Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GTA Creators Push Limits With Manhunt

Posted by simoniker on from the a-real-state-of-emergency dept.

Thanks to IGN PS2 for a new, screenshot-toting preview of Manhunt, the forthcoming "brutal urban videogame" produced by the developers of the Grand Theft Auto series. This previously secretive, potentially controversial title starts you, completely defenseless in Carcer City, where 'the Director' has sprung you from Death Row and "...populated [the city] with psychopathic gangs hired for the sole purpose of finding and slaughtering" the player. The piece muses that this "third-person perspective stealth game" seems to be "...much darker, more disturbing... than Grand Theft Auto, which offered seasoned comic humor and parody to counter the bloodshed and chaos."

69 comments

  1. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Why don't they push the limits by creating a multiplayer vice city ?

    1. Re:Yawn by johnkoer · · Score: 1

      Even though the parent post got flagged as a troll, I think he has a good point. I think a large scale version of Vice City would be fun. Get like 50 people in a city and it would be like a huge game of quake, with a much larger map. You could have snipers on the rooftops, or hide in the bushes until someone is right on top of you.

      I think this would be a very fun game and I would definitely love to play it.

      --
      Johnkoerner.com
  2. media rejoices! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This release must be like music to the ears of Bill O'Reilly and rest of FAUX News cronies. More material to blame societal violence on videogames.

    Nevermind the fact that we're bombing a 5th rate, 3rd world nation halfway accross the world, glorifying it and beaming those images into the TV sets nationwide. It's the videogames, stupid!

  3. Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by Babbster · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This is a great idea for a game. While it's clear that the stealth elements are lifted from the many stealth-based games that have come out since Metal Gear Solid, the game sounds like it's shooting for more of a Resident Evil meets Escape From New York aesthetic - except that you're fighting the living instead of the undead and you probably don't have to rescue the president. Given the descriptions of how enemy detection is going to work (by hearing them), I'd imagine that there are going to be a lot of enemies standing still, sitting, etc. right around a blind corner. As long as the control isn't handled like Resident Evil (mush), this sounds like a game I could get into.

    I will note that I certainly hope that they have enough system overhead left to provide real-time DTS sound (something the Playstation has to do in software, as opposed to the Dolby Digital 5.1 in hardware on the Xbox). They mention in the article that they haven't decided between Dolby (Pro Logic, I presume) and DTS, but it seems like a no-brainer if you've got the resources available - if you're going to have a game where sound has a lot of influence, being stuck with one matrixed back channel would be sad, especially since Rockstar did a pretty good job with the DTS in GTA:VC.

    As far as controversy goes, that's just inevitable and I'm sure it will be welcomed by Rockstar/Take Two's marketing department since they can save money on advertising. While we've been killing humans in video games for years, the ever-increasing fidelity of said killing is going to continue drawing the ire of the "parents should be able to ignore their kids' hobbies" lobby, desipte the fact that every uproar ends up selling more games.

    In short, I'm looking forward to finding out if Rockstar can redeem themselves in the controversial game arena (outside of the GTA series) after the debacle that was State of Emergency.

    1. Re:Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by jargonCCNA · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that hearing enemies thing is... I'd go so far as to say revolutionary. I remember playing Crusader: No Remorse and sort of wishing that they'd have done something along those lines... I think it'd be fantastic for games with that isometric view -- you see an enemy approaching a corner but he disappears when he gets to it because he's actually farther away than you thought! It'd certainly add a new element to being cautious in an environment such as that.

      --
      Matthew G P Coe
      http://mgpcoe.blogspot.com/
    2. Re:Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by lidocaineus · · Score: 1

      They most likely mean Dolby Digital, the analog to DTS (and arguably inferior standard).

    3. Re:Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 2, Informative

      I dont know about revolutionary. Thats the basis behind multiplayer games currently -- In counterstrike, I hear your footsteps from the other side of a wall, so I shoot the wall and hit them before they even know where I am. Even back in the quakworld/tf days you'd hear your enemys from around corners and know what to expect (You hear a rocketlauncher, you know theres a soldier coming. Hear an assault cannon, know theres a hwguy.)

      As far as AI targeting humans based on sound, PodBot for counterstrike does that currently, as does the halflife grunts I believe. Hell, Doom's monsters could activate based on sound.

      It is a nice feature either way.

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
    4. Re:Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by Boglin · · Score: 1
      Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE
      Would they it Soylent Manhunt?
    5. Re:Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by superultra · · Score: 1

      hearing enemies thing is . . . I'd go so far as to say revolutionary.

      -cough-THIEF-cough

    6. Re:Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by Babbster · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, they most likely don't mean Dolby Digital when they're talking about a PS2 game. Unless something's changed in the last few months, the PS2 doesn't have a capability in software (there is definitely not one in hardware) to render real-time Dolby Digital (in any form, 2.0, 4.1, 5.1, etc.) sound. There is a package available to allow rendering DTS in real-time, which has been used in SSX Tricky, NHL 2002 and GTA:VC. They can also do Dolby Pro Logic II which is another matrixed system that allows separate L/R surround channels, which may indeed be the other option they're exploring (if the game is good with good use of DPL-II, it could force me to upgrade yet again to get that decoding).

    7. Re:Survival Horror...Made From PEOPLE by lidocaineus · · Score: 1

      Hmm, not having played any of those games on my PS2, I had no idea they used DTS instead of DD, which seems kind of backwards since I would've thought DD would take less processing power.

