Mainstream Coverage of Manhunt 2

Now that Manhunt 2 is out (and garnering little enthusiasm from gamers) the mainstream press is having their say on the title. Joystiq has a look at what ABC and CBS has to say about the latest assault on our nation's children. "'What sets this video game apart is that the player can become physically involved in the acts of violence,' Couric says. 'Rather than just pushing buttons, the player actually wields a knife, an ax, a glass shard -- to stab an opponent.' Ummm, no. Don't know who writes the copy over there at that ratings powerhouse, but that's just plain wrong. Although the PS2 version would be about pushing buttons -- unless CBS has discovered some new feature -- we're currently unaware of the Wiimote's ability to shape-shift into any of those items described allowing a player to "stab an opponent." Couric then says that research shows violent games cause children to accept violence as an every day part of life."

Comments

The real version was leaked.

[Nursie]

I don't blame people for not buying the watered down version, the uncensored version is out in the wild anyway.

After all the hubbub, that's the version people will want.

OTOH, having played it a bit, it's not much different to manhunt one, or any random horror movie. But then I'm not a tv/radio shock-merchant and I seem to have this rare ability to differentiate games from reality.

The fact that Miss Couric throws in the bit about children shows how much people are still just *not* getting it. Manhunt 2 is NOT for your children. It is rated as M (or AO for the original), don't damn well give it to them.

Re:The real version was leaked.

[lluBdeR]

It is rated as M (or AO for the original), don't damn well give it to them. What? Actually pay attention to what my children are doing? Then who would I have to bitch at when the news tells me the goal of a game called "Manhunt"?

Re:The real version was leaked.

[rkanodia]

The funny thing is, there's never really anything 'adult' about games that are rated 'Adults Only', nor is there anything particularly 'Mature' about games labeled such.

I figure at the rate things are going, there will one day be a game consisting solely of giant-sized genitalia doing battle with machine guns and bodily fluids while healing themselves with crack cocaine. The villain will be an undead mutant urethra, who rapes the players with his radioactive waste-spewing demon gonads and multifarious blood-dripping, sulfurous tube-like appendages, better known as 'Satan-tacles'. At that point, the ESRB will have to add a new category above 'Well-socialized And Upstanding Community Member' (which itself was created to categorize Puppy Molestors 4, probably named something like 'Confucian'. And the whole thing takes place in Hell.

Re:The real version was leaked.

[moderatorrater]

Are you publicly traded? I'd like to invest in your game idea.

Saw CBS

[MBCook]

I saw CBS's piece last night, not knowing it would be on. It was just as fair and balanced as I expected.

They basically considered it a murder simulator. They pointed out that while violent games existed, this took it to a new level because you act it out. They did the "while there is no evidence yet linking games to causing violence, violent people often like games" kind of thing. They had a few little points that were good (like pointing out the game was rated M/17+, and that the Wii has parental controls).

But by and large the piece was terrible... as I expected. They talked about the game, but never mentioned that it was a sequel (that was up to you to figure out). They mentioned that it was banned in Britian, but not that many consider it tamer than the previous game. They pointed out it was from Rockstar who made the GTA games. They showed the movements you make with the Wii controller, but it's just flailing like in Twilight Princess... not "murder simulating" like they tried to insinuate (note: not a quote).

They didn't mention it was toned down. They didn't mention that it just isn't a very good game (have you seen the reviews? 40%-70%). They didn't mention it's a bit of a one trick pony (once the violence stop shocking you, there isn't supposed to be much there). They showed the game to some 20 somethings and said they were all shocked by the violence. They had a clip of someone saying games like this shouldn't be made.

They said that this would make the Wii more hardcore and less family friendly.

