Controversial Manhunt Game Rated 'R' in Ontario

GrimSean writes "Well, it looks like someone in power up here in Ontario finally noticed the level of violence in Rockstar's Manhunt, as the Ontario Film Review Board has given it an R rating, much like a movie. The Toronto Star has an article here and the CBC has also covered the story - according to an article at CJAD, businesses could be fined a minimum of $25,000 Canadian for selling it to minors. It seems like they've completely sidestepped the ESRB's M rating and gone directly to the Restricted to 'control the thing'."

Comments

This is OK

[pcbob]

I see no problem with this - now all those whining "save the kids" types can't complain and get the game completely banned.

Good decision, I applaud Ontario.

Re:This is OK

[Dark Nexus]

Exactly!

And kids who really want it can ask their parents... forcing the parents to be involved.

And for those parents who don't have a problem with it can just go buy it for their kids.

Re:This is OK

[Goldberg's Pants]

Funny. I was going to post pretty much this exact same comment, and figured I'd be modded as a troll but was going to do it anyway since free speech rules:)

I have no problem with this. I wish more areas would do this. Rather than whine about the games themselves, go after the fucking bastards who sell extremely violent video games to 10 year olds. Hit them in the wallet where it hurts.

I mean credit to the ESRB thing, but a certificate is only useful if it actually does anything. As it is now, the "M" certificate isn't a warning, it's a selling point. If there's an existing structure in place for movies and it can be legally applied to video games, so be it. Start fining these stores that sell these games to kids large chunks of money and perhaps they may start enforcing the ratings.

A similar approach has worked to a certain degree to stop kids buying cigarettes.

In short, kudos to Ontario!

Re:This is OK

[Daetrin]

One could consider it good or bad though, on one hand videogames being judged by a group well versed in making these types of judgements is defintely a plus, but on the otherhand this group probably doesn't have experience with games and dealing with their level of interactivity....

Some would even argue about their competency to judge films.

I seem to remember that a few years ago there was some artsy type film that involved some females talking to each other about their sex lives. No actualy sex, just talking about it, and the MPAA wanted to rate it NC-17.

Ok, after five minutes of Googling i think i have it narrowed down:

"And some suspect that the MPAA rates films about female sexuality tougher than those focusing on men. For example, an independent teen comedy called Coming Soon that was a hit at the Seattle International Film Festival has had trouble finding a domestic distributor (20th Century Fox bought international rights) after being rated NC-17. The film, which is about three teenage girls who talk frankly about sex and their interest in it, contains no nudity and no violence. The filmmaker has said that when she accused the board of having a gender-based double standard she was told that the board was merely reflecting the mores of the nation."

(Excerpt from this site)

So if we can't even trust the review boards to judge movies fairly, how can we expect them to judge video games?

Power Grab?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems the only way that they can do this is via a very loose definition of film in the Theaters act.

Off topic: I noticed this section of the Theater Act:

National anthem

21. (1) The national anthem shall be played in every theatre at the commencement of the first or at the conclusion of the last exhibition or performance given each day. R.S.O. 1990, c. T.6, s. 21 (1).

Can our Ontario readers inform me if this is really done?

Re:Power Grab?

[Axiom_D]

They used to. I remember as a kid that every theater had the national anthem played before every movie. Now, we only get a slide show (of comercials), then a bunch of comercials and then a few tailers.

A few years ago, I was up at an army base, and watch a movie there. They still played the national anthem. It was really strange to listen to O'Canada and then watch species.

They'll get around it

[yeejiun]

I hope these people realize that kids will get their hands on the games regardless of what the law says. I mean, if not a licensed copy, then a pirated copy off of bittorrent or something like that. At the end of the day, it's the parents that have to make sure that their kids don't spend their time on the wrong game, not the retailers.

Film Board Rating Video Games

[leadfoot2004]

If you read the story carefully, it is the Ontario Film Board that is rating video games. As I watched the CBC TV on this news story, the representative from the Ontario Film Board mentioned that Manhunt has every element that contributes to the R-rating, as in film: excessive foul language, grotesque violence, etc. If we were to rate video games the same way as film, then a lot of other games should have gotten the R-rating as well, yet this is the first video game that has received such a rating. This implies that they are looking for a quick and easy way to regulate the sale of violent game to minors, and the ESRB rating is not as effective as they like.

Re:Film Board Rating Video Games

[Miaowara_Tomokato]

The ESRB rating seems to be increasingly an implementation of CYA policy for the marketers of games than anything else. If the Ontario Film Board has taken it upon themselves to rate a game, the message carries an implicit statement that the ESRB has become obsolete. It will be interesting to see whether other similar organizations follow in Ontario's footsteps to try to "re-regulate" video games. However, the problem in that is that it could easily become just a series of ratings on a game that are all equally ineffective. It is a band-aid rather than a cure for the real problem.

Re:Film Board Rating Video Games

[SScorpio]

You should play the game before passing judgment on how/why they gave it that rating. Being a mid-20s gamer I like to think I'm pretty tough skinned about stuff but the game just sickened me when I played it.