      I know what DPL2 is, and even have it on my Denon preamp. I've used it once, and seen it in action a few times (mostly on a GCN), but the effects are subtle at best, it seems, and I've calibrated my speaker set for optimal seperation.

  4. Might be a good game... by blwrd · · Score: 1

    .. but I also hope that the parents would become more aware that there is lot of games on the market that arent that suitable for kids under 16 (or 14, 12, ..) for example.
    I don't mean that violent games necessary cause violence, but I wouldn't let my kids watch some "action" movie with a lot of killing either...

    ps. This is not meant as a troll, just a thought that came up when i read about the game idea.

    1. Re:Might be a good game... by GrimSean · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well, speaking as a guy who sells games to said parents, I think you'd be surprised how many of them just don't seem to give a crap. I've had parents buy GTA 3 (both original and Vice City) for their under ten children. I tell them "Sir/Ma'am, this game isn't suitable for a young child - it has depictions of violence and adult situations" to which I get the reply "It's a video game - how bad can it be?". The strange thing is I've yet to get a returned game on the grounds that it is too violent, which leads me to believe these kids either aren't being supervised, or the parents just don't care.

      It's kind of sad in a way, but what can I do? If I don't sell the games, the store goes out of business and I don't earn money.

      I'm also going to assume that someone is going to bring up the ESRB rating system. Parents don't notice that (I'm serious). I've been asked why games aren't rated with the same system as movies (an idea which appeals to me), and "What does this 'M' mean?" - the system doesn't seem to be intuitive enough for people to understand at a glance (reinforcing my belief that most people are mostly stupid).

      --
      I don't need to be made to look evil. I can do that on my own. - Christopher Walken
    2. Re:Might be a good game... by Azadre · · Score: 0

      IMO, the reason these parents aren't caring is that they are afraid their children would go and party like they did when they were younger and when the kid is absorbed in the game the worry level goes to 0%.

  5. Re:man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Did your parents take away your copy of the game or something? Because this seems like a heavily biased bunch of crap.

    On a technical level the GTA3/Vice City games are absolute masterpieces. They excel at simulating full, living environments in 3D, with both detailed exteriors and interiors, and a large amount of vehicle and pedestrian traffic.

    In terms of gameplay, the missions are laid out logically, and the addition of effectively simple cutscenes to move the plot along in between creates an smoother, more cohesive experience. There are multiple things to do aside from main quests, both which are time consuming and fun, such as finding all the bonus jumps in a car, uncovering tons of secret items and challenges, and the aforementioned free-roaming kill-fest.

    These titles bring everything from the first two games in the series into 3D. The killing sprees and mission based plot progression were both in the first two, and were very entertaining. The addition of a fantastic engine, decent graphics and too many other beneficial aspects to mention (good soundtracks, interesting and funny characters, etc. etc.) is in no way making these two games the "worst gta games yet".

    Obviously they are not for everyone. Obviously they are not for you. Go whine to another forum about how your import copy of the latest japanese dating sim didn't make it through customs, and lay off the titles you're obviously to immature to comment on.

  6. Controversy... by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's already apparent that this, much like GTA3 and Mortal Kombat before it, is going to make overprotective parents and bored Congressmen wig out and try to ban video games as a whole. Just remeber: the rating system is there for a reason. A lot of people I know could care less about the ratings, but games like this aren't meant for seven year olds. If people ignore the ratings and buy the game for their kid themselves (as most parents would have to do, considering its rating), they can only get mad at themselves for being irresponsible and not checking the game out prior to purchasing it. In any case, the bottom line should be:

    You should be monitoring what your kid does in their free time. If you're offended by the game, don't buy it for your kid. It's that simple.

    --
    Goo goo g'joob.
    1. Re:Controversy... by nathanh · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      You should be monitoring what your kid does in their free time.

      Spoken like somebody who doesn't have kids.

    2. Re:Controversy... by clambake · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You should be monitoring what your kid does in their free time.

      Spoken like somebody who doesn't have kids.

      Likewise, spoken by someone who SHOULDN'T have kids.

    3. Re:Controversy... by AceM2 · · Score: 1

      I hope that you're just being a troll and that you don't actually have kids yourself. We have people like you to blame for Columbine.. Not to mention half the vandalizing, teen pregnancies, drug deaths, and the fact that my neighbor's 17 year old kid drives wildy down the road drunk every friday and saturday night..

    4. Re:Controversy... by gumpish · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Just remeber: ...the rating system is there for a reason.
      Not to mention the name of the game.

      Manhunt.

      Not to be confused with "Fluffy Bunny in Magical Kingdom" or "Mario Party 8".

      Parents who buy their kid Manhunt and then complain about the content should be bitchslapped.
    5. Re:Controversy... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "You should be monitoring what your kid does in their free time. If you're offended by the game, don't buy it for your kid. It's that simple."

      Just out of curiosity, what do you consider then to be an appropriate age for a kid to make their own decision about what games they buy? Because not all parents buy games for their kids, many kids buy them for themselves. And you can't always control your kid, particularly in the latter half of their teens.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    6. Re:Controversy... by Xerxes+of+Zealot · · Score: 1

      Spoken like someone whos never been a parent to a 17 year old kid. As a 17 year old kid I can honestly say its the worlds most difficult thing...More difficult than typical slashdotter trying to find a date late on a friday night.

