IGN: How Rockstar Toned Down Manhunt 2 for an M Rating

@Zen

Oy, that was a bad one.

I am, too. While I can speak with him, this game is nothing but gross controversial disgust. I can't see how anyone could get enjoyment out of games like Manhunt; all it is is senseless killing in terribly brutal ways. Not much of a game, if you ask me.

It sickens me, and I'm not speaking for him, for that very reason. It's disturbing, like guro (hentai that involves mutilation and excessive gore). While I don't like it, though, I'd still support the rights of people. But that doesn't mean I'll support the game itself, because I feel it was, as he said, made simply for "controversy for the sake of controversy," which can be both good and bad, depending on the context; in this case, I think it's bad. While it does raise issue about the AO rating, overall, I don't think it is worth it, and only hurts more than helps.

The fact that there's posters who were even into the idea of the bizarre testicle attack, and will now not buy it because it was removed, is a source of some mystery to me. I guess to each his own, but I've never seen the funny in testicle attack.

Of course, for game violence, my speed is really more Prince of Persia, too, so it's possible that I'm just not on the same standards as folks.

On a somewhat different topic: I think GP needs to have somebody else make the polls that show up on the front page. They are often written in a way where all answers display a knee-jerk reaction.

The current one is especially bad, though many others often exhibit these traits:


"Given what you know about the changes Rockstar made to the game, will you be buying Manhunt 2?"

- I'm Buying
- No Way
- Not Sure


The wording of the question is specifically discussing it as if the decision to buy the game is affected by the changes currently made to Manhunt 2. These answers are directly interpreted as:

- Yes, I'm buying it despite the changes.
- No, I'm not buying it because of the changes.
- Not sure if the changes will affect my decision to buy Manhunt.

In other words, the answers assume that we were already going to buy Manhunt 2. What about those of us who have no interest at all in the game? We're not represented in the poll.

While I know that internet polls aren't really "official", polls written with this sort of bias help feed the common misconception that we're all frenzied in anticipation for the next Rockstar bloodfest, when I say "No Way" it will be interpreted by the pixel-anti and gamercore alike as being another vote toward "See R*, you shouldn't have censored it!" when my actual reaction is "I don't give two shits about this game."

If it was just this one poll I wouldn't feel the need to comment, but more often than not the polls on GP give me this same impression. I always want to put my vote in on the poll, until I realize that my vote will be biased toward the opinions of the person who created the poll. So usually I just look at the results and wonder "How many of these people actually meant what they said here, and how many just didn't read the poll closely enough?"

Enough ranting, carry on with the otherwise good work. :)

Wasn't gonna buy it either way but disapointing that they had to censor their crappy game.
Its art, I may not like to see guys balls get riped of but if mainstream movies like sin city can do it then why not games?

@Father Time:

As Nekowolf said, the AO rating was not originally intended to be reserved for sexually explicit games. The fact is, and I think we all can agree on this, the point where you cross the line in sexual content is much clearer than it is with violence.

Retailers, console makers, and the ESRB...of all of them, the ESRB deserves the least blame for the unavailability of AO games. Yes, they can indirectly control what gets released as we have seen with Manhunt 2, but anyone who claims that the ESRB is doing it deliberately, ask yourself this: WHY? WHAT'S IN IT FOR THEM? And spare me the old, "it gets the watchdog groups off their backs" argument. Anyone with half a brain knows those idiots can never be placated, and I feel confident saying that the ESRB knows it as well.

@lumi

You are absolutely right about challenging developers. Challenging them by restricting them to some tired and terrible fad. Why release a non-motion sensing Wii game? It just wouldn't work due Nintendo's zaniness developers are restricted to Nintendo's vision when it comes to hardware output. Kind of like the vision that ESRB,Sony,and Nintendo had of what Manhunt 2 should be. Rockstar is to blame as well. Why focus on releasing Manhunt 2 for the kiddie-biddie Wii? If Mh2 were to only come out for Sony systems we'd never be having these discussions. Completely under the radar just like the first game. WHICH HAS NEARLY IDENTICAL CONTENT WITH THE SEQUEL. Only difference like with ALL sequels is the fact we get added features, more levels, gameplay adjustments. Shit, the graphics are almost the same as Manhunt 1.

