subsequent recall.
From the CCFC press release:
In Manhunt 2, players can saw their enemies’ skulls in half; mutilate them with an axe; castrate them with a pair of pliers; and kill them by bashing their heads into an electrical box, where it is blown apart by a power surge. On Wii, players will not merely punch buttons or wield a joy stick, but will actually act out this violence...
Said CCFC co-founder, Dr. Susan Linn of Harvard:
If ever there was a time for the ESRB’s strongest and most unambiguous rating, it is now. An Adults Only rating is the only way to limit children’s exposure to this unique combination of horrific violence and interactivity...
An “M” rating is more like a wink and a nod than an effective safeguard. The industry appears to be going through its paces, but as the FTC’s most recent data show, these games are still being marketed to children.
Also quoted in the CCFC press release is Dr. Michael Rich, Director of the Center on Media and Child Health at Children’s Hospital Boston:
Video games are among the most powerful educational tools yet developed... players experience and learn the game’s skills, whether they be based in strategy, logic, or violence. The content of Manhunt 2 and the unique physical interaction with the Wii control combine to take this simulation a level closer to reality - we can expect that the effects of this experience will be even greater.
On June 6th GamePolitics broke the news that, prompted by Miami activist Jack Thompson, Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum was looking into Manhunt 2 on the Wii. It is unknown what role, if any, Thompson may have played in the CCFC's action, but it's clear that he knew it was coming.
The original Manhunt, controversial in its own right, was rated M (17 and older) at the time of its release in 2003. In addition to the Wii version, Manhunt 2 is scheduled for release on PlayStation 2 and PSP.
A statement received by GamePolitics from ESRB president Patricia Vance said:
We have received the letter from CCFC and, while we might take issue with some of the statements made within, we sincerely appreciate their expressed concerns. Our ratings are intended to provide guidance that allows parents to choose games they deem suitable for their children, and that is a responsibility we take extremely seriously.
It should be noted that ESRB has already assigned a rating for the Wii, PS2 and PSP versions of Manhunt 2, and that rating has in fact already been communicated to the publisher. However, we are unable to publicly release the rating at this time as it is our policy that ratings be posted to our website 30 days following assignment, unless the game is released prior to the end of that period. This is done to give publishers the opportunity to consider modifying and resubmitting their games for rating or appealing the rating assigned to our Appeals Board should they wish to do so. We have not yet been notified by Rockstar as to what they intend to do with respect to our rating assignment.
GamePolitics Poll: Should Manhunt 2 be rated AO or M? We now have a poll running in the right sidebar. Be sure to vote.
Comments
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=114&sid=1170388
Anyone here ever hear of the Kaiser Family Foundation? That article's about a survey/study they did on parent's knowledge of what media their children consume. The study and article seem fairly impartial, but I'm curious as to what information other people here have.
1) No console maker (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft) will allow an AO rated game to be published on their console. They will effectively pull their support for the game, and it will not meet their console certification requirements.
2) No store in America, that I know of, will sell AO rated games. Even when GTA got rerated to AO, they pulled all copies off the shelves until the game was re-rerated as an M rated game.
What this group is asking for isn't a proper rating, but an effective ban on the game. This is what we call censorship.
If that is the case, an AO rating would be a de facto ban as there would be nothing published for retailers to choose whether to sell or not..
As many people have said, no one has yet seen this game in action. I remember a lot of hooplah about how Bully was going to be a
Columbine simulator," and it didn't work out quite that way. Of course, a reasonable person can infer that Manhunt 2 is going to be waaay over the top; after all, Nintendo wanted it to be, so that their console wouldn't be type-cast as a kids-only system. Let's all just sit back and let the ESRB do its job on this one.
The difference between AO and M is a subtle one, but there is a good case to be made for not merging the two. AO, like NC-17 is a necessary straw man for the ratings board. Major retailers can say that they are protecting kids by not carrying whatever the strongest rating is (be it AO or NC-17), while ratings boards will only very rarely have to rate anything at that level. Most movie companies know when they are making smut, and just don't rate it. I think Manhunt could probably sell just fine without a rating, but they'd like to see if they can get the ESRB to rate it M so that it could be sold in mainstream stores.
There should be no difference in rating between games controlled by a joystick, a light gun, a traditional controller, or a wii-mote. I've played the Wii; the motion controls are fun, but in no way do they approach actual simulation of what's happening on-screen. Pulling two white sticks toward one's torso doesn't any more simulate strangling a human being than moving two joysticks on the PS2, or even playing tug of war, or flossing your teeth, or anything else. I remember when people were up in arms about the hyper-realism of Mortal Kombat (the original). Now it just looks silly. The "realism" of wii-mote controls are perfectly analogous.