    7. Re:Controversy... by AceM2 · · Score: 1

      It wasn't long ago that I was 17. I never said that you had to watch your kids 24/7, but there are things which a parent should be able to notice easily. I never wanted to tell my parents what was going on in my life, but they always had ways of knowing what I was doing and such. I'm not saying you have to put a tracking device on your kid to be a responsible parents, I'm saying ask questions, pay attention to actions, and just because your kid says omg mom I'm 13 stay out of my room.. doesn't mean you have to listen. In any case, if you're 17, that's going to be totally different from someone who's in their early teens. Your parents aren't going to have to go oh you aren't going to see an R rated movie are you? or That isn't that GTA game I see you playing is it? At least, in my opinion if they did a good job bringing you up they shouldn't have to worry about that.. On the other hand, they should be allowed in your room, they should know if you're playing with shotguns or building bombs, they should talk to you to know where you're going and that you aren't doing drugs.. I mean come on, some things are obvious.. I'm not a drinking or a druggie, but I can smell alcohol and can tell if you're high or drunk..

      Anyway.. You're just 17. You don't want to hear it, but you have a lot of growing up left to do no matter how mature you think you are.. Then when you think you're grown up, you'll have kids and (HOPEFULLY) realize the responsibilities involved.

    8. Re:Controversy... by AceM2 · · Score: 1

      How about this.. By the time your kid is old enough to have a job and afford a $50-60 game without you loaning them the money, then HOPEFULLY you've done a good enough job in bringing them up that at that point they'll be ready for it. There are always exceptions of course, many kids can easily handle these types of games at an early age.. The parent has to decide, is my kid the kind that imitates everything they see, etc.. I mean it's like a lot of kids can't watch scary movies without nightmares, or watch a Jackie Chan (random) movie without karate kicking their syblings.. Then again, I was never that way that I remember and my parents let me watch both in moderation.. So far so good, all the trouble I've been in is a traffic ticket, but we'll see if I snap some day..

    9. Re:Controversy... by Xerxes+of+Zealot · · Score: 1
      When you bring drugs into this is becomes a totally different ballgame. Its not hard to act normal infront of parents when drunk or stoned. As a 17 year old who actually got a social life this year, I've come home too fucked up to walk correctly but I managed to get into my basement just fine because parents cant always tell whats happening in a teenagers life.

      I do agree about building bombs and playing with shotguns though, that is completely obvious. When your teenager is alone in a locked garage (basement, attic, bedroom, etc.) there may be a problem there.

      I do agree about the growing up and maturing part, but I will never have kids, the world does not need another me running around...

    10. Re:Controversy... by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Then your parents are idiots, or are drunk or stoned themselves. Either that, or they're typical bad parents.

      It takes about 3 seconds to look at someone's eyes and tell if they're drunk, and even less time to smell their breath (if you were smart enough to cover up the external scent of alcohol.)

      If you think that building bombs is somehow more obvious than drugs, you're naive. I was 17 less than a decade ago, and I was never foolish enough to believe that my parents wouldn't be able to detect drug or alcohol use.

      Oh, and don't confuse drinking and drug use with a social life. They aren't the same thing, even *if* other people are involved.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    11. Re:Controversy... by bobbozzo · · Score: 1
      Parents who buy their kid Manhunt and then complain about the content should be bitchslapped.

      Maybe they thought it was a gay-porn game, but got mad to see it was sociopathic. :p

      --
      Nothing to see here; Move along.
    12. Re:Controversy... by Xerxes+of+Zealot · · Score: 1
      Thanks for taking the high road and attacking my parents, just because I know how to act sober when I'm a bit messed up doesn't mean my parents are idiots. I've come up with ways to cover every possible way of getting caught. We're a new breed these days, we think ahead before we go to a party or smoke a bowl or something.

      The kids have gotten smarter. We use Visene these days. A few drops of Visene in the eyes will clear up that whole red-eye look. The smell can be covered by doing shots, making mixed drinks, or even using some of those new breath freshener strip deals that actually kill other smells. Walk a straight line? I can walk a straight line even if I can't even tell which line is the one I should be walking on, it's called practice and balance.

      Your whole building a bomb in the garage is just as easy to tell if a kid is going out and partying is bullshit, plain and simple. If a kid is spending time alone in his garage with the door locked and won't let anyone come in no matter what, there is a problem. If a kid goes and hangs out with some friends for a little while, he is being a teenager with friends. "Hey dad im going to the movies then grabbin a bite to eat with Johnny" That alone gives 3 hours, enough time to hammer down a few shots at a party, sober up, and go home.

      As for the drinking and drug use not being a part of having a social life. You obviously don't go to high school now. Drinking and drug use (or partying as we call it now) has become the number one way to become one of the "in crowd". A social life can mean many things, does a person who sits online all day and plays everquest have a social life? Its quite the paradox, they are sitting on a computer not seeing another real person, but they are still being social in a way.

      A decade is a long time Jeremy, I don't mean to insult but the times are changing fast, and now kids like me can think up ways to cover just about anything. You obviously were one of those kids who were afraid to come home messed up and would act afraid. Hell, after writing this I should write a book about how easy it is to be messed up and do anything. I've even talked to an officer of the law after smoking a good amount of pot and drinking my fair share of screwdrivers and he simply said "Make sure you are home before curfew, son." It's easier than many people want to think, but we know what we're doing, we're not completely stupid.

    13. Re:Controversy... by nathanh · · Score: 1

      Flamebait? Are the moderators on crack... moreso than usual? And what's this nonsense about me being responsible for Columbine, drugs, sex, and World War 2? Are you Americans really that stupid that you think the way to stop disobedient behaviour is to treat everybody like potential criminals?