But they didn't put anyone pro-gaming on. If they interviewed me, I know what I'd say. It's violent. It's disturbing. It's a good thing someone made it. It's interesting. Someone should make something other than the Carnival Games and Wii Play. There is no great reason this shouldn't be available if someone wants to make a game like this. I have no interest in it, maybe if the violence was in another context. But I think this kind of game should be available. There no way kids should get to play it, but if you buy it for your 8 year old that's just you being a terrible parent.

It could have been worse. They could have shown someone saying WiiSports made their kid violent, and they had to ban their kid from playing Boxing in WiiSports (I've seen that, try telling your kids not to punch other kids... see if that helps).

Now to put things in context... they fear monger. Other stories included the terrible wild fires, how thousands of Iraqis were terrified about the damn that was in imminent danger of bursting (truth: hardly inspected, not in good shape, but not imminent danger of bursting).

CBS and the other guys like to fear monger. They have slanted stories with incredibly slanted titles. That's just how they work. It's sad, it's pathetic, it's true. My news comes from NPR, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and the web. NPR is mostly neutral (slight bent), but don't fear monger much at all compared to the mainstream media. The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are fake... if they have a bent on a story it's obvious and usually funny. The web gives me many viewpoints, on issues that the mainstream media doesn't cover (for various reasons).

Re:Saw CBS

[UbuntuDupe]

it's just flailing like in Twilight Princess... not "murder simulating" like they tried to insinuate (note: not a quote).

Well, if you'll recall, USA Today said that Manhunt 2 "literally gives you the hands of a killer", which if they understood how to use "literally" would be a serious accusation.

(Hey, I'm all for colorful use of terms. But what am I supposed to say when I literally mean literally?)

Re:Saw CBS

[rkanodia]

Actually, when you buy the game, the box includes a pair of severed hands, taken from a condemned murderer.

Re:Saw CBS

[clearreality]

In my opinion, this game (and other games by Rockstar) include unnecessary violence. Further, I'd say it is too much violence and too graphic, both in depiction and in conception. Should it be illegal to make a game like this? I suppose not. But to use a long-worn phrase, just because you can does not mean you should. (I felt this way within the first few minutes of watching a friend play Grand Theft Auto, and Manhunt is worse, if anything.)

I believe it is ok for some things to be socially unacceptable even if they are legal, and depictions and promotions of realistic/graphic violence as entertainment should be one of those things. (ie, it is not the government's job to manage every aspect of people's behavior -- that is our own responsibility.)

There's some line here that is hard to describe, but something like Saving Private Ryan may not cross the line (violence is not glorified), while the Silence of the Lambs series probably does (the message is confusing as the serial killer is idolized). Likewise, Starcraft probably does not cross the line (clearly "fake" violence), but Manhunt 2 does (player initiates criminal violent acts to "win" the game).

This is clearly not a well-defined line that should be codified in law, rather a moral/social line that should be based on good judgement.

Whether there is a link between violent entertainment and actual acts of violence I cannot say, however promoting criminal and violent acts does provide some glorification of those things -- for example movies that glorify stealing cars. What is the effect? I don't have any data to say, but I think anyone who says there is zero impact on viewers/players is simply ignoring obvious connections between people and how they are influenced by their environment.

I guess it comes down to this: it is good to encourage people to have values that respect other people's lives, rights, and property. Does this kind of entertainment encourage such things? No. Rockstar may not feel like it is their responsibility to encourage good values, but I would counter and say that it is everyone's responsibility. (Yes, that means there are people and companies who I feel are not meeting that responsibility.)

Also, why make a game with realistic depictions of criminal violence and abuse when it is possible to make a best-selling game that has none of those things? The only reason I can think of is that the studios developing those games do not have the talent or ability to develop a best-selling game without using the crutch of realistic violence (because, despite my opinions, those features can increase sales).

I think the objection to a game like this is a moral stand and a moral argument, but that does not mean it is a bad argument.

