Take Two Shelves Manhunt 2 350
If you've been following this story so far, it shouldn't come as a shock that Take-Two has shelved Manhunt 2 for the moment, while they decide what to do next. The company is considering its options, and still fully supports the game as a 'work of art'. "Take-Two Interactive Software has temporarily suspended plans to distribute Manhunt 2 for the Wii or PlayStation platforms while it reviews its options with regard to the recent decisions made by the British Board of Film Classification and Entertainment Software Rating Board ... We continue to stand behind this extraordinary game. We believe in freedom of creative expression, as well as responsible marketing, both of which are essential to our business of making great entertainment." Analysts have already started weighing in, with some seeing this as unfairly targeting the GTA-maker for previous 'sins'.
loss (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There were some kids that stole cars after playing GTA because they thought it was cool. What kind of things could we expect those kids to do after playing this game?
I'm not saying I think this game itself should be banned from the open market and country. THAT would be an issue of freedom of speech. But I understand t
Re:loss (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You'll probably scoff at the idea of games for windows becoming a serious force in PC gaming, especially with so few publishers signing on so far, but stranger thin
Y'know what (Score:2)
Re:loss - MOD CHIPS ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! (Score:5, Insightful)
If there was ever an argument for Mod Chips, this is it! Once I purchase a console it's mine, d@mn it! I should be able to play whatever games I purchase for it, and shouldn't need Sony's or Nintendo's blessing first. That's like buying a Mustang, and then finding that only Ford Brand Gasoline service station nozzles will fit the weird shape of my fuel filler tube.
I wonder if you could win an anti-trust suit over this? Imagine if your Dell PC would only run software resold through Dell stores. Where does it say on the outside of the PS3 box -- This unit only runs software licensed by Sony. Any other use of this equipment violates the Sony Playstation 3 License Agreement.
Re:loss - MOD CHIPS ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:loss (Score:5, Interesting)
Imagine the promotional campaign:
The sheer curiosity for the forbidden fruit can propel the game in the history books.
You are missing the DRM aspect of this... (Score:2)
Re:You are missing the DRM aspect of this... (Score:5, Informative)
It's a shame that (almost) the entire console industry consists of closed systems (and this generation it looks increasingly complex to crack). I was hoping that this generation I'd be able to form part of the homebrew community, but it looks like it isn't going to happen anytime soon. Anyone willing to form an *open* team dedicated to opening up the Wii? I'm sure there are ways, but if either no one tries or those who do keep their findings to themselves, nothing gets done.
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't change anything about your right to distribute discs to stores that happen to play a video game when inserted into a WII or PS3
As I stated elsewhere, this is only true if the developer has not entered into a contract with the console maker, as all developers do when before receiving their licensed development kits. Yes it is possible to independently develop games for the current consoles, and assuming you can get around the DRM/DMCA/Anti-circumvention laws mentioned above, you would be able to distribute any game you wanted as long as you have not entered into a contract with the console manufacturer. You wouldn't find any major
Re: (Score:2)
According to a lawsuit brought against Nintendo years ago by Tengen they can in fact release games for whatever playform they damn well please.
This is only true if the company did not license development kits from the console maker and in doing so signed an agreement with them. If Take Two had reverse engineered the PS3 or the Wii, or otherwise gained access to the necessary machine code (since there are no freely available C compiler or Assemblers for the PS3) and memory maps (Sony doesn't release the hardware architecture to just anyone) then they would have been able to release to game without legal consequence. When Tengen did independantly
Re:loss (Score:5, Insightful)
I expect them to go "Huh, stealing cars landed me in jail. I don't want to do that again."
Re:loss (Score:5, Insightful)
So it's GTA's fault these kids were never properly raised? Hm so what happens if they watch on the news that more soldiers in Iraq were hurt/killed by a roadside bomb, decide it sounds cool and took a stab at that action.
Truth is, this had nothing to do with the game and everything to do with them being irresponsible idiots with irresponsible idiot parents. We have to quit blaming everyone else for our failures otherwise we keep perpetuating the need for a nanny state.
Re:loss (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Yes, parents are responsible for their kids (I'm a parent myself). However, even the best and the best raised boy in the world *will*, from time to time, come to completely and utterly idiotic ideas, especially if there are some girls standing around, watching and cheering. You can't just blame it ALL to the parents, you know. Being a parent is challanging enough even without having companies like - in this case - Take Two making it even harder by raising car theft to the "cool" level.