      Need anybody answer that rhetorical question?

    14. Re:Controversy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ladies and gentlemen... our future.

      The sad part is you're so stupid that you don't realize your "tricks" are the same ones your parents pulled. Believe me, if they still can't see through it, your parents are dumb or lazy (I'll let you decide), and you're even dumber for thinking you're pulling the wool over anyone's eyes. Cops have better things to do than deal with your drunk, stoned & sorry ass, it's not his job to be your parent.

      The only 'social life' you seem to be attracting is those of the drunk and stoned. Good luck fitting into the higher echelon of society with that. Hope you like living at the bottom of the barrel.

    15. Re:Controversy... by nathanh · · Score: 1
      I hope that you're just being a troll and that you don't actually have kids yourself. We have people like you to blame for Columbine.. Not to mention half the vandalizing, teen pregnancies, drug deaths, and the fact that my neighbor's 17 year old kid drives wildy down the road drunk every friday and saturday night..

      I pray to God that you're not really as stupid as you sound. People "like me" are to blame for Columbine? That kind of idiotic finger-pointing really makes my blood boil. In the wake of Columbine we had various extremist groups blaming everything from television to movies to computer games to gun ownership for what happened. And of course we had the self-righteous moral brigade led by people LIKE YOU who blamed the parents.

      What I never saw out of the entire media circus was anybody blaming the two kids who actually pulled the triggers.

      I'm sick to death of the American idea that it's "somebody elses fault". Nobody dares to take responsibility for their own actions. Much easier to blame somebody else. Fall over in the street? Government's fault for not fixing the sidewalk. Lose your job? Immigrants stole all our jobs. Two kids go on a murderous rampage? Parents are to blame for ... well, what for? Not taking them to church often enough? Not locking them in a padded room, sanitised from reality?

      People like you make me absolutely sick. And what truly scares me is that it seems the majority of Slashdot moderators (and by inference, a large number of Americans) share your point of view.

      What's even worse is your hope that I don't have kids. That's a vile thing to say and I despise you for saying it. I can only hope that you one day wake up from your self-important righteousness and realise what an ass you are.

    16. Re:Controversy... by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      Two kids go on a murderous rampage? Parents are to blame for ... well, what for? Not taking them to church often enough? Not locking them in a padded room, sanitised from reality?

      How about not noticing their kids building pipe bombs in their garage?

      Sure, my parents didn't know what I was doing all the time when I was 17, and even less so when I was 18 and they pretty much let the reigns go (and one of the two involved in Columbine was 18), but they sure as hell knew what was going on in their own house and garage.

      The two that pulled the triggers are to blame for the acts, but the parents are to blame for simply not raising their children right. I don't care if you take them to church or not (in fact, I prefer that you don't, but that's another story), I don't care if you prevent them from playing Grand Theft Auto. What I do care about is that you know what's going on with your kids, and that you make informed choices about what your children do and are exposed to in your own home. You can't control your kids when they're away, but you can give them good values and bring them up to make good choices on their own. The TV is not a babysitter, and the babysitter is not there to raise your kids. The school may have your kids 6-8 hours a day, 5 days a week, but it's not the teachers' job to raise your kids, either.

      By the time a kid is 16 or so, it's probably too late to prevent them from doing anything, but at least you can prevent them from doing it in your house, and if you can't do it yourself, have the guts to call the cops.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    17. Re:Controversy... by AceM2 · · Score: 1
      I'm in between classes so I don't have long to respond, but anyway..

      I pray to God that you're not really as stupid as you sound. People "like me" are to blame for Columbine? That kind of idiotic finger-pointing really makes my blood boil. In the wake of Columbine we had various extremist groups blaming everything from television to movies to computer games to gun ownership for what happened. And of course we had the self-righteous moral brigade led by people LIKE YOU who blamed the parents.

      Yeah, I am as stupid as I sound. Luckily for me, that's not very stupid at all. You on the other hand just need to get a grip on your emotions. I'm not blaming the gun manufacturers, I have a rifle that was given to me long ago. I'm not a hunter, but I see the importance in my right to have one. I'm not blaming tv or games because even after playing Vice City all the way through and watching Terminator 2 when I was younger, I have yet to feel violent emotions towards *anyone* at all. HOWEVER, I do blame the parents because this is a special case. These kids entire appearance and attitudes were seriously screwed up, that shouldn't been the first sign the parents shouldve at least talked to their kids, and while I don't think you should throw someone into therapy for dressing weird, it does warrant a little parental snooping in my opinion. Sign number two shouldve been that these kids had weapons in their room that they should not have had, not to mention bombs and bomb making materials. All the parents had to do was open the damn door and see what was in plain sight. Lastly, if the kids parents would have done a better job teaching them morals, responsibility, and a reasonable amount of beneviolence (I'm not against self defense) then perhaps they wouldve just sucked it up and dealt with life like the rest of us.

      What I never saw out of the entire media circus was anybody blaming the two kids who actually pulled the triggers.

      I call BS here. Plenty of people did, not to mention it was obvious. However, how can you NOT blame the parents for not seeing what was in plain sight?? These kids were minors! They were living at home with their parents! Do you not believe in ANY parental responsibility?? I bet you let your kids run around unsupervised in the grocery store and don't care when they beat up other people's kids too right? Kids will be kids, even though they're not mature yet they know right from wrong right? Dumbass, don't you remember being

      People like you make me absolutely sick. And what truly scares me is that it seems the majority of Slashdot moderators (and by inference, a large number of Americans) share your point of view.

