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."

4 of 69 comments (clear)

  1. 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.

  2. 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 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. 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.