I have no intention of buying this game and no opinion about what the rating should be. I just wish people could argue intelligently and logically about what actually is, not about what they fear might be.
It's funny/sad that people fall for this kind of sensationalisim in the media. Wow, the only thing they have to their advantage(if there even is one) is the fact that the Wii's controls are hands on.
* silence *
Were these same people after Arnold when he was running for Governor? Don't they remember him emulating a futuristic robot that was "sent back in time" to murder a woman?
Or how about when he was blowing people away in Commando? Or featured in violent films such as Predator, Conan, etc?
I mean, he had to do several takes when those movies were shot, right? What if one day Arnold snaps, thinks he's in one of his movies then goes on a killing spree becuase he once "emmulated" it?
Just a thought. Also just wanna show, once more how rediculas and contradicting this can be.
I plan to buy this game. I have the first one, beat it a few times and I still manage to make it in to work without ripping people's nuts off.
Fashion does that. A size 2 becomes a size 0 in no time.
Etc...
It's like wrestling, their kid sees a wrestling move and tries it out on his friend killing him/her or paralyzing them. Do they blame the dumb ass kid? No! Their own lack of supervising? No! They blame wrestling, the wrestlers, etc. If you kid is so fucking stupid that they have to do things they know that could or would hurt someone else, well, then your kid shouldn't even be allowed to do anything other than sit in a big white room eating crayons and riding the short bus back home at the end of the day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AO_rated_computer_and_video_games
then there have barely been two dozen games to ever receive the rating. When GTA:SA was relabeled as AO, it was already well past the initial surge in sales...but we didn't see a sudden revocation of the game from the market. But with the exception of GTA:SA and the "director's cut" of Inidigo Prophecy, virtually every game on that list is sexually explicit (and most are PC games or hentai dating sims).
That certainly shows where the bias lies with regards to violence versus sexual content....and remember, GTA only got an AO because the Hot Coffee mod on the PC version unlocked a sexually themed mini-game left in the code. Inidigo Prophecy also only got an AO rating for the download-only version that reinstated the sex scenes to the game.
Manhunt 2 would be the first game receiving an AO for extreme violence, if that were to occur. How that would impact sales is a matter for debate, since most retailers weren't carrying AO games because, for all intents and purposes, they contained sexual or in some cases pornographic content. Also at debate is how successful Manhunt 2 would be with just an 'M' rating. I mean, was the original Manhunt that big of a commercial success? It was banned in several countries too, as I recall. I doubt Rockstar is all that concerned; to them, this is just a way to develop media attention, anyhow.
2) I would only support this game for AO if major retailers offered to sale AO games in brick and mortar stores. If that occured I would be more willing to let these nit picky parenting groups to have a little more say in what is rated what, because then it wouldn't actually affect the games sales.
Manhunt2 is still marketed to kids? Burden of proof lies with the accuser, please provide some or STFU, CCFC.
And yes, I can gather they meant that kids will want to play this game, but realize that this is natural. Kids want to feel like they can watch adult movies, etc. I did, you did, and your parents did. Every generation has its things hidden in the mattress. It's a part of growing up, and this is, in no uncertain terms, the strict domain of parents. The ESRB, retailers, etc. all try to help out, but at the end of the day, where are these games played? In the home. Left-handed censorship of ideas (and an AO rating is very clearly just that) is an invasion of a parent's home, plain and simple. I would very much like the CCFC to stay the hell out of my right to raise my (future) kids as I see fit. Guess what, I wouldn't let any kid play this game either, but I recognize that I have no control over other people except in the case of illegal or imminently dangerous situations, and a video game (no matter the implied 'realism') doesn't fit either of those cases.
The real debate we need to have, as gamers, is whether or not the Wii-mote controls actually are realistic enough to warrant concern, in the case of pantomiming the brutal acts of Manhunt? Too bad the real debate gets lost in the activist parade ...
Personally, I used to fashion swords, guns, etc. from anything and would brutally 'slay' my younger brothers (or be slain in turn). And those games included using real-life items as weapons, bats, golf clubs, etc. So because the game is pseudo-realistic on a screen, does it mean more? I'm inclined to say that it doesn't because my imagination is still more vivid and I can distinctly remember 'beheading' my 'adversaries' many times. I'd think the Wii-mote is very similar to this type of play violence.
The difference is, of course, the subject matter, which I think we can universally agree is far to strong for most kids in Manhunt 2. Now, maybe there are some kids that can understand the right context? But who is best suited to know what an individual kid can understand?