      First of all, pay attention to how the moderating system works. It has nothing to do with where you come from or who you are. There are mods from all walks of life, so please stop pretending like it's me and the mods vs the world. Just because you think you're right (and I think you're at least half right) doesn't mean you really are.

      What's even worse is your hope that I don't have kids. That's a vile thing to say and I despise you for saying it. I can only hope that you one day wake up from your self-important righteousness and realise what an ass you are.

      I'm sure I sound like a jackass for saying what I said. The thing is, I'm not some politically correct moron that thinks I should or should not say things just because of the way it sounds. That's not to say I don't have manners, but I will tell you like I see it. Until you decide that parents should have to take some responsibility, I hope that you don't have kids.

      One more time for everyone out there like you..
      PARENTS SHOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR BRINGING UP THEIR CHILDREN.
      Once you decide to bring another life form i

    18. Re:Controversy... by nathanh · · Score: 1
      I'm in between classes so I don't have long to respond,

      And I think that says it all; he's a kid himself yet he's an expert on raising children, even to the point of blaming parents for the woes of the world.

      Pompous ass.

    19. Re:Controversy... by AceM2 · · Score: 1

      Again you show your lack of intelligence. Since when does going to college mean you're a kid? Maybe you were lucky and got to go to college right out of school, but some of us had to get jobs and be providers. Pretty sad though, that all you can come up with as a response is to say I'm a kid and an ass. You probably didn't even pay attention to my post, since it's so obvious you're unable to control your own emotions.

    20. Re:Controversy... by GenSolo · · Score: 1

      It's easier than many people want to think, but we know what we're doing, we're not completely stupid.
      No, you're an absolute idiot, and you're too damn stupid to realize it. If you think your tricks to cover shit up work, you're a fool. I'm 19. I was your age 2 years ago. I got away with my fair share and then some, but it's not because of any skills when it comes to covering it up. It's either because they don't want to believe that you'd be doing what they think you're doing, or because they choose to let you get away with it because they don't think you're doing any real harm. (Have a few shots, sober up, and come home. Who really cares? Sure, it's illegal, but it doesn't really hurt you if you're careful.) Your parents are probably a lot smarter than you give them credit for. I'm honestly still not sure how mine figured out some of the stuff they have in the last year or so, but I thought they were clueless. One day you'll also realize that all the shit you did and thought you got away with because you were so smart and so good at hiding everything because you're a new breed, you really got away with because people wanted you to learn from your own mistakes. People have been using Visene to get the red out for decades. Why the hell do you think that's their slogan? As for the drinking, do you really think your parents didn't know how to sober up and knock the alcohol off their breath? Your tricks are nothing new, so deal with it, and quit getting insulted because someone wanted to point it out to you. A 19 year old shouldn't feel this old, but you damned punk kids never seem to learn anything.......

    21. Re:Controversy... by Xerxes+of+Zealot · · Score: 1
      Us "damn punk kids" are smarter than we are given credit for but no one wants to hear what we are trying to say. I did not get insulted at the fact that someone pointed anything out to me, I merely resent the fact that someone believes its easier for a parent to tell that a kid is smoking a little pot or drinking a little alcohol than it is to tell if a kid if planning to blow up his fucking school. I'm sorry but there is a huge difference between a kid who goes out to a party and has a few beers before catching a ride home with a friend and a kid who sits alone in his basement and makes bombs to blow up his school. I'm sick of this goddamn arguement and the fact that you goddamn people do not seem to understand the fact that I am trying to get across. I'm simply starting that it is easier to tell if your kid is planning to commit multiple counts of homicide at school than it is to tell if he smoked a bowl after work.

      Has the shit we do been done before? Hell yes it has, for years and years, but why do we still use it, because it still works. But I dont remember kids building bombs to blow up his classmates ever working out quite too well before the early-90's school shootings. Either the kids have gotten smarter or the parents have gotten lazy/dumber. Personally I do NOT believe that it's the first one...

      Yes, my second post should have made this more clear but damn, for a bunch of smart people you sure can be fuckin ignorant when you want to be.

  7. Re:man by lidocaineus · · Score: 1

    I wholeheartedly agree. Half of the praise GTA3 got was from the whole shock value aspect. And while there was some innovation in the open-endedness, it really don't go anywhere. Frankly, GTA3 is barely a step above POSTAL to me - a game hyped on controversey that didn't really deliver.

  8. One man's trash is another's Sunday afternoon by Chartreuse_Zergling+ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm going to take the bait and ask what "is" wrong with that, from an ethical standpoint? I think killing is killing whether done for duty, profit, or fun. Killing is bad. Simulated killing, however, lacks the real-life consquences of suffering and death. What's the difference between playing as a gangster in a crime sim or a playing a soldier fighting a "justified" war, i.e. Desert Combat? The virtual motive?

    Granted, I'm not saying that a serial killer sim would be fun, in reality serial killers tend to be pyschopaths and focus on weaker victims. And there are already games that allow behavior similar to a serial killer, like Postal2 and GTA3. However, acting uber-violent in these games doesn't add to the gameplay or help you complete the game, aside from maybe gaining extra points.

    There maybe existential ramifications in guiding a make-believe character in a make-believe world, but you do the same thing as a spectator when you read a novel or watch TV.

