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.'"

Comments

even from an experienced gamer..

[Aeron65432]

I've been playing videogames for years now, I've played CS, Doom, Unreal Tournament, etc. I never was really bothered by the violence or graphics because it was entertainment. I even thought GTA:San Andreas was an excellent game, despite it's dubious morals.

I have no problem with people publishing ManHunt2, or playing it. But is anyone else very disturbed by the idea of using a Wiimote to stab/strangle/maim people? This just seems over-the-top to me. I don't think I could play this even if it appealed to me.

Re:even from an experienced gamer..

[Chris Burke]

But is anyone else very disturbed by the idea of using a Wiimote to stab/strangle/maim people?

Uh... it sounds like the most obvious thing to do, exactly what you would expect to do in any similar game for the Wii.

I mean, you hack things apart in Zelda by waving the wiimote around. Granted it's cartoony, and manhunt is "realistic". Same difference between Zelda for GC and GTA:SA for PS2. Either way, just like on those consoles you expect to control your character's actions with buttons, on the Wii you expect to do so by simulating the action with the Wiimote.

So how exactly is doing the most natural thing "over the top"? How exactly should they abstract the act of stabbing someone (besides the fact that you'll be 'stabbing' your wiimote at empty air)?

If pushing buttons vs making vague stabby motions in the air is all it takes to turn something like GTA:SA from a fun romp into something deeply distrubing, well, I guess that is what disturbs me.

Re:even from an experienced gamer..

[suv4x4]

But is anyone else very disturbed by the idea of using a Wiimote to stab/strangle/maim people?

Not more disturbed than giving my kid a "lightgun" to "shoot" other kids.

You see existing technology didn't cause the apocalypse the media, certain lawyers and worried parents promised.

But as you age, you actually become one of said parents raising worried voice against newer technologies, repeating the mistakes of the previous generation once more.

Remember, in the past, Germany outlawed River Raid in fears it may make kids go out and kill people.

Re:even from an experienced gamer..

[GnarlyDoug]

But is anyone else very disturbed by the idea of using a Wiimote to stab/strangle/maim people?

That would be sick and wrong. However I plan on using the Wiimote to stab/strangle/maim bitmaps/sprites/pixels.

Re:even from an experienced gamer..

[Chris Burke]

Did you seriously just call 'acting out a murder in a video game' "the most natural thing?"

It's the Wii. It uses motion controls. In most games the motion controls are used to simulate the action your avatar performs. It has a paucity of buttons. So yes, using motion controls to control your actions is the most natural thing to do.

I'm sure you meant the acting part, but if you can't see what makes that disturbing, where pressing buttons wasn't disturbing, I can't even begin to imagine how to clear that up for you.

I'm sure that you have no idea what I meant.

You're acting out a virtual murder in any event. If making your on-screen avatar brutalize innocents by pressing "A" or "X" is fine with you, but doing the same thing by making vague stabby motions in empty air is not fine, then it's because you've never actually thought about what you were doing before. If you actually found the violence itself disturbing, that would be fine, and these games simply wouldn't be for you. But when shanking someone in the neck is honky-dory as long as you do it with a button but not a motion, then that speaks to greater issues that have nothing to do with the game or its interface. That's why you can't make the difference clear, because it rests on essentially a hairs breadth difference in level of abstraction in what is in either case a completely abstracted and artificial act.

By the way, how do you feel about murdering virtual people with a gun by pulling the trigger button? Are shooters too disturbing for you?

Re:even from an experienced gamer..

[tbannist]

Indeed! Past subjects of hysteria include:

Novels - No, really. Novels were ruining the youth of America in the late 1800s
Pinball - In the 1930s pinball machines were turning children into muggers.
Rock'n'Rolle - This is the classic one. Rock'n'Roll was responsible for all kinds of things like devil worship!
Comics - I think it was the 60s when comic books were turning children into deranged killers.
Rap - We should all be able to remember that Rap was turning children into thugs in the 90s.

Obviously, Video Games are just the latest in a series of assaults on decency, and must be banned just like all that other stuff.

Re:even from an experienced gamer..

[Aladrin]

Actually, no I didn't, but I take your point. It's somehow a little different when you get to see the blood of the person, even if it's 'just pixels'.