2. If I were the owner of a stolen car, I wouldn't CARE who is to blame - parents of the thief or the company that brought the thief to the idea. You can't just throw away all moral responsibility under the cover of "freedom of speach" (let's be honest here: it's not the freedom of speech Take Two is trying to excercise here, it's the money they are after).
3. "iraq roadside bomb in the news" is such an inappropriate example that I am wondering how in the world can it be that you found somebody to mod you UP for that! If Take Two made a game where the main objective of the game was to place a roadside bomb in order to kill some marines, THAT would be a good example (although in a direction you wouldn't like). And I can very well imagine the (rightfull!) outcry on the
And what
Re:loss (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:loss (Score:5, Funny)
Realism (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This only applies to people who are already unstable, assuming that video games actually have that kind of an effect on people.
I'm looking for a serious answer here. With the rising occurrences of Diagnosed Mental Disorders in western civilizations, how to you propose we keep games like Manhunt out of the hands of those who are "already unstable" and potentially susceptible to the negative imagery and psychological effects of simulation? Now how do you propose we do this without calling into question the last 100 years of anti-discrimination challenges?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Wait a second... the "Diagnosed Mental Disorders" that you mention... do those include the crap like ADD? Or are you talking actual disorders, you know, the ones that don't sound suspiciously like: "drug the kids, they'll behave then!"?
Also... I assume you actually have a source for the claim that there is a rising occurrence?
Nephilium... avoiding modding to post...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1) "Rising occurrences of Diagnosed mental disorders" does not equal "a rising occurrence of mental disorders"
2) People are living longer in Western civilizations, so one would expect a rise in age related mental disorders (if in fact this is occurring)
That's a pretty vague statement in itself. If you are implying that people who already have s
If not freedom of speech, how about anti-trust? (Score:2)
This is not about freedom of speech. This is about freedom to choose what you want to sell. Many 'family' companies don't want to sell games that depict this degree of realisitc violence.
As individual companies you are right, they have full right to sell or not so sell anything, however once you have all of these companies come together to agree not to sell something, you actually have a classic example of anti-trust law violation... unless of course you scream "but think of the children" - in which case all the laws can be bypassed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well yes, except what happens when "family" companies stop carrying a book because it has bad language, or god forbid sex in it. As it is I specifically avoid stores like Wal-Mart because as an adult I don't want them making choices about what language I should listen to. I don't need someone foisting their beliefes on me
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
this kind of rubbish has been debunked many many times... but *sigh* here we go again.
blaming the present day medium for childrens behavour is FLAWED logic, as this kind of behavour was present prior to video games, and till continue to be there if video games never depicted such acts.
the problem lays squarely with parents who allow the tv
Punishing for previous sins (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Is "punishing for previous sins" unfair?
In particular, you need to state which one of the sins [wikipedia.org] is being punished.
Is it Wrath? Attempting to kill everything in GTA will not advance the plot - perhaps even set back the player as he gets reduced back to what's considered the absolute basic equipment and stuff.
Is it Lust? While it is true that GTA III had a dry-humping sex scene that cannot be obtained through normal in-game means, it's still considered an isolated incident.
Is it gluttony? Probably not, since Pacman would obviously be considered
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Rockstar makes incredibly violent video game
2) ESRB does its job and rates the game AO
3) Sony and Nintendo reaffirm their licensing agreement, saying no AO game will be on their consoles
4) Rockstar halts production of incredibly violent game
Could you show me the step where somebody's rights were violated?
Bizare. (Score:2)
XBox 360 (Score:5, Interesting)
This whole thing is rather interesting. The Wii version is the one that really catches my interest because of what the controls "add" to the game. I was rather surprised at first when I saw what they were doing. While it fits well, it's rather visceral compared to just pushing a button so I wondered if they would have a tough time.
Nintendo banning an AO game doesn't surprise me. Sony banning it does surprise me some. But what all of this has really made me wonder is... does Microsoft have an anti-AO game policy? If Manhunt 2 was developed for the 360, would they be able to release it (problems with Target, Wal*Mart, etc selling it aside)?
The computer is really the only platform where this isn't a problem. If you look at the list of AO games, most of them are on the PC, even if you remove the "Virtual Jenna" type games. Since no-one can stop a game from being published on the PC (you can sell it mail order or download if you have to), this wouldn't be a problem.
