Slashdot Mirror
Rockstar Fights Back Against BBFC
Rockstar has launched its appeal against Manhunt 2's rating rejection in the UK. At the first hearing on the matter, Rockstar representative Geoffrey Robertson took the British Board of Film Classification to task: "Robertson went on to accuse the BBFC of being 'simply ignorant of the gaming experience' and 'throwing adjectives with hyperbolic abandon at the game ... Their reputation is not at stake; if it were we could show how, over the last century, they've been derided for some of the most stupid decisions in censorship history ... But we're not going to go down that road.'"
From TFA:
I should hope that the BBFC puts its reputation above that of gamers, movie goes or anyone else for that matter.
The article talks of the BBFC's use of hyperbole but if you read their press release, they say:
None of this to me suggests that the BBFC is out of touch with games. In fact I'd accuse Mr Robertson of hyperbole suggesting the BBFC is the British Board of Videogame Censors as a quick search of their records shows that Manhunt 2 is the only game currently listed as rejected.
A thistle is a fat salad for an ass's mouth...
If the game is not harmful to gamers then how will letting it through harm the reputation of the BBFC? Isn't their job to keep the populace from seeing harmful things?
When people want something done, they do what it takes to get it done. Well, productive people anyways.
If this is something Rockstar can leverage, then why not? I mean if they want something done, and this isn't a lie, then why not take advantage of it?
Suppose you wanted something, lets say a pair of shoes. Now the question is, do you Steal them, buy them at a discount center or on sale somewhere, - buy cheap knockoffs shoes made by child slave labor in some foreign country that your sure you never heard of or at least cannot pronounce the name correctly if you have, or get gouged at retail prices? I'll tell your which option you will take, what ever option gets you a pair of shoes. I can come back and make fun of you for any of those options but the bottom line is that you got what you wanted. Rockstar is attempting to do the same.
So, how, exactly, did they lie to the ratings board about GTA Vice City? the Hot Coffee mod? it wouldn't have been a mod, if they were allowed the first amendment freedom to publish the game as it was written. When will you self-righteous pious hypocrites quit dictating your moral values to the rest of the world? I understand if they want to slap an adults-only label on the title... but what I do with MY video game console in MY home is really none of ANYONES business but my own. These same pious hypocrites will starve you, enslave you, and steal from you, all while they protect your morality.... PLEASE SOMEONE GIVE THESE FOLKS A CLUE!
I didn't say that i thought the rating was right, I didn't say whether or not censorship is right (as it is, I personally beleive as long as the user is forewarned about the content, anything should be publishable) I was merely saying, rockstar's behaviour within what is the current framework of ratings, not only seems to be a situation of pot calling the kettle black, but that it was doing this in a way to annoy the people who's approval they need. I mean, there's no reason rockstar should've made a comment to the press about this at all.
Oblivion was also re-rated by the ESRB as well, with the 'T'een rating changed to 'M'ature. The developer's response claimed that they already advised the ESRB on the violent content (although they disagree that red pixels and "inaccessible" content should bump a rating from 'T' to 'M'.)
All the BBFC ought to be doing is Classification.
As such everything should come under one of their classifications, even if that is R18.
They are not about censorship, that should fall down to one of two places. a. the content owner self censoring in order to gain a certain certification or, b. the government, for not allowing illegal things.
Other that that please certify things and leave it up to the consumer.
+----------------- | What is the question!
Just imagine the next one they release in a couple of years time (ha, i know). Hi def graphics with photo realistic body and face textures. Nintendo will have released their WiiAxe and WiiCleaver by then and you will be able to watch the blood spray from a victims jugular using the most realistic fluid modelling physics engine money can buy. It will be indistinguishable from real murder except no one really dies. or do they?
I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
Moving on, while I feel that most of Rockstar's titles are over-hyped "shock" titles they are certainly able to be classified. While I personally enjoyed the GTA series, I would not want it in the hands of my children (were I to have any I was responsible for) unless I knew they could handle it BUT that would be MY decision as the child's parent/caregiver to make and not the government's. The end of the government's involvement should be to make available the information for me to make an informed choice that aligns with my personal beliefs, not to tell me what those beliefs are in the first place. I realize this is England where their ideas of personal freedom and the US's don't always line up. I also realize that the US is turning into more a Nanny State as well, but the fact remains.
