Slashdot Mirror
USA Today's Sensationalist Take on Manhunt 2
Fozzyuw writes "USA Today has up a story on Manhunt 2 for the Wii, the 'AO'-rated then re-rated title from Rockstar games. They appear to be specifically aiming to sensationalize the story, with evocative and needlessly violent language. Here are a few snippets from the article: '"Nintendo Wii takes a murderous turn." Manhunt 2 was originally rated Adults Only — equivalent to an X in films — and now carries an M for mature audiences (17 and up) ... Since the Wii version uses the motion-sensitive controllers, it literally gives players the hands of a killer ... Nintendo doesn't need to expand its user base to help the Wii continue to outsell its pricier and technologically superior competitors ... On the Wii, players physically make killing motions with the controllers — slashing for stabs and lifting to strangle — rather than simply pushing buttons.'"
RTFA. The article is fair. It describes what the game is about and how it is played. I am not sure what is sensationalized about the article itself. If having the game described shocks you then your problem is with the game itself.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Oddly, I dont think it recieved nearly the attention of Manhunt. Maybe its because Manhunt is by those horrible purveyors of filth that are threatening to bring table tennis to the Wii.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
The "X" movie rating is simply a mock rating, used when the film has not been reviewed by the MPAA. The correct equivalent would be a "NC-17" rating.
The Godfather : Blackhand Edition for the Wii had choking (requiring you to shake the controls vigorously in a throat-grab position), garrote usage (requiring you to use the Wiimote and nunchuk to simulate looping the garrote around a neck and pulling it taut), gratuitous use of the word "Fuck!" and dancing call girls, in addition to being able to violently murder innocent bystanders in a variety of ways. Not entirely sure why Manhunt 2 was so outstanding, except that it was produced by Rockstar Games, and not EA.
I wouldn't quite say that. People typically insert "literally" into a sentence when they want to express sincerity as opposed to an empty use of a phrase. For example, someone might say that a movie had them "literally glued to their seat." Of course they are in fact figuratively glued to their seat not literally, but the sentiment they are intending to express is that they were genuinely reluctant to leave their seat and that they aren't just using the stock phrase "glued to one's seat" as unnecessary hyperbole.
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
The problem is, that history is rarely painted in black and white.
Pinball in the thirties often came with payouts - thinly disguised gambling machines at a time when a nickel was serious money.
In the fifties, comic books were losing older readers to the paperback novels of Mickey Spillane.
Graphic crime and horror seemed the way to go.
The problem was these often very crude and exploitive comics were being sold off the same drugstore racks as Archie, Casper and Scrooge McDuck.
There was no adult channel for the distribution of comics except through the same news stands and cigar stores that had a well-earned reputation for selling hard core porn out of the back room.
In the fifties artists like Al Capp, Milton Caniff, Walt Kelly, Charles Schulz and a dozen others were publishing newspaper strips that were fun, sophisticated, and appealing to a very broad readership.
They were in a much stronger position than EC and they could - and did - fight back.
The MPAA doesn't give a flying f*** about what movies people can or can't see, so long as its members make money.
If the MPAA hadn't stepped in and created their own voluntary code, the government would have. By making their own voluntary code, they ensured they remained in control of it and not the government. This is exactly why publishers are supporting the ESRB ratings right now - they may not like the limits they impose but they'd much rather their own voluntary limits than the government making compulsory ones (the only problem being that theaters did a passable job of applying the limits and so the government backed away while many game stores keep ignoring the ESRB and so leave politicians with ammo).
So, the MPAA's ratings are only there to make the government go away. Given that that worked, they're totally happy for their members to release "unrated" versions - so long as a) the government stays away and b) their members make money. As the big chains are more than happy to sell unrated movies as something titilating and decades passing means politicians get no mileage from it, the MPAA is more than happy to support it.
Were the ratings really a symbol of MPAA power, sure, they'd fight "unrated" releases. But, given the ratings are simply there so they control censorship rather than letting the government do it, so long as their members don't upset the cart, they're more than happy for those same members to make even more money by appearing to flout them. They're still members and this is just another way for them to keep making a profit - which is all the ratings really were in the first place.