Someone should tell people that escaping the mental institution is only the first level.

@ Amarkov

Like the Halloween series?

"but we do ask for responsible exercise of creative rights when serious public health concerns are at issue. It is our right to demand a higher standard."

So....its your right to censor what you dismiss?
Next you will tell me evil is a mental illness that can be cured with lolies and teddy bears.......

so....does this group also ask for similar modifications to movies or books that show a mentally ill person in an irresponsible or stereotypical way? I mean that would be the fair thing right, equal treatment for all media? I don't see what all the protesting and demands are for, if you personally don't like it then don't play it. I likely never will because it just doesn't appeal to me, but horror fans would probably love it like they love the saw movies. Oh well...what can you do.

Hey, guess what? I have a mental illness, and I'm not offended by the game. I am, however, offended by you. Please go away.

Darth_Toxic
ZOMG?!?! uuu mental too? 0-o

You know, if this were a movie not one word would have been said.

At all.

- Warren Lewis

Hmm, you know what, i think it is time we had a game starring an insane character. We've gone through assassins, cops, murderers, thieves, dragons, wolves, random elf people, and the random Bandicoot and Lombax. I think its time we had an insane guy, might be fun to eat some delicious purple. mmmm...
Now on a more serious point, honestly its just not right that they want to prevent people expressing a point and telling a story. And if they bring up the interactivity in the argument, then they just defeated their own "Perpetuating the Violent Mentally Ill" argument, for we are playing the guy, so are in control of him. We get to say what he will or wont do. Hell, we could make him just wander off. Besides, theres a bunch of monsters attacking him, id get violent too if it were me.

:rolleyes: Well, I guess I shouldn't have been so surprised to hear this. It seems that the minute anything remotely controversial comes out, pantywaists like these want to come out and comlplain and put their two cents in. For cryin' out loud it's a GAME! I don't care what he says. If they complained about the depiction of the mentally ill in other media more often, maybe I'd be inclined to take them more seriously.

@dan

"recall or further modify" "It is our right to demand a higher standard."

thats censorship. maybe not full blown censorship but its damn close. he wants the game to be changed just because he doesnt like something about it. if they give in to that sort of thing all hell would break loose and you would have these types lining up at the door demanding things that they dont agree with to be "recalled or further modified".

Ya know, I read the review at Gamespot.com, which included a bit of the REAL storyline of Manhunt 2. And I'm wondering... is NAMI concerned that people will find out that the Mental Health profession are performing secret experiments on the Mentally Ill and turning some of the very doctors who created the the experiment into psychopathic killers?

Does anyone have a thorough link to the entire storyline of Manhunt 2? Because the above is how I understood it from Gamespot.

At this rate, shows like the Six Million Dollar Man, Bionic Woman, and other "alter the physical abilities of people who have been terminally injured without their permission and indoctrine them into secret organizations" should be banned because they put a negative spin on the government, on the medical profession, and on people with serious injuries (who can be saved using secret super surgeries to turn them into supersecret agents of super secret government agencies).

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

Ho. Lee. Crap.

What's going on in our country? Is everyone offended by everything?

You said it yourself, it's just a game. A game people. A friggin' game! It's not an encyclopedia or the evening news. It's not a source of information for basing your life decisions on.

When is the Manhunt 2 critic bandwagon going to break down?

Your wagon sank. You lost 3 oxen, 4 pairs of clothing, and 17 bullets. Mike Fitzpatrick has Cholera.

Sadly, there are "followers" of this organization, almost like a cult.

2 posters in this article ( http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3798090&page=1 ) were already prattling about the NAMI before this guy said a word. Wonder if they are a branch of the LaRouche cult.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