Back on the immediate point, I really don't like this particular title for a variety of reasons, but to claim that something is "unclassifiable" says they've stepped over the line from classification to censorship, and that SHOULD be brought to people's attention in a free society. They are "classifiers," not "censors." Do your job and classify it. It's Adult Only (or the English equivalent anyway) and call it a day.
The "Hot Coffee" mod was for GTA San Andreas, not Vice City.
"I think it would be a good idea!"
Gandhi, about Internet Security
Doh. oops... but still, how exactly did they lie? I would love to know how they should be punished for lying to these agencies. I would also like to know when the British decided that democracy in their country didn't include freedom of expression. I know their system is different than that of say, the US or even that of the other Commonwealth Countries, but still, I had though that freedom of expression was a basic tenant of democracy... and how is it that if I want to buy pornography in the UK, it is perfectly legal, but if its in a video game, its a problem?
Smooth, frankly, after rockstar got caught lying to the ratings boards with GTA:VC, they should at the very least be treated very harshly.
I'm sorry? What are you referring to? The only thing I'm aware of is the scandal around "Hot Coffee" for GTA:SA. And although the content was technically "on the disk", it wasn't accessible in any form without downloading and installing a mod. Functionally not any different than not including it at all.
PLUS who, after rockstar's recent history of incompetence, would start going round attacking the reputation of others? This smacks of the whole childish nature of the company.
"History of incompetence"? Meaning what - producing fun, interactive games that people like? Sorry, I'm not buying it.
Rockstar produces great games that are fun to play. If you call their stuff "porn" then you really need to get acquainted with Google's "SafeSearch" feature...
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
The PR machine - in overdrive as usual - touted how the game used the Wii controller to immerse the player in his role as the psycho killer.
The censors only had to stand by and watch as Rockstar dug its own grave.
The point is, no matter how you see them or their image, it doesn't matter as long as they didn't break a law. They set out to do something and are in the process of doing it. No matter what it takes. And it doesn't matter what you think, as long as they don't break a law.
buy cheap knockoffs shoes made by child slave labor in some foreign country that your sure you never heard of or at least cannot pronounce the name correctly if you have, or get gouged at retail prices?
The name brand is probably made by child slave labor in the same country, so what's your point? That we can all make "fun of you" for not realizing this?
The Farewell Tour II
Why do they give rockstar so much free publicity?
Your the second "what's your point" reply I have got. Evidently I didn't word my post clear enough.
The point is, that it doesn't really matter who has legitimacy, you are attempting to do something and as long as you don't break the law when getting it done, you have accomplished your objective. Similarly, Rockstar's blasting the ratings things is only an attempt to some end that they want to accomplish. Any objection to their methods to achieving a goal, unless something is illegal (or should be) is somewhat pointless because they are doing the same thing anyone else would do. They are attempting to achieve a goal and using the available avenues to do it.
And this was a response to PLUS who, after rockstar's recent history of incompetence, would start going round attacking the reputation of others? This smacks of the whole childish nature of the company. It could be anything anyone wants to call it but it is nothing more then working to achieve a goal that they set out to achieve. In the parent's case, childish seems to describe an attempt to persuade other people's opinion based from past experiences to get their way. Hardly something a child would be able to pull off. More likely something an ex-girlfriend or wife would do.
How the bloody fuck is this a troll? It's a valid statement, idiot mod.
If no one wanted their product, they wouldn't make it.
If you agree that the mod was a lie, it was a lie because the content was included in the game and Rockstar didn't say so to the ratings boards. On the other hand, the content wasn't easily available at all, so that's why they might have thought it wasn't necessary to warn of it.
The reason this doesn't fall under "Freedom of expression" is that the porn wasn't explicited. Porn movies and mags don't conceal their content from rating boards or censors. Indeed, with titles such as "romantic rectal reamings 4" there's not much to conceal, I guess. If a videogame was about porn, said so, and didn't hide that fact, it would be perfectly legal to sell it to adults. The problem then would be to find a publisher (I believe Nintendo and Sony refuse to allow AO titles on their consoles). Still, there are erotic videogames, mainly for the PC. Freedom of expression don't enter into this.
"I think it would be a good idea!"
Gandhi, about Internet Security
Take-Two has been in and out of financial trouble. Having products banned from release or pulled off the shelves is not the kind of publicity that keeps you in business.
Really? Which one?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife