Manhunt 2 Could Beat Ban With Digital Download

GamePolitics notes that the Register has a theory as to how Rockstar can get around Britain's Manhunt 2 ban: make it available as a digital download. "Downloaded games ... do not need an age-suitability classification, such as 15 or 18, because the Act, which mandates the BBFC's certification programme and forces retailers to obey the classifications, only covers physical products. A BBFC spokeswoman confirmed that if Manhunt 2 publisher Take-Two Interactive chose to sell the game online as a download then 'that would be legal and not contravening the Video Recordings Act'. She added that some games are already sold this way without a BBFC rating, but that most developers choose to have their games classified because selling a physical product is more profitable."

Comments

Could work well...

[meringuoid]

... Enough people have broadband now, and there's a certain cachet in downloading The Game They Tried To Ban! and doing an end-run around the censorship laws. Since the making of the game is a sunk cost, and since it's clear the BBFC aren't going to pass it even with the cuts, then anything they can get out of Britain is a bonus.

Reminds me of Carmageddon. It was banned in a similar way - but a version with all the pedestrians replaced with green-blooded zombies was passed. Then the makers put a patch online that restored the original gore. Since most people weren't online at the time, every PC gaming magazine in the country put the patch on their cover discs every month for the rest of the year ;-)

Re:Physical Product More Profitable?

[Ambiguous Coward]

I am not a hard-core gamer. I play games once in a while, I go to a friend's house some weekends and use one of his computers to play games. When I do actually buy a game, I play it pretty hard for a couple few days, then I lose interest and wander off. I have no idea what the current hot new releases are, or what have you. I just don't pay attention or care.

Here's the thing: because I'm just not that interested, I don't go to the local EB at the mall. The physical boxes there have *no* presence in my life. However, I downloaded Steam cause I was mildly curious. I have bought more games over Steam in the past year than I had purchased at retail in the previous *decade*. It is far too easy to open Steam and say, "Hmm, what's on the front-page? Oh, that looks interesting. Only 20 bucks? Okay, I'll buy it." And voila, it's mine. I don't have to go to the store, or anything. I just *buy* it. Way more casual than retail.

What I'm trying to say is that venues such as Steam are so much *better* for attracting the casual gamer. You don't need to attract them long enough to go to the store, pick out the product, stand in line, pay for the thing, etc. You only have to attract them long enough to hit the "Purchase" button. Hell, convince them to store their purchasing information on the server and it's a one-click bonanza! The only problem is that you first have to educate the user that an option such as Steam exists. That just takes time, as does any new marketing method.

Steam is a brilliant idea, and is a great way to capture the casual consumer. One may even argue that retail is better suited to the hard-core gamer, because they're the ones willing to make the trek all the way to the store just for the latest Whatsits 2008: Episode 4.5: The Whatsening: Super Gold Edition.

Steam made me buy games I absolutely would not have bought otherwise.

-G