“so….does this group also ask for similar modifications to movies or books that show a mentally ill person in an irresponsible or stereotypical way? I mean that would be the fair thing right, equal treatment for all media?”
Yes: “Whether these images are found in TV, film, print, or other media, StigmaBusters speak out and challenge stereotypes. They seek to educate society about the reality of mental illness and the courageous struggles faced by consumers and families every day. StigmaBusters' goal is to break down the barriers of ignorance, prejudice, or unfair discrimination by promoting education, understanding, and respect.”
If you take at look at this page you can see from the titles alone they do practice the above http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=Stigma_Alerts_Archive
Black Manta you may now begin taking them more seriously.
“thats censorship. maybe not full blown censorship but its damn close.:
Yes if you take an overly stringent definition of the word but that would RS be self-censoring themselves ,which is a practice done by and expected of every human being and human organization on the plant. The president of this organization (the person referenced in the post I was quoting) is asking for a greater, degree of self-censorship on Rockstar’s part, this is a request not censorship.
There is a big difference between asking someone to practice greater self-censorship and to say that a person himself or herself is censoring something. Again my example: Dennis and pretty much everyone here has asked Jack Thompson to practice grater self-censorship in his post, however we all agree that Dennis himself is not a censor despite the fact that he is requesting voluntary self-censor be done by another party. Let me put it another way I can (and have as a dietetic major) asked the many major food companies to basically do the above with products which implying that they are health but aren’t I’m I now a censor for doing this? No, I am voicing my opinion; it is their choice if they want to follow. When I no longer give them a choice, pushing game laws and mandatory government recalls, then that is when I become a censor.
Lastly, “give in to that sort of thing all hell would break loose and you would have these types lining up at the door demanding things that they don’t agree with to be “recalled or further modified”.
They are already lined up, and if Rockstars does so and other companies follow, that is an industry tread responding to public opinion, you may not like the trend but again the NAMI cannot be called a censor for simply triggering a trend. It would be as if saying a fashion designer make pink out of fashion is censoring people who chose to wear pink.
“It’s not a source of information for basing your life decisions on.”
It a source that should not be used for such thing that doesn’t change that people do make decision based on these hence why this is justified, I agree it shouldn’t matter what one game stereotypes but health care advocacy and really health care in general based on should be does work very well.
“What’s going on in our country? Is everyone offended by everything? “
Ok than post that in response to a poster here, calling out JT or someone else for making a gamer stereotype, after all it a double standard otherwise. I finding it seriously bizarre that people are complying that people find this offensive (being offended by people being offended?) the game was designed to be offensive to the average persons taste, this isn’t even close to being offended by everything. This is pretty much exactly the type of response rockstar want to invoke. An artist made a piece of art people responded to the art this good, this the way it supposed to be, if the artist changes his art to suit the taste of his public that is his right and his prerogative. Crazy lawyers wanting to pass laws stopping citizen from every being able to witness said offensive art, now that is bad.

@Tye The Czar

I actually had a Ron White quote to back me up but I can't remember the whole thing. If NAMI didn't have all the facts before issuing the statement that's their problem. Look at all the half truths and out right lies that are polluting the social atmosphere at the moment. This whole dust up, as in the whole Manhunt 2 'public outcry', has very little to do with protecting anyone and everything to do with public image. I just wish all these people and groups would come clean on that regard. It'd be a very refreshing change.

By the way, is it just me is NAMI coming a little late to the party? How long has it been out there that the game was going to start in an mental institution. It reminds me of the Resistance: Fall of Man issue. Is selective ignorance a term that can be coined to sort of sum up this whole situation in a nutshell?

the character is being tested on by scientists do your homework you moron

the game is fiction

and just to let you know now you are on the Ass hole of the year list along with Jack,Yee,Fox network, super conservative christans, etc.

welcome to the PC era people, in this day in age you can't depict anyone or anything in a negative light because they have a lobbying group which will bitch and moan and get all kinds of because they are the ones being PC

out of curiosity was this the same group that demanded Vince McMahon change the XFL team from the Memphis Maniacs to something else as maniac is not a PC term for a crazy person?

Why on earth did they wait until after the game release to say something like this. Or did they only *just* get the notice that the bandwagon was leaving the station?

You know, its probably only the right of the public health institutions to criticize T2 and R* over this game.

@ BlickIce

That and the Resistance fiasco.

I have a personality disorder, yet I'm not annoyed by Manhunt. Why? Because stereotypes in Rockstar games isn't exactly breaking news.

I got an idea, lets get 20 people to play Manhunt
JT, Yee, and whoever else is against T2 in one group of 10 and 10 regular Joe's/Jane's. Now we evaluate them before they play, to get their mental thoughts. Then let them play for a few hours. After the time is up we'll evaluate them again. To find out if playing this game makes them prone to the violence.

Oh and these people saying that you are portraying a mentally ill man going a killing rampage. No, this guy is wrongfully being held in a cell even though, he is sane. They need to get their facts straight, and find out the story line before they assume the worse about the game. Am I right or what?

Oh and JT, it'll be a while before I have that second copy of Manhunt to so send to you. You should give it to your son, he deserves it for doing your dirty work.

well he is escaping a mental health facility for the CRIMINALLY insane
kinda makes sense these would be the mean ones

@Skylar

No, people have always been this easily offended.