    Games don't help people become better axe-murderers. They already were.

    1. Re:One man's trash is another's Sunday afternoon by Babbster · · Score: 1
      I think a fun serial killer game would actually be fairly easy to design, though perhaps less so to program. The "art" of it would have less to do with the actual killing but the concealment of evidence and evasion of police. A truly advanced game could even include baiting of the police with cut-and-paste notes and phone calls.

      I won't speak to the morality of such a game but there's no doubt that it could be interesting and entertaining, just like movies and books about serial killers can be interesting and entertaining.

    2. Re:One man's trash is another's Sunday afternoon by tgv · · Score: 1
      What's the difference between playing as a gangster in a crime sim or a playing a soldier fighting a "justified" war, i.e. Desert Combat? The virtual motive?

      You make an error here: there is no such thing as a virtual motive. The motivation is as real as it is in real life, only the object(ive) differs.
      There maybe existential ramifications in guiding a make-believe character in a make-believe world, but you do the same thing as a spectator when you read a novel or watch TV.

      No, you don't. While reading a book, your motivation is not to kill virtual beings.


      Why produce these games in the first place? For profit? Isn't that a little bit too cynical?

  9. this really sounds like a dumb idea. by droper · · Score: 1

    Stick to expanding gta and put in multiplayer. This game is a bad idea. There is a lot more to gta then then violently slaying someone, which to me wasn't even the best part by any stretch.

    1. Re:this really sounds like a dumb idea. by Newrad · · Score: 0, Troll

      You seem like a person who only bought GTAIII/Vice City simply because everyone else did and you didn't want to be left out. You only liked it because you could progress through the game without having to kill every civillian and commit hate crimes. You only played the games to be in the "in crowd." I doubt you even liked the killing part in the missions.

      Some people play games like this to relieve stress and pretend that the person they are violently beating is their boss or someone they hate (which can be made to look like the person with some propper modding.)

    2. Re:this really sounds like a dumb idea. by Babbster · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Sure, and Nintendo should stick to Mario sequels, Sega should only put out Sonic games and Konami should never release a game without "Metal Gear" in the title.

      It's always amazing to me that with all the calls for fewer sequels and more original games, there are people out there actually clamoring for developers to do the same thing over and over and over again.

  10. Linearity concerns me by robson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What made GTA3 & GTAVC great were their open environments wedded with non-linear game-play. Everything I've read about Manhunt suggests it's far more linear, leading me to believe that Rockstar North may not have learned from its successes. :(

    1. Re:Linearity concerns me by Winterblink · · Score: 1

      You got all that from an game preview? Even worse, an IGN game preview? Wow. GTA3 sounded pretty damn linear too, what with you having to do missions for various mob bosses and such. But there was so much more to the game that the previews suggested, and I bet that'll be the case with Manhunt. Bottom line: game previews suck. They're never an indication of how good a game will be on release.

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
    2. Re:Linearity concerns me by robson · · Score: 1

      Bottom line: game previews suck. They're never an indication of how good a game will be on release.

      I, of course, agree with you. But I'm actually getting my info on the linearity from a big magazine preview where they say explicitly, "Manhunt will be much more linear than the GTA games."

      But don't get me wrong; that doesn't mean I won't even try it. I'll be ecstatic if it brings the same sort of freedom that the GTAs did.

  11. Rockstar v. Miyamoto by superultra · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I hope that the games.slashdot crew is well versed enough that I don't have to go and link to a gazillione interviews with Miyamoto on why GTA3 and its kin aren't great for the industry. Manhunt only proves that violence without purpose in games is only escalatory. So Manhunt sells billions of copies. What subject content does Rockstar tackle next? There's not much left beyond the prison brutality espouged in Manhunt's (now defunct) promo website.

    Meanwhile, in the other corner, we have Miyamoto who's busy making the Amelie-inspired Pikmin 2 and a revamp of Pac-Man. I think this represents the beginnings of a rift in the gaming industry. Rockstar and everyone trying to copy them on one side, and luminaries like Miyamoto, Spector, Wright, etc on the other side; essentially, people who see purpose-less violence as self-defeating.

    Here's the paradox: if GTA3 and Manhunt are "art" as nearly every video game enthusiast espouses, then it does - as art is prone to doing - affect the way we think. If that's the case, then why not examine it? I am by no means suggesting that games like Manhunt should be legislated, but I think it's extremely naive of gamers to assume that GTA/Manhunt does not change our social consciousness. Shouldn't we then be concerned about its effect, be it good or bad?

    Every Manhunt/GTA-esque game casts a vast shadow on the game industry that obscures gems like Pikmin or Viewtiful Joe or Animal Crossing. Those are the games that should be on the forefront of the industry, not GTA or Manhunt. "Everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial." Merely because we can makes games like Manhunt doesn't mean we should.

    1. Re:Rockstar v. Miyamoto by BenSnyder · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Essentially you're right. I read the IGN article about Manhunt and thought two things: first, you'd have to be a psychopath to feel like you could derive true pleasure from playing the game and two, I bet it's fscking brilliant. But let's be honest. This game is for people who have parties to watch "Faces of Death". I'm sure that it's of the highest quality though, I mean, once you buy into the whole death-with-glee thing.

      However, I'm actually cool with a game like this out in the public arena. Violent warlike games do for game technology what porn has done for video technology. It's pushes the limits. And this is a good thing because it breeds things like the mod scenes for Half-Life and UT2003 among others. And I know there are people at universities right now who are working on mods of UT2003 to bring new gameplay types to the table for educationally minded purposes.