This game isn't about you just randomly running around like in an FPS blowing people up, sniping them in the head, etc. It's a stealth game where you sneak up on people to murder them. I have to say murder rather than kill to get the point across a little more since we're usually used to killing things in games.

I remember that article that the NYTimes removed where the guy was complaining about Grand Theft Auto 3. Well, in this game you ARE the main character of a snuff film. You basically creep up on characters and using weapons like plastic bags, knifes, etc kill them silently. You are also rewarded in the game for more brutal kills like wrapping a plastic bag on a guys head then beating him down with punches and kicks and finally snapping his neck. Slitting people throats with the knife isn't much better either.

I'm really surprised this game got away with an "M" (mature) rating in the US since it really deserves an "AO" (Adults Only).

For the record I really enjoyed the Grand Theft Auto games. I've been pissed off by all the negative media exposure to the games. And finally am surprised at the total lack of media coverage and politician bickering about this game as it is FAR more violent and grotesque than GTA ever was.

I do have to applaud RockStar for making such a game even in light of all the controversy surrounding GTA. They made a game that was darker, sicker, and far more violent than GTA ever was (State of Emergency was pure crap IMHO).

So please try playing the game before saying, well a lot of games have killing, swearing, etc they shouldn't be given an adults only rating. The report just didn't go into how bad those things were in the game. I'm just waiting for the media to pickup on the game; they media antics should be much funnier than with GTA.

As for me, I didn't care of the game and will not be playing it again. That's my position and I'm sticking to it.

My thoughts...

[josh glaser]

...I think it's good. I usually think that this whole videogame violence thing is blown out of proportion, and it is, but here, I think they made the right choice. Manhunt is just really disgusting - it's not at all like Grand Theft Auto, where the violence is humorous (a la a grown-up cartoon)...no, the violence here is disturbing...everybody I know who played it felt dirty, like they were some serial killer or something. It's really an uncomfortable game for most people I know. And the gameplay itself isn't that great (mediocre stealth fare), and it just seems like a cash-in on the media attention...yeah, I think Ontario was more than justified.

On a side note, sometimes I think that (in the U.S., don't know much about how it's done in Canada) we should just switch to movie ratings for games. I don't know if it would be a good idea for the same board or whatever to rate them, but it's just that PG and R are more familiar to most people than E or M. And they are kinda on the same "scale" anyway (PG-13 = T, R = M), so it might be a good thing.

Oh, and does anybody else feel that game ratings are a little...big? The dirtiest R-rated movie can get away with a little tiny square on the back of the box, but then videogames have to have a huge, ugly E or T or whatever plastered on the front and a large "descriptor" on the back. It's not that I'm against visability of the ratings, but I just think that videogames and movies should be treated more alike (it's annoying when Target refuses to sell M-rated games to minors, but don't have the same policy for R-rated movies, etc.)

That was quite a rant there...enjoy.

Re:My thoughts...

[kboy1]

The movie ratings (PG, R, etc.) are legally enforceable. The store owner can be fined or imprisoned for allowing the sale or rental of an R-rated product to a minor. Video game ratings are voluntarily provided suggestions to the consumer about the content of the game.

So the reason video game ratings are so big is because the consumer has to see them or they mean nothing.

Movie ratings can be small, because the consumer doesn't have to see them; the onus is on the storeowner to enfore them.

Oh, and I'm an Ontarian, and I've never heard the anthem played at a movie theatre. And I'm pretty sure I've been to a "first showing of the day" (specifically, the midnight premiere of Star Wars Episode I).

Re:My thoughts...

[Rayonic]

Manhunt is just really disgusting - it's not at all like Grand Theft Auto, where the violence is humorous (a la a grown-up cartoon)...no, the violence here is disturbing...

Could it be (*gasp* *shock*) that violence in real life really is "disgusting"? Perhaps the designers were trying to make you feel bad about killing all those people?

...everybody I know who played it felt dirty, like they were some serial killer or something. It's really an uncomfortable game for most people I know.

Why, it seems I'm right.

Ontario

[alphaseven]

Hmm, this is not much different than what the ESRB is asking. The ESRB suggests Manhunt should be 17+ while the R rating in Ontario means 18+ (it's different from an MPAA R) so we're talking a difference of one year.

Another interesting thing, in the U.S. ratings are voluntary but in Canada they're decided by the Provincial governments, and (in Ontario at least) they're a bit stricter than the U.S., i.e. a few of the more extreme American R-rated films (Eyes Wide Shut, Hannibal) and all(?) NC-17 films get the 18+ rating in Canada.

Ironically, the 18+ rating is slapped on so many films it's not seen as a big deal. That's why Canada got the uncut version of American Psycho in theatres, while the producers wanted to avoid the NC-17 in the U.S., in Canada it was going to get rated 18+ anyway so there was no point in making cuts. Crash similarly had no problems in getting shown in Canadian theatres.

Maybe we'll get 'Canadian' versions of games with extra nudity and violence, since the 18+ rating is the strictest available there's no reason to hold back.