What has changed is:

(a) America has gotten better (somewhat) about looking down on 'victims' so people from small groups can now SAY they are offended and:
(b) Unfortunately, we have also developed the social construct that if you are offended it is 'ok' to offend back, since some groups are now 'allowed' to be offended and other groups are only able to 'be offensive' and thus do not have feelings of their own.

As a mentally ill person functioning in society I have this question to ask, when I did I give this group permission to speak for me.
The mentally ill, including myself, may be crazy but they're not stupid and can think and speak for themselves.
Now if a group of mentally ill people came out and slammed this game I would view that as more noteworthy than any of these watchdog groups and activists because they would have a basis for their arguements.

@Stinking Kevin

Who really gives a crap about NAMI? well now we do, because they don't like teh Manhunt. Now if GP had something positive to say about Manhunt, we would want to discredit them by thier past actions. But hey, now that one douchbag at Nami has said what he thinks (and even worse may be incorrect about his assumptions that the character is mentally hill), and we now put the entire organization on our shit list, because hating charitable organizations like PITA, NAACP, AARP, whatever based on thier stupid methods is so in vogue among today's superior minded youth.

and the point Xeli is trying to make is the mob mentality the gamers have been reduced too. If a politician makes a negative statement about video games, then thier evil and stupid, no matter what good solutions they have for BIGGER ISSUES. If some random blogger makes some a statement about racism in a game that is out of sync with what most people think, she is a bitch, and lets back it up with a bunch of stupid rhetoric about the true nature of the game. If Mother Teresa rised from the dead and told people todays games are the reason why America's youth are out of touch with worldy issues, than the majority of these gamers would dig all sorts of shit up to 1: reduce her cred, 2. reduce her contributions to society 3. make a bunch of remarks about her age, religon, race, etc. Jesus could make a statement about Manhunt 2 shouldnt be sold to kids, gamers would gang up and say crap like he's forcing his religon on us, or refer to all the murder in the bible, therefore hes a hypocrite, or how he's not a gamer therefore he has no opinion.

that is except for Jack Thompson. Sometimes, I wonder is he just some small autistic boy controlling how we think and feel

If you people really don't favor censorship then wouldn't it be more practical to ask Rockstar to put in a disclaimer than to ask them to remove the game entirely?

*PING*

Ahh the lab results are in, it seems your statement is 99% Grade A Bullshit with a small hint of baloney

@Dan

Your whole self-censoring thing is meisleading and a shallow argument. I can ask rockstar to promote better "self-censorship" by removing blood from grand theft auto and according to you that would be fine. Of course I am applying what is and is not good self-censorship based on my own moral fiber but oh well. In am asking (demanding really) that Rockstar censor the game based on what I feel is right and wrong. Please explain to me again how this is not censorhip. For further proof I give you the south park episodes 'cartoon wars'. Based off your argument we can conclude that Cartman was just asking Fox to promote better self-censorship. What they are asking rockstar is unreasonable and demanding that they give into their demands is disgusting. How easy you forget the fact they are asking retailers to not carry the game (which blows the whole 'they're asking politely' theory out the window.

"They are already lined up, and if Rockstars does so and other companies follow, that is an industry tread responding to public opinion, you may not like the trend but again the NAMI cannot be called a censor for simply triggering a trend. It would be as if saying a fashion designer make pink out of fashion is censoring people who chose to wear pink."

The opinion of those who were actually interested in the game in the first place probably want their games uncensored. Again I point you to Cartoon wars. Oh and your analogy about pink clothes is fundamentally flawed. If NAMI had their way Manhunt 2 would be very much censored, thus denying me the right to play the game as I want or experience the storyline. Now let's say a fashion designer is hellbent on making pink out of fashion (which is slightly rediculous) and succeeds. May I still wear pink? Yes. No fashion designer is even trying to change that.

"I finding it seriously bizarre that people are complying that people find this offensive (being offended by people being offended?)"

First off you know that's not the case (they are offended that NAMI think they can/should censor a game). Second is it really that hard to believe that people can be offended by people being offended ("I find your work offensive!" "Are you saying that my work is smut?")?. (Although in this case disgusted would be a better word). 3rd weren't you saying that people have the right to be offended by stuff?

"Crazy lawyers wanting to pass laws stopping citizen from every being able to witness said offensive art, now that is bad. "

Advocacy group trying to stop citizens from even being able to witness said offensive art, now that's bad.

Um, guys? For everyone one of you accusing this man of getting his facts straight: Where does he say that the protagonist in this game is a mentally ill patient? I might have missed it, but I can't see any words of that meaning in this story, or the source of it. The straw man argument is irritating to see, especially when I see the universal panning of someone who wasn't even demanding the removal of a game: they were asking.