      It's not that far removed from how WWII advanced aviation. We wouldn't air travel available to us in its form today had it not been for technological advances made during war time. Similarly, we won't have the diverse range of gaming options available to us in the future without growing technology through what is essentially simulated war.

      I'm not arguing against you, I'm just pointing out the silver lining in the blood-drenched clouds.

    2. Re:Rockstar v. Miyamoto by superultra · · Score: 1

      Good -great- points, really. GTA did an incredible amount of good for open-ended gameplay that I think we will yet see the true fruition of. Warren Spector is a huge fan of the open-ended gameplay in GTA3 but not of the violence.

      My question though is: why? Why does Doom get the credit for what Ultima: Underworld had already done? Why did GTA3 get the credit for something that Sid Meier's Pirates! accomplished nearly 20 years prior? I think that it's not necessarily that violence pushes technology further; I think that a more apt description would be that violence in video games popularizes already developed but otherwise obscure technology/methodology. At least from the mere 2 pages on IGN, Manhunt doesn't seem to be doing anything that Splinter Cell, Metal Gear Solid before that, and Thief before that didn't already do. But the fact that it will be intensely violent and hence reap a massive amount of press coverage (and it doesn't hurt that it's Rockstar North) will mean that this stealth methodology may well be the next big thing.

      Of course, despite being a different divisin of Rockstar, that's what everyone thought State of Emergency would be as well.

    3. Re:Rockstar v. Miyamoto by Babbster · · Score: 1
      Good Lord. Are there still people beating this drum outside of the Nintendo offices?

      Believe it or not, people have different tastes in video games. Not one of those tastes is in any superior to another. Should I get angry because Madden tops the video game charts every year despite the fact that I think the 2k series (now ESPN) from Sega is superior? Should I "go postal" because someone else says that Deathrow is a lousy game?

      I've played Pikmin, Animal Crossing, the GTA series, Civilization and Knights of the Old Republic - I enjoyed all of them. Each of them addresses different needs I feel as a gamer. There are some popular games that I just can't get into at all, such as Resident Evil. Now, that being said I don't consider any of these games inherently superior to the others in either design or execuation. Why? Because, again, they've all got different things to offer.

      I know we're a society of critics but there ARE games that shouldn't be compared to one another. Pikmin/Viewtiful Joe/Animal Crossing versus Manhunt/GTA would be a perfect example of a conflict that shouldn't exist.

    4. Re:Rockstar v. Miyamoto by AzraelKans · · Score: 1

      Nice comment however it is in fact incorrect, video gaming has evolved into a new art form, and since it is an art (and business) there will always be the Disney's and the Tarantino's there will always be some artist that will try to explore the dark and less simpathetic aspects of reality or fantasy (and profit from it) and those who will try to explore innocence and fantasy (and profit from it).
      They are not inherently wrong they are targetted to completely different audiences and explore completely different aspects of life and/or fantasy. The sooner we learn to accept that fact, the less crap we will have to accept from the media who tries to convince us some kind of entertainment has somehow become the source of all evil.

      --
      Go ahead MOD my day!
      More opinions here
    5. Re:Rockstar v. Miyamoto by superultra · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your post is what I'm talking about. It's as naive as "the media" to merely accept GTA and Manhunt at face value as being not wrong as it is to accept it at face value as being wrong. "The media," or more apt general society overall, refuses to look beyond the surface at video games for their true potential.

      Meanwhile though, 99% of all gamers are so ignorantly defensive of games like GTA and Manhunt, throwing around words like free speech and the like, that they refuse to examine the potential effects of those games on general overall society.

      I suggest there's a middle ground. There is a place and room for games like GTA3, but to merely say that they don't affect the way we think or view the world is just plain ignorant. If it is an art form, as you suggest, then it also has the potential to change the way people think. Shouldn't we then also be concerned if there is an 8 year old playing Manhunt? Yes, yes, the parents. So if the parents don't feed their children, or they neglect their children, to whom does the responsiblity fall? General society. Likewise, if a parent doesn't give a damn that their 10 year old kid is playing a game with prison rape and sexual brutality, shouldn't the rest of us care?

      What can we do, as a society, to prevent that kind of thing from happening? I worked in an EB, and 4 out of 5 parents didn't give a damn what their 6-16 year old kid played. You can't tell me that thousands of 10 year old children playing games like Manhunt and GTA3/VC won't have a general effect on society. If you can tell me that, then this isn't art. It's mere shallow entertainment, and in that case who cares about a stupid little game is legislated?

      I can hear it in your head; you're already coming up with those brisk gamer arguments against censorship etc etc. What I expect of the game industry and enthusiasts is to start thinking - not even doing anything, just thinking - about the effect that their creations have on people and society in general.

  12. Tip for game article writers by Zed2K · · Score: 1

    Knock it off with the stupid social commentary in your articles:

    "With TV pervading deeper into our lives, nothing -- however personal it may be -- is off limits. Sadly, the idea isn't very far-fetched in the grim world of the 21st century. It's not far from the truth."

    I don't give one little bit what you think of the real world around us. In fact I don't care what your opinion on anything is. Describe the game, stick to the facts and leave your opinions on everything out (unless its a review which this isn't). You are writing about a video game so how about sticking to the topic you are assigned to write about.

    Other than stupid IGN writing ability it sounds like an interesting game.

