Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ESRB Refuses To Detail Manhunt 2 Re-Rating Logic

Posted by Zonk on from the it-is-dark-you-are-likely-to-be-eaten-by-a-grue dept.

Next Generation reports that the ESRB is flatly refusing Leland Yee's request to further outline their logic behind Manhunt 2's re-rating. Says organization president Patrica Vance, "It is simply not our place to reveal specific details about the content we have reviewed, particularly when it involves a product yet to be released. What can be said is that the changes that were made to the game, including the depictions themselves and the context in which those depictions were presented, were sufficient to warrant the assignment of an M (Mature 17+) rating by our raters."

6 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. What's the issue? by steveo777 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Seems cut and dry. The ESRB isn't a news source and probably has in its guidelines that it can't release any game info anyway. Come to think of it, HAS anyone ever leaked info at the ESRB? That would be news indeed.

    Next story.

    --
    This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
    1. Re:What's the issue? by Sinistar2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What is also cut and dry is that the ESRB said that content that garnered the AO rating was changed or removed to bring it back into M territory. This is no different than films initially rated R cutting content in order to achieve a PG-13 and yet no politicians demand to see detailed change lists for every movie re-rating.

  2. Translated: by spocksbrain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "We do not want people to scrutinize the way we arbitrarily make willy-vanilly decisions on the way we rate video games."

    1. Re:Translated: by jythie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Better translation: We don't want to get our asses sued off for releasing other company's confidential information.

  3. It probably is a smart thing to do by joeflies · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It probably is because that anytime there is a line drawn in the sand with something as arbitrary as a social standard, then you end up having to explain away yourself why some things fall above and below the line.

    What happens if they say that "the game was rated AO because of graphic decapitation", and then the lawyers end up twisting that rule so that they can press the ESRB how come Baraka's fatality isn't an AO

    It's a way that they can do ratings with an "I know it if I see it" type methodology without having to be held accountable why some things are AO and some are mature. They're an industry board, not a government agency, so I'm fine with that. I have no problems with the way the games are being rated now, and I'm ok with manhunt being sold as mature too.

  4. Why is this surprising? by Minwee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Games are submitted to the ESRB with the understanding of confidentiality. All that the ESRB releases is a final rating, they don't leak the whole content of the game.

    Doing anything different would be like the MPAA releasing movie ratings of "This film is rated PG for sci-fi action violence, with some mature content like that scene near the end where Darth Vader reveals that he is Luke's father" or "Rated PG-13 for intense thematic material, violent images and Malcolm Crowe really being dead all along but not realizing it".

    If Dr. Linn or Senator Yee want to know what changes have been made to Manhunt 2 then they should be asking Rockstar about it. You know, the people who wrote it, made changes to it, and are in a position to release that kind of information. Hounding the ESRB for details is like calling someone's family doctor to demand details about their health.