Rockstar respond to Manhunt rejection

[wraggster]

via gamesradar (http://www.gamesradar.com/gb/ps2/game/news/article.jsp?sectionId=1006&articleId=20070619165138892030&releaseId=2007020617942953009)


Rockstar has issued GamesRadar with an official response to today's announcement by the BBFC that it has rejected Manhunt 2 for rating. Here's the statement in full:

"We are disappointed with the recent decision by the British Board of Film Classification to refuse classification of Manhunt 2. While we respect the authority of the classification board and will abide by the rules, we emphatically disagree with this particular decision.

"Manhunt 2 is an entertainment experience for fans of psychological thrillers and horror. The subject matter of this game is in line with other mainstream entertainment choices for adult consumers.

"We respect those who have different opinions about the horror genre and video games as a whole, but we hope they will also consider the opinions of the adult gamers for whom this product is intended. We believe all products should be rated to allow the public to make informed choices about the media and art they wish to consume. The stories in modern video games are as diverse as the stories in books, film and television. The adult consumers who would play this game fully understand that it is fictional interactive entertainment and nothing more."

[TCLCloud]

How horrific is it gonna be? I mean tehres loads of gory movies on TV all the time with loads of freaky stuff on so why cant it be on a game?

[Shadowblind]

Its said to be the most violent game ever created.

[mcdougall57]

this better not be because of that kid that stabbed his mate over the first one

[h4s30]

its just the ability to be more graphical its no different from watching a horror movie

and yes rockstar we understand your intentions of making a game aimed at an adult audiance but really kids are going to get it too and yes you can have ratings and laws that prohibit the distribution of games to minors under 18 i mean hell how many parents bought their kid GTA 3 mine did and i was in 7th grade

anyways kids 3 to 10 are actually the most affected demographic during this time are the kids learning and absorbing knowledge and behaviors

[IamAbe]

its too bad some people cant differentiate between video games and reality.

[Xiofire]

its too bad some people cant differentiate between video games and reality.

Yew just summed my thoughts up in one small sentence. Praise to you.
-Xiofire

[cswallstreet]

There is not much Difference between Playing a game like Manhunt 2 and watching this twisted gory slaughter movies I.e. Hostel 1 and 2 where poeple are captured and tortured.

[jdnation]

its too bad some people cant differentiate between video games and reality.

Unfortunately there are, or there are just stupid people who want to imitate what the see. Britain has had those problems before, and that's precisely why this game is being banned.

[NeoXCS]

I still think the people who do these acts when they play games are just mentally unstable, which isn't fair to the majority who can take a game like this. Violence hasn't gotten worse because of games it's just another medium that psychopaths use as a reference for killing people. Manhunt is such an awesome game with suspense and complicated puzzles, trying to figure out the next kill. It's too bad that countries would do this to such a unique game.

[splodger15]

Most people will still be able to get the game. I mean I have the first one and have been waiting for ages for the second one and especially now it is on Wii its going to be even better. I might try to see if I can buy the game abroad online and bring it in if that doesn't work I will just buy it when I go on holiday or when someone I know goes away. You will still be able to get the game so there is no problem

[Vega]

damn.... this blows. Ugh, time to import. weak. f*cking weak.

[jimmi]

Despite being banned and downed i still think the people that wouldnt rate the game are restricting the level or reality we can indulge ourselves in and have fun with, if they create the game with adults intended why should it matter if it affects kids? Why should rating offices supress the genius and creativity that goes into something like this? All becuause of one incident involving and underage kid and some bad parenting. I think it all ****ing nonsense censoring this because of what little ones will do.

IF its not for you, dont ****ing play it.

My two cents.

[robman84]

Blimey this really messes with my head and heart. So many conflicting ideas going on in there! The heart says:

* Freedom of choice - don't like it, don't play it
* Doesn't sound like my cup of tea so I won't get it anyway
* Surely people can tell the difference between game and reality
* If kids get hold of it, blame the parents and/or the people who sold it to them

But the head says

* If media has no influence over our lives, how come I drive faster when playing rock music loud (and I'm a sensible old fart who has never got a speeding ticket)

* If my young kids got hold of it somehow and were sneakily playing it I would be mortified!

* How can premeditated murder be entertainment?

Like I said, big conflict

[Plowking]

If you want it, I assume you can just buy online from ebay etc.

Also, regarding that terrible incident of that kid killing another, the police retracted all statements in relation to it being a result of the first game. The killer or victim never had the game, and so they threw out that line for motive.

[Sonny_Jim]

A lot of people are missing the fundamental difference between a film and a video game:

In a film, you see what the Director wants you to see, which normally means panning the camera away or similar during a particularly gory scene.

In a video game, you choose what you see, so if you want to zoom in whilst you are stabbing someone to death, you can. Video games are a LOT more immersive than film due to this aspect.

Also they haven't 'banned' it per say, it just doesn't have a rating, and it's illegal to sell in this country without a rating. That doesn't mean you'll get arrested if you import it IANAL but I'm pretty sure it works out that way. Also bear in mind that there is a massive set of rules that dictates what you can and can't show on T.V/Film/Games. For example, in UK pornography you can show a penis, but it can't be at an angle of more than 30 degrees, if you are advertising alcohol you are not allowed to imply that it will make you more popular to the opposite sex. It may be the case that the BBFC requested that certain scenes or whatever be dropped due to them breaking these rules, but Rockstar refused.

Even though Rockstar say they are 'Thoroughly Disappointed' I bet they are laughing themselves silly at this point. Theirs is a company that thrives on controversy (GTA, Bully etc), so it doesn't really matter at all how gory it is or even if it's a good game, it's going to sell bucketloads because of this.

Personally I don't have a problem with these sorts of games (Super Columbine Massacre was a bit too much) but I really wish developers would stop making 1st/3rd person shooters and actually make some new game genres.

[h4s30]

delegation

people don't want to take responsibilty for what happens so they blame someone else or give the job to somebody else

people suing mcdonalds for getting fat
that old lady who sued for the coffee because it burned her when she spilled it on herself
i guess the kid shooting somebody just recently

they all pointed fingers at someone else as if it was their responsiblity for getting fat or getting burned

delegation stop delegating your responsiblities to someone else

[Shadowblind]

Really. if Manhunt 2 is bad enough to get an AO rating, EVEN GET BANNED FROM 3 OF THE MOST GAMING CONTRIES, Then I don't think half or you really know just how violent and discusting this game really is. Im gonna say that many of you who probably play this game are going to be in some form mentally ill.

You think the first one was bad? It didn't get an AO rating much less get banned from a country!

[Sonny_Jim]

that old lady who sued for the coffee because it burned her when she spilled it on herself


OT but:

She did have a valid point legally. Basically the coffee was labelled as 'Hot'. Her lawyer was saying in scientific terms 'Hot' is a few degrees lower than 'Scalding'. If something is 'Hot' it doesn't tend to burn the skin. When it's a few degrees higher (ie scalding) it will. See here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s_coffee_case#Evidence_presented_to_the _jury) for more details.