  13. I think it'll be bad... Because of the characters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Resident Evil, Jill Valentine was a great character -- and so were the other characters in the game: Barry, Chris, Wesker... I actually wanted Jilly to escape the mansion (mission: accomplished). This game, however... I don't know. I just don't see myself caring about whether or not a greasy, death-row inmate survives this experience. Besides, "James Earl Cash" is a really, really bad name for a character -- it's too 1840s. The name is almost as bad as "Max Payne."

    "The Director" sounds like a rip-off of "Calypso" from Twisted Metal: Black.

    Character development is important in games today; it's important for the players to respect and identify with the characters in the game. I mean, if you don't care about the character, what's the point in even finishing the game?

  14. Re:man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Obviously they are not for everyone. Obviously they are not for you. Go whine to another forum about how your import copy of the latest japanese dating sim didn't make it through customs, and lay off the titles you're obviously to immature to comment on."

    Who says that dating sims are immature. Oh they can be very very mature. >:D

  15. MANHUNT PREVIEW IN GTA!!! by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 3, Funny
    1. Start up your PS2/PC with GTA3/GTA:VC
    2. Find the cheat codes for you resepective ssystem that enables 'Pedestrians have weapons', 'Pedestrians riot' and 'Pedestrians hate you'
    3. Enter cheat codes
    4. ???
    5. Profit

    There you go. And you didn't even have to wait for an official demo/release.

    --
    I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
  16. Re:I think it'll be bad... Because of the characte by Cassius105 · · Score: 1

    I think one of the main driving forces of the game will be finding out exactly what the hell is going on

    from sounds of it when you are droped into the game its all going to be very vague other than the fact people want to kill you

    ill want to play through the game just to find out who the director is and such

  17. Good game with its apropriate audience deserves... by Airon · · Score: 1

    success of course.

    GTA is certainly comical in its violence from my POV.

    Two things about Manhunt concern me. Two things I am not shure about yet.

    First is the gameplay. Level Design, gameplay mechanics and carefully crafted challenge curves are so hard to get right.
    Sneaking around is neat and all,but what else can our character do. In Thief2 I cherished being able to shoot an arrow in to a wooden beam or ceiling and climb up in to a shadow to hide from my enemies.
    I don't want to discover all the gameplay possibilities of a game in one day. That's why I liked DeusEx, Thief1&2 and GTA3&/VC so much.

    Second is, how mundane is the violence going to be when you're treated to a film viewers kind of perspective of the killings ? How much will this point the finger at us, saying "you want this! Now you're getting it! Do you like it?!". You can always throw some blame to the bad guy of the game, but actualy it's you.

    I just wonder how well it's going to work in the game.

    If it works well in the game, it serves a purpose. If it does that, it's fine by me.

    I saw a realistic depiction of war violence in former Yugoslavia(a Soldier movie with Denis Quaid) last night. That stuff was disturbing. I doubt anything they come up in Manhunt will reach beyond horror or thriller movies. It's nowhere near anything realistic, and to be frank, I don't fucking want anything that realistic.

    I heard they're gonna have plastic bags as weapons in Manhunt. That's one that makes me queasy. Let's hope it's a good game above everything else.

  18. Re:man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I know, it was the only thing I could think of at the time...

  19. Good. by mrseigen · · Score: 1

    These guys are making an incredibly violent, sociopathic game and they're not apologizing for it. Also, it's nice to see that Rockstar can do more than just milk their GTA/Midnight Club cash cows for awhile (it gets quite sickening if they put out the same two games per year).

  20. Re:Stop buying this trash by danila · · Score: 1

    I think there is already a game in development based on Silence of the Lambs.

    BTW, do you see a problem with movies like Silence of the Lambs, Se7en, etc.? Why is it OK to make a film about killers, but not a simulator of them?

    Market works by trying different things. There is currently no simulator of ballet dancers, but I can bet someone someday will eventually make one. If it's popular, another niche will soon be filled with various dancing simulators. :) You don't want to play this trash? Don't buy it. Others like it - they are free to buy and play it. Don't push you values on everyone else.

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  21. Disturbing feeling by danila · · Score: 1

    The disturbing feeling that I get when looking at the screenshots is not because I am uncomfortable with the basic premise of Manhunt. No, it's because the screenshots look quite dated. IMO PS2 should be killed as soon as possible, because graphics innovation is no less important than style and gameplay. I don't really look forward to playing another GTA game with the same blocky characters and generally crappy and undetailed environment. GTA3 was cool, Vice City is tolerable, but San-Angeles is going to be crap. :( Rockstar, why do you have to spoil the great gameplay with outdated visuals?!

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  22. Re:Stop buying this trash by thegrue76 · · Score: 1

    Center Stage: The Video Game

    Now with special first-person POV from Peter Gallagher's eyebrows!

  23. Responsible for sex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sir, I would like to shake your hand. Thank you, thank you very much!

  24. Re:Stop buying this trash by Theaetetus · · Score: 1
    Market works by trying different things. There is currently no simulator of ballet dancers, but I can bet someone someday will eventually make one. If it's popular, another niche will soon be filled with various dancing simulators. :) You don't want to play this trash? Don't buy it. Others like it - they are free to buy and play it. Don't push you values on everyone else.

    Coming soon...

    Dance Dance Renaissance! Compete with your friends to see who can pirouette or dip the best! Thrill to soundtracks by Debussy and Strauss! Can you get a perfect score at Swan Lake? Tu-tu not included

    -T