Slashdot Mirror
Condemned 2 Trying to Avoid Manhunt 2's Fate
CVG is reporting that Monolith, makers of the upcoming Condemned 2, are working with the ESRB to avoid an AO rating. As we've discussed previously, an AO ban in the states is effectively a ban on retail sales. From the article: "When asked for examples of what we might now never see in a game again, we were told, 'An example of what we cut would be putting someone's head in a vice. That was too much, you know. There are also some decapitations we've lost. But this is more Sin City than it is real world and we want people to know that this is not a real world.'"
I'd like to see a retailer grow some balls, tell the ESRB to shove off, and start carrying AO games on the shelves. I don't care if they section it off in it's own little area or something, so long as it's available for purchase. Then companies could make whatever they feel like making and who cares what the ESRB rates it.
Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
No, that link you posted to a web comic we've all seen a hundred times is not "obligatory."
If anyone else played the original Condemned, you'd probably agree wtih me that it would probably be rated AO, simply for all the blood. (And probably the ending.)
Nonetheless, I'm extremely pissed that game makers have to worry about ratings now in order to get their games on the shelves. In the past it was, "Oh, look.. That conservative group is trying to nag at our game. Ha! We're number one on the selling charts!" And then finally, those "conservative groups" get a couple of lawmakers to enforce this type of law because of some group of idiot developers who decide to put an extremely well hidden sex scene in their game.
Just great. So while we're censoring every form of art, how about Michelangelo's statue? Someone needs to put some leaves there. Oh, is that a breast on that artwork? Better get the censor bars out.
No matter what it is, there's always some group that complains enough that, "This shouldn't be shown, because it's just.. shouldn't." Of course, I'll also assume that their kids will group up and be smiling adults that always do the right thing, help old ladies cross the streets, turn their head away from those XXX nightclubs, and of course, never ever get angry.
Beautiful, just beautiful. I suppose if people have a bad enough psychosis that they can't tell that Condemned has a world in which demons exist and physically manifest to cause riots apart from the real world, well.. My opinion on humanity is at a loss for words.
...we want people to know that this is not a real world.
I'm getting really sick of all this pussy-footing around. Personally, I have a strong aversion to graphic, unnecessary violence, but if you are so unhinged that you can't tell the difference between reality and a game you are ALREADY off your rocker.
...and realize there is a huge market out there for a console that will allow AO games? Can't they just have parental lockout for games with a certain rating, just like DVR's and TV's do now? Why does the entire industry push forward this notion that video games are played primarily by children?
When I saw this article title, I choked up a bit.
Hold on, my friends. With each passing day, games are being more and more scrutinized. It's only a matter of time until it's a criminal offense to make a violent game.
And you know what the absolute worst part about all this is? The original video game generation is the generation calling the shots on this one.
How big of a pile of bullshit is that?
Living With a Nerd
Several posts have mentioned that the console makers have to give their ok for an AO game to be released on said platform. Does anyone know if there is any sort of work being done on an open source hardware platform kind of thing, for which AO rated games would be freely available without mfr's "upgrade kit/license"?
I wonder if Doom would make the cut if it were released today.
The stateside market for AO games on the PC is insignificant. The number of PC games released stateside under an AO rating is insignificant. List of AO-rated products
Just have rainbows shoot out of someones neck when they are decapitated.
Just to let you know, Hillary is for enforcing game ratings, not stopping games from being made. That means if a retailer sells an AO game to a minor, her laws would make the retailer responsible, not the game maker. Her laws are good, and far different than what Thompson is doing. Nintendo and Sony not distributing AO games is also an entirely different matter not associated with Hillary.
When movies get an X or NC-17 rating that doesn't prevent them from being sold in adult stores or in back-rooms of rental places. Why not just allow a game to get an 'AO' rating, then put them in adult retail stores or etc. and let the rating do what it is supposed to and allow the sale of the game to the proper audience just like porn... I don't mind being carded for buying an 'R' rated movie or even an 'X', so I wouldn't mind being carded to buy an 'AO' game, because I'm an adult and like to buy what I choose. And what's gonna happen to my Manhunt 2 pre-order sigh... It's easier for kids to obtain cigarettes and alcohol and porn than it is for them to get video game's that are less violent than some PG-13 movies, not to mention look a whole lot worse, because they are completely digital and done in real-time, and any blood or gore is super fake, movies at least get time to pre-render everything so those nasty scenes from movies like SAW actually look real. If they made a SAW video game and put in half the twistedness it would get an AO rating, but ... you get the point.
It seems like a downloadable, DVD/CD burnable version is feasible these days, given the bandwidth available to much of their target audience. Give each downloaded image a unique key to be emailed to the purchaser and entered on the console to run.
(I'm assuming that it's possible to make recordable DVD/CDs that will run on un-modified consoles)
Sure, the keygens will happen pretty soon, but it's not really any more problem than chipped consoles and copied games are now.
A smaller market than Walmart shelves, but surely better than nothing!
I'm glad you had a nice mom, but on the other hand, I see a lot of kids who don't seem to have one (or a nice dad, for that matter). I have no issues with the state "helping" parents a bit by forcing them to acknowledge ratings. I see no reason why shops should be punished for selling alcohol to 20-year-olds, but not punished for selling AO games to 10-year-olds.
You would prefer the game company be punished like they are now? People have a freedom to sue others, which is good and bad. Her ratings laws helps protect the game makers by putting the responsibility in the seller's lap, which is where it should be. It doesn't 'allow' anyone to do anything. It just controls what people are already able to do so their actions go in the right direction. As Adams said, if people were angles, we would not need laws to govern them.
Sounds like you have been listening to Dole too much and also didn't read her book. I also don't see the relationship of her laws putting responsibility on the seller as her trying to be your mother. Sounds more like you have an issue with her being a woman than anything else. You must not realize that other senators, and our president, are doing very bad things if you are worried about her so much.
So now any store that wants to carry Manhunt 2, a game which just barely inched into the AO rating, is also consenting to carry interactive donkey porn. As far as the ESRB is concerned they are one and the same.
Yes but stores don't have to be consistent, there's no rule that says you either have to ban AO completely or carry all of it. Though I'm really not sure if an interactive donkey sex simulator would be worse than an interactive snuff movie simulator.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I'm not sure why you would say that. In fact, I would prefer quite the opposite. If the rating of games, and the sale of games were controlled more clearly, game companies should have a lot less problems because they could show that their games would not be sold to kids too young to play them.
People have a freedom to sue others, which is good and bad. Her ratings laws helps protect the game makers by putting the responsibility in the seller's lap, which is where it should be.Okay, now I'm not entirely sure why you are arguing with me. I think we agree on this. I wrote "I see no reason why shops should (...) not punished for selling AO games to 10-year-olds."
Nah, Congress does too know what a PC is. They knew what Doom was when the Columbine shootings happened, and before that, they knew about the original Grand Theft Auto. I don't remember Phantasmagoria being criticized for its violence though. PC gaming is every bit as susceptible to attacks from politicians.
Why am I arguing with you?! Because I am an idiot and not a politicion...wait..what does that mean?
I had this mental image of a an explosion growing as I read your reply. Bravo! I am not trying to change your opinion of Hillary, and I agree we need a change. My question to you is: when did you discover we need a change, and at what points in your life you felt this way? When you pinpoint the ways we need change, find out what laws cause that reason and who made them, and who is against them, and what solutions they bring to the table.