Of course, Take-Two has put already had a target on their heads (unfairly). I can see the outrage over a game like this, seeing as how it makes GTA look tame. As adult as this is, I was really looking forward to reading the reviews of what the Wii controls added to it. There are previews out now, but previews are always positive so it's a bit hard to tell based on that. People called GTA a "murder simulator".. heh.
Porting consoles isn't easy. But maybe MS could agree to let them publish and get PR win with the mature crowd. But that would probably cause them problems with the family crowd they want.
Re: (Score:2)
No idea about the rest of the world, but at least in Germany they have. Any game (Gears of War, Condemned, etc.) that didn't get a USK rating (aka Germans version of ESRBs AO) isn't allowed to be published by Microsoft, this includes third party titles.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Though Manhunt 2 isn't slated for any of Microsoft's systems, the company has also confirmed that it does not allow AO-rated titles on the Xbox or Xbox 360.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
perhaps take-two should.. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Is this a surprise? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Rockstar's statement also claimed that the mod was the product of complex technical tampering. "Since the 'Hot Coffee' scenes cannot be created without intentional and significant technical mo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you realise that "reverse-engineer the source code" is a reasonably accurate layman's description of the process needed to create an Action Replay code? It's not a perfectly accurate stateme
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see how they possibly thought they could get away with this game. It's almost as if they're are determined to go bust.
They must not have seen it coming.
Think about it. If they suspected it, they would never have developed the game -- what company would voluntarily lose money? Or, for that matter, what company would want to waste their creative energy -- the developers are very creative people who want to get credit for a game being produced. Everyone must have thought they were going to get an M rating.
Maybe we could do an Ask Slashdot about this -- an interview with Manhunt 2's head of development. Imagine how angr
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Never before has any level of violence, no matter how explicit or gruesome, been reason for an AO rating. Let me repeat that again, in bold and capitals:
BEFORE NOW, VIOLENCE HAS NEVER BEEN A REASON FOR AN AO RATING
The only reasons for AO ratings are sex and politics. This game contains neither (as far as I know), and anyway, it
Yeah...so? (Score:2, Insightful)
Release it with the adult rating. If the traditional outlets won't sell it, find new ones or sell it online yourselves. If its such an awesome game, where you sell it should make absolutely no difference and buyers will beat a path to your door/website. But if it blows chunks, then the ratings really don't matter.
Re:Yeah...so? (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is that it's illegal for them to release it. Both Sony and Nintendo require that all gamees released on their platforms be approved by them (it's part of the contract a developer must sign to get a dev kit). In some countries it's even more illegal because selling an unrated game is prohibited.
All I really have to say is "Ha, Ha! That's what you get for developing for a proprietary platform".
Mod parent up (Score:2)
Oh, Hell No... (Score:4, Insightful)
Hell no. Political Correctness(tm) was NEVER a slippery slop to censorship. Gosh. Those Chinese sure do suck for their Censorship(tm). We don't suck. We have REAL reasons!!!! I mean, Think About the Children(tm).
Un-frickin-believeable. For you purist-morons, yes, this was both governmental and economic censorship. My belief will always be that pornography is the line. That is to say, sexual contact and insinuated sexual contact when one or both sides' "stuff" is involved. And, it even has to be REAL for that. Not animated.
I am a parent. I am a parent to my kids and I take responsibility for what they see and experience. I have the power to control a heck of a lot of what they are exposed to and I exercise that power. Sucks for the parents who don't, but don't put that on me via government. I'll handle my own situation and you handle yours.
If stuff happens to be viewed or experienced by my kids out of my control "area", then we'll deal with it. But, my kids absolutely 100% won't be "damaged" because of it. Show me one person of us 6 billion who hasn't had a perfect go of it. I can only say that now after Paris Hilton got sent away, but before that, I was 99.999999% sure.
Moe
Re: (Score:2)
Google it up.
Re: (Score:2)
1. The company is known for making deranged games.
2. The company is known for lying about content in said deranged games
3. This particular game is supposed to be incredibly dark and violent
4. As a result of a
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing to stop Take Two from releasing it on PC (and possibly 360, if MS will agree) at this point. They simply won't be able to be on the consoles they had planned to.
What surprises me is that this appears to come as a shock to Take Two. Did they NEVER think about what would happen if they published an extremely violent game and ended up with
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You equate their games with torture and with murderers, and you claim that you don't have a moral problem with them selling gam
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a solid business plan, and even as a defense plan, it sucks. There's only a few wackos screaming 'censorship' (because it's not) and only a few of those will actually buy the game in protest, most of which would probably have bought the game anyhow.