It seems like the nintendo company wants their system to be for all kinds of people since they started out with having alot of M rated games including some of the most graphic like, Resident Evil 4, Scarface, Mortal Kombat Armageddon, and so many others. The way this system is starting already with having Manhunt 2 that has even extra stuff in it than the Playstation 2 version, and going to release a game called No More Heroes that is supposed to be more violent than Manhunt 2, I would not start calling the wii a kid system, rather I would call it a system for a variety of people just like the xbox 360.

This is highly disappointing, as the death strikes are the entire reward structure for the stealth gameplay mechanics. They get increasingly over the top as you strive to get closer and pull off the harder kill moves. Now the payoff is severely neutered. It doesn't entirely kill the point of the game, but it does kill a large part of it. Here's hoping they release an AO-rated uncut version online somehow...

it's going to suck anyway, censoring it just gives them an excuse for it sucking so badly.

Ehh... Even for R*, using pliers to castrate some guy is too much. I can understand wanting to make a very extreme and gore-filled horror/survival game, but where does crap like that come in as an entirely necessary part of gameplay.
Most any gamer playing that would cringe and look away as they accidentally activate something like that. Doesn't sound like something to be 'enjoyed' any more.

@ ChrowX

It's not necessary, it's entirely optional. Which each weapon you are given three levels of kill; hasty, violent and gruesome. The castration move would almost certainly have been classed as gruesome, so anyone pulling off that move would have some idea of the level of gore they were about to see.

Besides, most of us manhunt fans were looking forward to that move. Ah well.

As much as this game may be an example of the current debate running through the gaming community I have to say..Whatever. I don't even see myself playing the game. It sounds boring as hell.

I'm curious as to how the castration was represented... In north america a film with male bits is x rated immediatley.

@HurricaneJesus:

Why? The game still plays exactly the same. No game play mechanics were removed.

Hey, wait a minute... fourteen years ago, Mortal Kombat let you rip out your opponent's spinal cord. How is that any less gruesome than Manhunt 2's castration sequence?

I'm at a complete loss to why anyone would want to play this game. Yay freedom of speech and all that, but how does this sort of game appeal to anyone?

Maybe we're just meant to assume that it would have been OK if the spine came out along with the guy's junk.

@Rob

Back in the day, the original Tenchu on the PS1 gave players very satisfying death cut scenes as rewards for effective stealth kills. I agree that those cuts scenes are not 'mechanically' important to the game play. However I disagree that they are not emotionally important to the game experience.

Adding filters to a cut scene breaks the player out of the moment / reality, and that reality is the entire draw for a game such as this. Frankly, why else would you play a game like this other than wanting to experience something that you would never do (unless you are an idiot) in real life? I mean this is rockstar, it's not like they have Ubisoft's record for tight controls / rewarding stealth action. It's on the PS2 as well, so it's not like you're getting astounding graphics either.

So I have to say, making a blurry muddy mess of the super death kills does hurt the game. It breaks the fantasy, it takes away a game play reward, and don't even get me started on how candy-coated violence (glorified killing, vs cold factual murder) seems like a worse idea in the first place...

"Nah, they’ll just latch on to that “still the goriest game ever” comment as “proof” that the ESRB is morally bankrupt."


And I'll retort that the most gory, sick game ever (that I played as a youngin) is the arcade game Chiller.

Damnit ESRB you killed another good game. First The Punisher then Manhunt 2. I'll be importing from Holland thanks to you.

As pointed out if watching guys testicles being ripped of is your thing (in which case, in my personal opinion GROW UP!) then they can go watch SAW III, Hostel, a snuff film or whatever! Why buy a game to see that sort of thing?

In my strange little world games are meant to be about GAMEPLAY, so why anyone would have a problem with Manhunt 2 being released with the gameplay and story being kept intact, but the gory executions being a little blurry or dark?

inb4 people discover way to remove blur and darken using cheat devices, JT demands Manhunt 2 be banned and Rockstar investigated by FCC.