Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Manhunt 2 Ready For Release, Politicians Angered

Posted by Zonk on from the tangled-web dept.

After much hemming and hawing, Take-Two appears to have secured an 'M' rating for Manhunt 2 from the ESRB. The title is now due in stores around Halloween. The reversal of fortunes for the much-maligned title has prompted a number of conspiracy theories and outright outrage from groups 'fighting' videogame violence. Well-known commentator on the subject and California State Senator Leland Yee is demanding more transparency from the ESRB as a result of this decision. From GamePolitics' coverage: "Parents can't trust a rating system that doesn't even disclose how they come to a particular rating. The ESRB and Rockstar should end this game of secrecy by immediately unveiling what content has been changed to grant the new rating and what correspondence occurred between the ESRB and Rockstar to come to this conclusion. Unfortunately, history shows that we must be quite skeptical of these two entities."

11 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. Silly video game industry by faloi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe if they start throwing money at national and state Senators like Hollywood does, they won't have these problems. Or maybe I missed the release when Leland was disgusted at the level of violence in movies.

    --
    "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
    1. Re:Silly video game industry by poppen_fresh · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Seriously. What I would really like to see is national attention that generates the following (changes bolded):

      Americans can't trust a rating system that doesn't even disclose how they come to a particular rating. The credit rating agencies and credit card companies should end this game of secrecy ...
      Or anything else of real importance. This think of the children bs is beginning to piss me off.
  2. Why not? by BigMe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Parents can't trust a rating system that doesn't even disclose how they come to a particular rating." Works for the MPAA, why not the ESRB?
  3. Cannot trust? by Fozzyuw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Parents can't trust a rating system that doesn't even disclose how they come to a particular rating.

    Do parents "trust" the G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17, NR ratings for movies? And what is there to "trust" about an "M" rated game? That it won't be violent? *yawn* Just politicians trying to win some votes by barking louder than their bite.

    Cheers,
    Fozzy

    --
    "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
  4. Re:Mixed news by Is0m0rph · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah really. 1 more year older and the government encourages you to join the military so you can actually go kill people in real life.

  5. Re:Mixed news by DrWho520 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sony and Nintendo should be ashamed of themselves for their prudish prohibition of AO-rated titles on their consoles...
    It is work mentioning that GameStop/EBGames does not carry on their website, Walmart and other retailers will not stock and Blockbuster does not rent AO titles. As far as I know, Barnes & Noble does not carry "Jugs" magazine. I do not think companies should be "ashamed" of making a conscious business decision.
    --
    The cancel button is your friend. Do not hesitate to use it.
  6. Re:The ESRB did do its job by Sarutobi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, you are right. I forgot about that.

    I don't know about Microsoft, but I remember reading that Sony and Nintendo don't allow A-O games on their consoles. But still, it raises the issue: the ESRB did its job and industry players will not play along.

    It is still true though that target, best buy and some other stores refuse to carry A-O games.

    --
    Think about this: Axe and Dove are actually the same company. Vincent L.B.
  7. Re:transparency by hansamurai · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well at some point, this very point of the ESRB not playing every game was brought up by our law makers:

    http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/9/ 27/5427

    I agree that there is an element of trust but the ESRB was created and is supported by the game industry. Developers and publishers are only hurting themselves by submitting bogus material. Witholding content from the ESRB raters is just what Washington needs to turn the ESRB from a self-regulating body to a government-regulated body.

    --
    Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
  8. Re:Maybe this jackass should read up on the materi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    An 'AO' versus an 'M' rating guarantees loss of retail space, less spaces for advertising and subsequent loss of sales. The ratings category may be nearly identical as far as stated intent (suitable for 18+ rather than 17+) but the morality police want to make sure that "filth sellers" are punished financially in order to stop such games from finding a publisher in the future.

  9. Re:transparency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "I agree that there is an element of trust but the ESRB was created and is supported by the game industry. Developers and publishers are only hurting themselves by submitting bogus material."

    It already has happened in a sense with the Rockstar / GTA controversy. The lies told by Rockstar ("not ours! not our fault!") along with the discovery of "hidden" content eroded some public trust in the system itself. Granted, it was an "M" game to begin with, but in the mind of a large segment of the population, a lie is a lie and it generates mistrust...

    As the saying goes, it takes only one bad apple to "spoil" the bunch which is a sad but true saying...

  10. Re:Difference from MPAA? by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The difference between MPAA ratings and ESRB ratings is that the film reel manufacturers do not reject all NC-17 rated films.