Slashdot Mirror
Manhunt 2 Ready For Release, Politicians Angered
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."
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
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
From Wikipedia:
Its just like the movies your great backwards state likes to put out Mr Senator. They constantly take crap out to enable them to get a lower rating too. Why is it so hard for you people to get it through your skull that NOT ALL GAMES ARE FOR KIDS! Hell why are you even bitching about it as if a parent is going to buy this? ITS STILL RATED M.... ITS STILL NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN UNDER 17 AND IF YOU BUY IT FOR THEM YOUR A BAD PARENTAs for transparicy... last I looked the Motion Picture Rating Board was not transparent either.
god these people make me so bitterly angry at their stupidity.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
While I'm glad that Rockstar has found a way to get the game released, I think it's ridiculous that they had to jump through so many hoops just to protect the supposedly fragile minds of 17-year-olds (the only people affected by an M rating vs. an AO rating).
Sony and Nintendo should be ashamed of themselves for their prudish prohibition of AO-rated titles on their consoles, and Rockstar should have the last laugh by releasing Manhunt 2: Uncut for the PC at some point down the road.
What do they REALLY expect when they give a single entity complete control over something? I'm sure the ESRB says 'we won't tell you why' because they don't want to get into arguments about specific content and they don't want the constant 'well, is this okay then?' that they'll get if they start that.
But I've always felt that was a bit uppity of them. They decide what is right and moral for all of America and nobody has any say-so, or any idea what they are even saying.
At the very least, I think the system should be overhauled to rate each thing seperately. Violence, nudity, language... Everyone feels differently about each of these. While I would put nudity down at Pre-Teen level, I would keep outright sex at Adult level. Shooting a weapon would be Adult, for any reason and any enemy. 'Bad' language would be Teen. And I'd add a concept, though I don't know what I'd call it: Concepts, Politics, Ideas... The overall concept of the game, and the message it brings, should be rated. Games about raising a horse for fun would be for Everyone. Games about raising a horse to be a war-steed would be Teen.
I can already hear people screaming about how I'd rate things. Don't bother to respond, that's exactly my point. Nobody agrees with me exactly! The rating system should explain WHAT is bad about that aspect of the game, instead of just giving it an overall rating.
I'm making this up, because I have no idea what Manhunt 2 entails, but I imagine the ratings should read like:
Violence: Firearms, killing humans.
Nudity: Full nudity, deviant sex
Language: Full range of taboo words, constant usage
Concept: Killing for pleasure, little consequence for actions
And then a parent that thinks killing people is fine, but showing skin is absolutely taboo can properly understand what they are handing to their child.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
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.
Well at some point, this very point of the ESRB not playing every game was brought up by our law makers:
/ 27/5427
http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/9
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.
"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...
Oh the horror. Parents have to actually parent their spawn rather than count on a society of strangers and an army of entertainment devices to do it for them.
FFS people, it's not up to the government or the industry to make sure your freaking kids are safe from all possible bad influences. It's your damn job as a parent to actually pay attention to what your little dorklings soak up with their sponge brains, and getting a rating on a box to make that easier should be considered a gift. I'm in favor of restrictions to prevent underage kids from purchasing adult material, but that's it. Senatorial involvement is nothing more than pan-handling for votes, and it's pathetic.
A parent needs to pay attention to their brats, pay attention to what they buy and what they watch/play/listen to. It's not up to the rest of the world to compensate for parental irresponsibility.
The difference between MPAA ratings and ESRB ratings is that the film reel manufacturers do not reject all NC-17 rated films.