As for the 'it's art' statement... Well, they -would- feel that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It may not be popularly known as censorship by people who don't like the game (and I can presume have never played the game), but yes it is censorship.
I'm sure if this topic involved something about banning th
Infamy is valuable. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There isn't time for this. Take-Two needs get back on track. To focus on Grand Theft Auto. Franchise gold. It's delusional to think the AO rating for GTA 4 is out-of-bounds.
Just Don't Sell it in Britain (Score:2)
ISO leak in 5...4...3...2... (Score:2)
Do somthing about it (Score:4, Informative)
England Prevails!
There's a fine line between M and AO (Score:3, Informative)
"MATURE Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language."
"ADULTS ONLY Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity."
I find it hard to believe that this game could not be classified as an M rated game. Both games require you to be at least 17 years old (18 in the case of AO). I highly doubt this game has "graphic sexual content", so it all comes down to whether the violence is "intense violence", or "prolonged scenes of intense violence".
The rating system is really not very well thought out. There should be some kind of process to appeal the decision and have it re-reviewed by a different group.
Come on... IT'S A GAME! They need to lighten up. I probably wouldn't want my kids playing this game, but if it's rated M then that means that you have to be 17 to play it anyways. Hold the stores responsible for upholding that responsibility, just as movie theaters are responsible for upholding the movie ratings by not allowing minors in to see R rated movies.
And for all those articles that talk about the game not being for 'families'.... those people need to get a life. Nobody is trying to claim that 'Manhunt 2' is a 'family friendly' game. It's a game for adults, and it should be available for adults to purchase. I hate it when other people decide what is best for me.
Re: (Score:2)
So, seriously... (Score:3, Informative)
Last I checked, the US hadn't banned the game. So there's no reason for that.
And the ESRB didn't ban it, either. The ESRB's website says a game gets an AO is it has "prolonged scenes of intense violence," and, from my understanding, if you "charge up" (presumably hold a button or something) for a kill, it will take longer to do (it will be more complex, or brutal). In other words, it will be PROLONGED.
If you have hostility for this game not being released, blame either Nintendo, Sony, or the countries that are banning it. The ESRB rated the game appropriately and were not directly involved in it not hitting shelves.
If you do the shit rain dance... (Score:2, Funny)
Where in the chain did they stop? (Score:3, Interesting)
That would be like an automotive company spending 100million to develop a new car, have the parts done and the factory with the ON switch just waiting to be pressed and then throwing in the towel. That kind of stuff doesn't happen, and as a shareholder I'm sure someone is going to be upset with them for this.
Re: (Score:2)
Thrill Kill, anyone? (Score:3, Informative)
WTF is wrong with Rockstar? (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't about creativity, it's the opposite... it's chosing one really divisive topic and sticking with it, without any given reason, other than it being purely sensationalistic. Fuck em, as far as I'm concerned, I really fucking hate this kind of unthinking, lazy, sensationalism. I'm a very strong supporter of Civil Liberties, and that's actually WHY I'm so upset... it's companies like this that are almost TRYING to get limits put on our civil liberties.
No sense of class, no sense of taste, just pick the most divisive things you can think of, and make big $$$$. Why are Slashdotters so quick to put up with this line of thinking? Sure, maybe you can defend it on principal, but you have to admit that what Rockstar ARE is really against everything that slashdot stands for.
Fox hunt, once again (Score:3, Insightful)
A lot of stupid nonsense has been said in that debate; those in favour of fox hunting would say 'It's traditional', and 'It's necessary to regulate the number of foxes', whereas the other side would have their own, rather emotional nonsense. But what it boils down to in the end is: do we, as society, want to encourage the kind of mentality that sees meaningless cruelty as 'fun'?
The same goes for violent games, especially a thing like Manhunt 2. Yes, 'Freedom of speech' is important, and 'Simply don't buy it if you can't stomach it' - that all sounds very convincing, but at the end of the say - do we, as society, want to encourage the kind of mentality that enjoys meaningless cruelty and casual murder? I know that I don't; and although it is important to allow people to make up their own mind and to protect minorities, it doesn't make sense to protect minorities to the extent that it harms the majority. And it does harm the majority - the majority of parents don't want their children to be lured into that kind of mindset, just like they don't want their children to get into contact with other things they consider harmful; and as a parent YOU are the one that is responsible for your children, and therefore YOU have the right to decide what your children are exposed to.