In an ideal world, Manhunt 2 would be rated AO (Granted, none of us have played the game, so our rating could be grossly overstated) for it's ability to associate movements to activities in an adolescent mind (Which if any of you have any psychology or even physical therapy knowledge, is very much true all the way into the mid 20s). However, due to the way the market has been established, a title with the AO rating isn't sold in stores, and thus is not given fair market, making the AO rating MORE than a warning; it's a red herring.
Either way, I think we should seriously have a look at the association of movement to the mind, and we should also tread very lightly when talking about our flawed rating system (in conjuncture with it's flawed understanding by parents and retailers) being all-knowing.
Thrill kill was also a non-nudity game that was coming out of the PS.
But after the first few scenes were shown to the esrb, and it got its AO rating, poof, it was no more.
They're right you know. 99% of moronic parents don't know any better. (Though I know none of them post here.)
Also, kids will still get a hold of it regardless of the rating. Make it 21 like alcohol or 25+ like renting a car... There's still people who will do you a favor.
This is the August Underground of videogames. Definitely getting it.
@DarkTetsuya
It shouldn't matter if parents are morons, the we shouldn't have to adapt to dumb parents.
2. In case the CCFC has had their heads in the sand, more and more game stores are making selling an M-rated game to a minor a reason for instant termination
3. HA HA ! YOU GUYS SENT THE MESSAGE TOO LATE! YOUR THREAT FAILS AS IT FALLS ON DEAF EARS!
4. CCFC really can't do anything as they can't even say something like "if you do not rate Manhunt 2 AO, then something will happy" as they obviously didn't.
5. They are wrong, obviously
6. They fall under the same mentally retarded thinking as jack thompson that M-Rated games are specifically marketed to minors
7. They fall under another mentally retarded way of thinking that just because you do something in a game, means that you'll do it in real life too.
Unfortunatly, that would be a waste of time. Like the CCFC would give a darn what we have to say. Also why should write angry letters to the ESRB? Just wondering.
I think it is wrong for developers to try and modify their game vision to avoid the AO rating to get the M just to be able to sell more
I think it is a myth that AO will sell less than M for a game that is clearly intended for very adult audience
ESRB - http://www.esrb.org/about/contact.jsp (no e-mail provided)
BBFC - General - contact_the_bbfc@bbfc.co.uk
Feedback - ithelpdesk@bbfc.co.uk
ESRB has a flawed rating system, why not let them know about it with a flood of e-mails? I hate censorship and the ESRB can effectively kill a game just by rating it AO. Its not right.
Think about it. The CCFC is starting a lettering campaign against rockstar, maybe if WE start a lettering campaign then we divide their time with a game no one really wants to play.
I'm registered on the Democrats' blog on their website, so I'll make a post there this evening. I go by "Foxwood".
The ESRB just rates the games. ESRB ratings are not enforced by law. Unlike the BBFC, the ESRB will rate any game you pay to have rated. The ESRB censors nothing. The ESRB is not worthy of your anger.
From the quotes above we know the CCFC is biased, ill-informed, or both. Assuming they are smart enough to research how the ESRB works (and you'd think so, with all those impressive Harvard-types on the payroll), this is all a bunch of well-calculated ado about nothing. The CCFC is not worth your time.
If you want to write an angry letter, write one to Wal-Mart, or Target, or Best Buy, or any retailer who refuses to sell "AO" rated games but is happy to stock "unrated" DVD versions of theatrical movies. There's nothing wrong with a private retailer having its own standards, but hypocrisy is always evil.
I agree, but if they don't parents are gonna ignore the rating anyway and buy it for little 6 year old Jimmy Whines-a-lot just to shut him up...
"In Manhunt 2, players can saw their enemies’ skulls in half; mutilate them with an axe; castrate them with a pair of pliers; and kill them by bashing their heads into an electrical box, where it is blown apart by a power surge."
wow thanks, I really want to get this game now (that was not sarcastic).
Honestly i wish the game would be rated AO, not because I want to see it effectively banned or that i don't like the game, I want to see it get an Ao rating and still be a sucsess. Also if the game hits an Ao rating then I know they didn't tune down any of the violence.
That said, what on earth is the distinction between "Adults Only" and "Mature"? Is the ESRB really arguing that there's a meaningful difference between an 18 year old and a 17 year old? That's pretty absurd.
Seems like a good argument to abolish the AO rating entirely.
The Ao rating is usually reserved for porno games that's why most retailers don't carry them. I think you can still get an Ao rating from extreme violence which is why they are tweaked to get M.
Interesting points. Manhunt 1 was hardly a best-seller, and it was on the shelf. So will an AO rating, keeping purchases to specialty stores or the internet, necessarily hurt sales, if Manhunt 2 is well and truly intended only for adults?