Re:Ontario

[Slashdot Insider]

Hmm, this is not much different than what the ESRB is asking. The ESRB suggests Manhunt should be 17+ while the R rating in Ontario means 18+ (it's different from an MPAA R) so we're talking a difference of one year.

Perhaps a small distinction, but unlike the ESRB rating, the rating from the Ontario Film Review Board was given by persons that actually played the game. That alone gives it a leg up in my books.

Re:Ontario

[alphaseven]

Actually imdb says i'm wrong about Hannibal and Eyes Wide Shut, that they were rated 18A (18 or older unless with an adult, like an R rating in the U.S.), but I could of sworn those movies had the harsher 18+ rating, anyway here's a list from imdb of Canadian R (18+) movies). Okay films like 8mm and Kill Bill got the harsher 18+ rating, along with Life of Brian!?

And you're right a lot of films actually get a lighter rating in Ontario, I don't think swearing matters much, so an American R-rated film like 13 Conversations About One Thing, which has nearly no sex or violence but has some swearing, gets a lighter rating in Canada. Still violence will generally get a harsher rating.

Re:Ontario

[n0wak]

> hey're a bit stricter than the U.S

No they're not. While Matrix Reloaded was rated R down South (and got to become the most profitable R-rated movie), it was just 14A here. There's a bit of a cultural gap between the acceptance of violence and sexuality between Canada and US. I guess movies get judged more harshly on sexuality down south than here; but here, movies get judged more critically on violence. Especially brutal realistic violence, and not the cartoony Matrix-kind.

Also, remember that these are *provincial* ratings, so they tend to vary. As you can imagine, in the more liberal Quebec, the ratings for sexual content are FAR less strict.

Rockstar Games Open Letter

[WarPresident]

Dear Ontario Film Review Board,

We, and the stakeholders, thank you for dramatically increasing public interest in our addictively fun game of death, destruction, and mayhem. Slow sales have been a bit of a problem, but now, young adults everywhere are lusting after the (almost) unattainable beauty that is Manhunt for PS2. Coming soon for Xbox and PC.

Sincerely,
Rockstar Games

A game Australians won't see

[the_seal]

Too bad in Australia they refuse to give an R rating to games.
We didn't see GTA until they had removed a scene in which you see a car rocking, windows steamed and can then get out and kill the woman and take the money. Other games have suffered a similar fate, like Carmageddon.
This is a strange fate for a country in which 18-24 year olds make up a very large portion of the gaming market - particularly console gaming.

Re:A game Australians won't see

[the_seal]

My bad. I was doing this purely from memory at the time and the sensationalist news reports. Here is the correct reason:

Grand Theft Auto III was refused classification on the grounds that you could pick up a hooker in your car, do your business, then afterwards beat her to death to get your money back. This is seen as being on par with rape. Rockstar simply edited out the coding that let the hooker enter your car, and re-released the game, with a classification of MA(15+).

You'll need to do better than that!

[Lewisham]

As a gun-fearing UK-type, I'm actually quite astonished that this is new for you guys. It's no wonder Senator Libermann hasn't been locked up yet!

Ever since Night Trap on the Mega CD, games have been regulated by the Britsh Board of File Classification. They're *video* games, and have been treated as such under the law. The publishers submit their games to be rated voluntarily in the main, but the BBFC would have had no qualms about slamming an 18 certificate on Manhunt, submission or no.

I don't see how people can seriously argue against this. I now fully understand why the whole selling games to minors (was that Washington?) was such a big deal! Here I was thinking that retailers were just disregarding the law :) These games shouldn't be in the hands of minors, a voluntary ESRB rating simply isn't enough to justify controlling a character who chokes people to death with a plastic bag and then the player is "rewarded" with a pretty cut-scene of it. The fact that I personally find that quite disturbing and morally reprehensible doesn't really bother me, it's been given an 18 certificate and firmly stamped as being for adults. What more can you ask for? Censorship above that which we have in movies now? No thanks.

The current problem in the UK in regards to this are the retailers (hence my previous confusion). They're quite happy to sell 18 games to parents who'll then give the game to their children, without even pointing out the certificate in the first place. I always made a point of telling parents that the game was certified 15 or 18, and the response was always the same: "Really? But it's just a game!" I'd then proceed to tell them the actual content of Grand Theft Auto III, and that was the end of that. The game would be put back, and not given into the hands of the child whom the BBFC has decided really shouldn't play it. And that's how it should be.

Not that the blame lies entirely there. Games magazines aimed at minors were shipping with demo discs that contained adult content and had a 15 certificate. I had to refuse selling a magazine to kids because of irresponsible disc compilation.

So yeah, the system in the UK doesn't work, but the idea is there :)

Re:how they decided?

[SuiteSisterMary]

Have YOU played the game? I'll point out that all of the money shots do take the form of cutscenes, BTW.

But, in all seriousness, how would YOU rate a game in which you play a supposedly executed felon, who is then forced to be the title star of a snuff film, who then has to survive the night by stalking and killing, in the most imaginative and violent ways possible, a succession of psychotic criminals?

This game makes NO bones about being all of this, and no

Note that I'm a civil libertarian who doesn't believe in censorship; only common sense.