So what is more important: 'Freedom of Speech' used as an excuse by a company out to make money, or the right to bring up our children according to what we believe is best? A company like Take Two willing to go right to the limit of what is legal and acceptable, and if we don't show where that limit is, they are not going to stop; they'll just wade on, as long as it makes a buck for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:it can't ATTACK ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! (Score:2)
If you live in UK, why don't you attack the BBFC directly. Normally it's the USA that runs the whole d@mn world, but here Britain seems to be wagging the dog. I don't have standing over there to be heard, but you must.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's called showmanship. Foreign 'art' films have been benefiting from the mock outrage of the conservative British press in this way for years.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your last post offers a better explanation an
Re:Dear Zonk (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually it does have to do with politics, particularly with free speech. Manhunt 2 is being shelved because of an AO rating which some believe to be based more on politicals than actual content. So, in that sense, Politics is a more appropriate section than games. Just as if a studio were targetted with a controversial NC-17 rating and stopped distribution of the film as a result.
If I wanted to read about games, I wouldn't have set my preferences to hide all the stories.
Then don't read it. You are actually NOT udner any obligation to read every story that appears on your slashdot page. No, no, really, its true. You can choose to skip over a story.
You're constant misclassifications circumvent my preference.
You do realize that, based on your UID alone that there are 841,676 other users, right? And that most would find this to be an appropriate classification? In other words, slashdot as a whole is more important than your preferences.
You are a douche bag.
While that could well be true, based on the little interaction I've had with him, I'd doubt it.
I hope you die,
In hindsight, I bet you're thinking that this might be a bit harsh. If not, well, ironically enough, you are actually the target audience for Manhunt 2!
but barring that, I hope you stop foisting your obsession with video games on the clearly uninterested.
Based on the number of comments this and related stories have garnered, I'd have to say that the interested outweigh the uninterested.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The British Board of Film Classification, the ESRB, and the MPAA -- none are government agencies. So no, it doesn't have to do
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
While it is true that the BBFC is not a government agency, it effectively has some legal power that can prevent films and games from being legally distributed or sold, so
Mature ratings (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Gross... (Score:5, Insightful)
Freedom of speech doesn't become an "issue" only when something you like is banned, it becomes an issue when the things you don't like are banned and precedence is made. When someone else is making the decision on what is appropriate and not appropriate for your viewing, you are living in a non-free society.
I'm not defending the game. It sounds gross to me, too, and I wouldn't even consider purchasing it. However, I defend people's RIGHT to purchase it. Whether this is a true censorship issue is questionable, because people purchasing PS or Wii know these systems will not play Adult Only content. It's just one more example why it's better to purchase only open standards.
No one harmed in production (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
> other games are merely pictures, and
> not particularly realistic ones.
TBH Manhunt 1 only selling point was it annoyed the censors. The game was total kack and was just violence for violence sake. No game play. Someone who did find that interesting has issues.
Sure movies depicting the rape of a child is not the same as doing it, but someone who watches it for pleasure is clearly not well in the head.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's be honest here.
The graphics of Manhunt 2 are not the graphics of Custer's Revenge.
The Wii controller manipulated as a pair of pliers to rip out a man's testicles is not the same experience as the adolescent button-mashing sex play of Hot Coffee.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a market of people who want to play such games that is your problem, your focus should be on dealing with these people. Imposing restric
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You do not get to decide that violent games shouldn't be marketed. No kids were hurt in the making of this game. No kids are GOING to be hurt by PLAYING this game.
If you're so concerned with violence, perhaps you should worry more about our 18 year olds being sent to their deaths for a "war" with questionable backing and purpose, or parents teaching their kids to hate people who aren't
Difference? (Score:3, Insightful)
A game isn't a cause for a culture, it's the effect of a culture. Despite what people think, the culture isn't all that different now than it once was. Was there a point in time where there wasn't violent crime? When was that super special time that we didn't kill each other whenever we thou
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I dunno, it might bomb.
Re:I fully support enforcing game ratings in store (Score:2)
Clerks do not enforce it so Target and Walmart will just refuse to stock your item instead. Now its just EB Games and the internet. At this point you would lose money as the marketing and cost to cut hte cds require mass production to not be cost prohibitive for the consumer. Why pay $70 for a game?
So its cheaper to take a loss now like poker and not cut it until Target and Walmart get into shape and allow it.