They say it is their right to demand a higher standard; of course it is! That is freedom of speech, something that seems to be defended a lot round here, in place right there!

Not only has this man given facts to back up his opinions, but he has handled it in a delicate, acceptable manner. At no point was he derogative towards Rockstar, and the majority of comments here act as if he's completely against games. I accept that there's a good chance he hasn't beaten Gears of War on the highest difficulty, or completed Resident Evil 2 enough times to get Hank, but to act as if he's unfairly criticising games and leaving movies out of it is ignorance. As someone has already pointed out, NAMI have a press statements criticising content in films too; want to know why you didn't know that? Because you're at GamesPolitics. Not FilmPolitics, or BookPolitics, of MusicPolitics, but GamePolitics, and unless you visit film-orientated politics sites, then how the devil would you know what NAMI criticise?

Jesus Christ people, try and be logical and coherent about these things.

That last bnit was supposed to be to drunkymonkey not arion sorry about that.

Actually it sad but if anyone should have an objection it this group. They are say TAKE IT OFF THE SHELVES. They just say that it give a bad image. Plus I am sure that the group will back down if Rockstars comes would inform the public that this is not typical metal case and do a little bit of PR, basically show that they did not mean to be discriminator . Their concern is about discrimination and there compliant has does have some bases.

"They do not have the right to demand a higher standard amongst what other people consume as entertainment."

Demanding is part of freedom of speech. Demanding is saying "We want you to do this now." Demanding is not strong-arm tactics. Demanding is just words. People demand that games are not censored...are you saying that those people do not have the right to demand that either?

“I can ask rockstar to promote better “self-censorship” by removing blood from grand theft auto and according to you that would be fine.”

Yes, it would be you using the right of free to ask someone to do this just like it is their right to ignore me and keep all the blood and gore in. Asking for something is not censorship, making that person do it against his or her will is censorship. Just like I have no really problem with JT *asking* games to be cancelled, taken off the selves, etc. I have problem with his methods of asking and when he tries to get the law to make them do it against their will.

As for your analogs, as I do not watch South I really don’t know what you’re talking about.

“In am asking (demanding really) that Rockstar censor the game based on what I feel is right and wrong. Please explain to me again how this is not censorship.”

Because the decision remains entirely theirs to make or not make, again going back to my example: gamers have asked (demanded really) that Jack Thompson change the content of his posts based on what they feel is right and wrong. Please explain to me how this is not censorship.

“3rd weren’t you saying that people have the right to be offended by stuff?”
Yes, they do, they also have rights to have hypocritical double standards, which is what I was pointing out, (i.e. someone makes a gamer stereotype people here do not act in the same calm collected “it’s only a stupid (insert media form here)” manner they expect from others.)

‘How easy you forget the fact they are asking retailers to not carry the game (which blows the whole ‘they’re asking politely’ theory out the window.”

No, I have not forgotten it I think it is actually a good idea if completly unrealstic idea. Fristly retaliators have aright to not stock a product they find offensive. If a store decided not to carry this game that their decision and I admire them for putting their beliefs ahead of profits, in this the exercising of their rights of realtors to stock what they want based on the criteria they chose. I will repeat It is the retailer right to do this if they want to, if asking someone to use this right in this fashion is censorship, then you asking the realtor to stock it is then compelled speech which isn’t a good thing either.

Lastly, let’s do this point blank. I belong to the religion of bizarre hypothetical questions, which bans mention of TV shows on cable stations in internet posts. I now ask that you please honor my sense of right and wrong and please stop using TV references and to please ask Dennis to remove your pervious TV show references. Am I censoring you right now?
If the answer is yes please make a TV show reference and explain to me how I have censored you despite the fact that you just went against my request. If you were to do what i say, explain how you voluntarily of your own occurred complying with a request made by a party with no control over you represent anything but a self-censorship.

Well...I'm not sure I see his point. Last time I checked, people housed in an asylum for the CRIMINALLY INSANE are probably dangerous. Besides, that's only the first level. It actually treats illness rather optimistically, if you've played through the entire game.

It's so fucking infuriating that when so many opportunistic scumbags exploit Manhunts taboo subject matter for their gain, that when someone comes along with a just criticism (as far as I've judged so far) that frustrated gamers jump on that too. Have a little balance guys (that I've read in the comments so far) They make great games but Rockstar are hardly whiter than white & if their playing fast & loose with the realities of Mental health & health care it's fair for the relevant body to demand that that should at least be made clear (disclaimers, press statement even.).