It's funny, because I've always been in the 'VR RPG's will be SO awesome!' crowd... But when I think about using a virtual knife to stab someone, and will see their virtual blood, it loses a lot of the appeal for me.

I'm one of the people that never sacrificed a little sister in Bioshock because it was cruel... I just couldn't bring myself to do it. If there had been no choice, and it was the only way the game played, I probably could have done it... It wasn't my decision, it was the game developer's. I guess that makes me a hypocrit.

You know what I love about today's games (and other media) more than anything? It makes you think, and explore yourself. Space Invaders probably never made anyone think 'What would I do in an alien invasion?' but Prey might. The Transformers may have made people dream about giant robots, but there's no moral dilemma there. Kino's Journey ep2 (anime) did make me think 'What would I do in that situation?' Kino handled it a lot better than I would have. (Admittedly, Transformers had a few 'should Optimus kill Megatron' dilemmas, but it's not really a situation you can relate to.)

Literally?

[grahamd0]

it literally gives players the hands of a killer

I believe the word they were looking for was "metaphorically", but it is USA Today so you can't really expect too much.

Sensational? How about Accurate?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh please, stop with the faux sense of outrage that someone might accurately describe a video game for the murder simulator it is.

Seriously. This is what this game is. You kill...almost indiscriminately. That is the name of the game. Hell, this is probably why I'm going to buy it.

And this is a big step for Nintendo. I just finished the Godfather: Black Hand Edition and it too was a 'bit' violent. But there is some history with this...not much, but some. The Godfather, violent as it may be, is in the publics culture. I believe it too was an Adult Only game. Manhunt? It is ONLY about killing. What is the backstory? Who knows -- it is about killing. That is like trying to put a backstory on Doom. Oh wait -- didn't someone try to do this? The story is you are put into an unrealistic situation where you need to kill or be killed...and given extra points or kudos and maybe a gold star next to your name because of how bloody a killing you make it.

Honestly, I think games are getting way too violent and too realistic. I don't think these things need censored for adults...but I also don't think kids under a certain age need to be playing them either -- and that is the point of these sorts of articles to warn the parents.

So please, spare us the faux indignation about sensationalism when the article does a good job of accurately describing what the game is and does.

False ESRB To MPAA Ratings

[nick_davison]

Manhunt 2 was originally rated Adults Only -- equivalent to an X in films -- and now carries an M for mature audiences (17 and up) Ao is a rough equivalent to NC-17. NC-17 is considered a commercial deathknell for a movie as it ensures most theaters won't pick it up because of concerns that potential audiences are too small. In exactly the same way, an Ao is a deathknell as BestBuy, Walmart, etc. won't carry a game they think is going to scare adults away from buying it for their children.

M is a rough equivalent to R. R pretends to mean "No one under 17" just like NC-17 but everyone knows many parents, older brothers, etc. will ignore that warning and choose to take kids anywhere (I sat through Scream 3 while a woman took her roughtly 3, 5 and 10 year olds in with her). In the same way, Walmart and BestBuy will happily sell M rated games as they know they won't scare parents off from buying them for their kids in the same way Ao might do.

Hollywood has been sending movies back for re-review for years. There are even famous letters of producers debating how many "fuck"s a "Jesus Christ!" is worth. Generally, they pick a rating they want, aim for the edgy end of it, submit, then make whatever edits they're told they need to to squeeze it back in to that category. All that's changed is that game companies have learned from Hollywood - nothing more, nothing less.

The real shame isn't that "evil" games are getting reclassified after receiving edits. The greater shame is, much like movies, potentially great pieces of art that are totally appropriate for an adult audience are being squashed in the name of commercial viability.

Games such as Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodlines are examples of the truly amazing art form the genre can become. From betrayal to lust, infanticide to the damaged adult personalities of children who were abused, it was far and away the most epic piece of game storytelling I've ever experienced. Though also flawed by bugs at the time of launch, its biggest issue was no one talked about it, no one advertised it and it was hard to find. An amazing game studio crumbled because they released something phenomenal that couldn't be sold in puritan America. Since then, no one has even tried to launch a game with close to that depth of adult themes.