In practice, however, I am of the belief that an AO rating has been reserved for pornographic games, despite its intent to the contrary. And as such, an AO rating has a chilling effect at best, or at worst - left-handed censorship.
However, the ESRB is well within its limits in assigning such a rating, and I will trust their judgement. Perhaps an AO is warranted. I wouldn't know until I play it, or see scenes from it first hand. Personally, I don't think it will be given an AO, since most of the 'content' I hear about is speculative, or hyperbolic word-of-mouth from critics like the CCFC, and gamer press is little better. I will wait until its rating by the ESRB, the game's release, and it's review by GamerDad. Then I will feel informed enough to pass judgement. Or I'll buy it outright because it's a big, stinking deal, like everyone else.
Even if it s AO, I don't necessarily see it as the "kiss of death." At least, the manager of the EB Games didn't see it that way when I spoke to him while I was buying my copy of UFO: Afterlight. He wasn't too concerned about it. In fact he was like, "Go ahead, let them." The way he saw it, it would be more business for EB Games if Wal Mart and the like would not carry it, and I found it hard to disagree with him on that.
EB Games/Gamestop at least seems to have every intention of selling it, and I don't recall them ever saying they wouldn't carry any AO-rated games anywy. After all, they're a specialy store, so odds are they be more likely to carry it than a big box retailer. So if people want this game, at least there will be a place where they can get it, and in a way that's good news. So at least someone would benefit from it.
Are you really arguing that there's no meaningful difference whether or not you are eligible to vote, or be drafted, or purchase pornography and firearms, or be held accountable for your actions as a legal adult?
For the sake of argument, why not bring the MPAA into too? "R" movies are suggested for people 17 and older, while "NC-17" movies are intended strictly for people...17 and older(!).
If you believe the ESRB, its ratings and descriptors are intended as more than just abstract age-cutoffs to blindly accept. I think it can be confusing when we focus too much on the numbers instead of the meanings behind them.
They do deserve my anger because they are responsible for the rating of games and its because of their rating system that retailers are turned off from allowing AO games on their store shelves. They are the very root of the problem. Their system does not have any logic behind it I mean come on, M is 17+ and AO is 18+. Doesn't make any sense at all. Kill the AO and just raise 17 to 18 and that way Mature game are automatically rated for adults only(though the rating says Mature which implies adults anyway).
Because of the way they set up their rating system it gives them the power to influence the content of games. They shouldn't beable to infulence it they should just do their job and rate it. They know what the deal is. They know AO is the kiss of death so they use it to water down violent content in games. They have no business doing that. The ESRB should either be abolished or they should fix their crap rating system and I will be angry at them and everyone else looking to censor video games. They deserve every ounce of anger I can give them.
That being said, I agree with the majority: censorship is bad. In one way, the utmost of all evils. To take away, both figuratively and literally, my right to speak, you take away my humanity. No one other than me, myself and I should be have a say in what I do, what media I engage in, or what games I choose to play.
For those of you say that this game is indecent, thats great. I totally respect that, but what you believe isn't what I believe. For example, I hate the Jackass TV show and movies. Loathe might be a better word, make fun of people for watching and liking them and yet -- I would never do anything to infringe on the right of those shows and movies to be made, because its not my choice. My choice is not to engage in that media myself, and you know, that choice works well. I change the channel, I don't go to the theater to see it--I don't rent it. The same goes for Larry the Cable Guy, Nazism, KKK, and the like -- I don't for one second agree with anything they say, but I will defend their right to have those opinions, as loathsome as they may be.
I've said it before--I think Gamers need to step up in this. We need to ignore the people like Luscan who seek to hold the entire industry back, and start making our voice heard. We sit around saying that the CFCC shouldn't be allowed to demand anything, we say that the Industry or the ESA should rise up the occasion. Just like Luscan and his cronies, we want to be able to blame the problems on someone else when everything goes to hell. Our inaction is seen as our salvation, freeing us from responsibility of the world where we live. I think it's time to stop with the kind of mentality.
I think we take the task of responding to these kinds of issues, to JT, and the like into our own hands. It's obvious that even here there are some amazingly intelligent people, and I think given the opportunity could make some incredibly eloquent and well thought out responses to whats going on in the industry. I know I would have no problem with starting it, but of course, something like that can't be done alone ...
ha
Pipedreams of course ...
Serrenity-
If you have any ideas on how we can have well though out responses heard and not fall opon deaf ears then I'd certainly be willing to listen. I mean so far non of my e-mails have been responded to, and if I get something in the mail from a politician is a generic thank you for your letter response that they send to everybody.