Witch hunts continue

[sickspeed6]

As usual, in an effort to shift the blame from the parents to the game designer, the major new outlets get to spread misconception to the everyday citizen. I am only 19, but, my parents have been allowing me to play violent video games since i was 10. I'm not killing people, nor do i intend to kill people. It has always been the game designers, musicians, directors that are bad people. How about parents try and be there for their kids, talk to them, tell them that games aren't real. I know that i will allow my children if/when i have them in 10-15 years, to play violent videogames, not when they are 3 or 5, but when they are 13 or older, maybe even sooner if i think that they are mature enough. But it will be my choice, not the choice of some ill informed news outlet.

Re:I don't care how many Manhunt stories...

[Phoenix00017]

The problem is that you're missing the point entirely. This has little to do with Manhunt, and has far more to do with censorship, violence in games, and main-stream portrayal of video games. This is what we call "precedence setting". While you might not care if they decide to ban Manhunt based on violence, something tells me you might care if they then decide that the upcoming Halo 4 (or God of War 3, or [insert bad-ass violent game sequel here]) game is excessively violent as well.

And before you come back telling me you never play violent games, it isn't so far to reach and say that Super Mario Bros., despite the lack of blood, still has the main character killing tons of seemingly-innocent wildlife. Sure, it seems like an incredible stretch, but you have to ask "where does it stop" once you start villainizing games and ignoring the fact that some games are made for adults as well.

Mmmm, violence...

[Krinsath]

"It's bad because it encourages people to act out violence!"

Ok, as a kid I remember playing Cowboys and Indians, "sword fighting" with wooden swords or sometimes just plain old sticks and having full-contact water gun fights...sometimes conducted while riding a bike in a sort of "drive-by" fashion...not so much because we were trying to be cool and emulate gangsters, but for the simple fact that you could shoot them and they couldn't hit you very effectively.

These things all strike me as things that lead to *actual* violence, yet not once were we chastised for rough-housing growing up unless somebody got hurt (or if one of the mothers caught you swearing). However, waving a white piece of plastic around and around in yet another example of crappy Wii controls from an uninspired developer is going to make kids suddenly more prone to violence? Did I miss some fundamental shift in the nature of human development here?

I realize that most people informed on the issue are fully aware that there is no proven direct link between violent videogames and actual violence, and in fairness to CBS they alluded to that fact in their report, but it was glossed over about how this game is going to turn little Johnny into a killer. Sort of a "while there are no signs that link leaving an electric fan on at night will cause your death...ARE YOU WILLING TO TAKE THAT CHANCE? Listen to our thousands of anecdotal stories that make good cursory sense to those who know nothing of the way things work, because we know that's all the further you'll look into the issue!"

I know all news media is a pack of lies to get advertising money and anymore who you watch is just picking the pack of lies which you find most palatable, but it still saddens me to see that "journalism" has descended to such a pitiful level.

Manhunt 2 matters not.

[ObiWanStevobi]

The game title doesn't matter. Could have been a care bears game and the media will find some way of convincing you it is deadly. If it isn't a murder sim, it's soo addictive that you'll forget to eat or sleep for three days and die. If it gets any coverage from the media, you can be sure that it will be something that can kill you.

The problem in question here is not censorship. It's media.

They have free reign to be completely wrong without any adverse reaction from the masses. One of the first news stories I remember was that killer African bees were coming and America was in danger. Never happened. Exploding school buses, nevcer happened. How many looming epidemics that never happened? I would have never guessed SARS killed less than 1% of infected people if it wasn't for South Park. Shooting at police helicopters during Katrina? Nope. Iraq WMDs, nada. Do they tell you what kind of missions shuttle crews are going on? No, but they will replay the challenger explosion and talk about the dangers of foam and heat shielding damage for hours.

I could go on for hours here, but I'm sure you get the point. Media doesn't care if they get anything right, they only care about it scaring you in to staying tuned until after the next commercial break.

Re:"Violence as an every day part of life"

[Chosen Reject]

Even before video games, we had...eskimos and seals

You had a very interesting childhood.