Wii: Manhunt 2 - Withdrawn

RuMp3l4$k1n · 20 Jun 2007 at 17:47

unless they appeal and or change the game a lot I doubt the UK disks will ever be pressed.

~J~ · 20 Jun 2007 at 18:10

PiKe said:
You have to recognise there is a difference between being an onlooker (watching a film) and participating (by playing a game) though.

Interesting point. I agree.

However, what's different between watching a boxing game, playing a boxing game and beating the hell out of someone? Boxing games have been around for years, but AGAIN, the Wii has provided a more interactive experience.

Is a highschool fight between kids going to get attributed to something the 'kids' picked up from Wii Sports.

It's either a blanket ban or no ban in my eyes, no inbetween.

msmalls74 · 20 Jun 2007 at 23:02

From kotaku,
Yesterday when news broke that Manhunt 2 had received a preliminary rating of Adults Only from Take-Two, I shot a quick email off to Nintendo seeking comment on the issue.

Today they've confirmed that if the game's final rating is Adults Only it won't be showing up on the Wii... or any of Nintendo's systems.

Games made for Nintendo systems enjoy a broad variety of styles, genres and ratings. These are some of the reasons our Wii and Nintendo DS systems appeal to such a broad range of people. But as with books, television and movies, different content is meant for different audiences. That's why the ESRB provides ratings to help consumers understand the content of a game before they purchase it. As stated on Nintendo.com, Nintendo does not allow any AO-rated content on its systems.

I think that pretty much seals the deal with the Wii version of the game. There's no way Rockstar can ship a game for the Wii without Nintendo's consent.

So does that mean that the Wii version will be canned worldwide if it keeps its AO rating? I think this will force TakeTwo to alter the Wii version cant see them dropping it totally now. Will this mean that there will be no AO games on the Wii, i know theres not many AO games on any system but is this a bad thing for Wii owners?

XPE · 20 Jun 2007 at 23:05

Look like sony said the same thing LINK

msmalls74 · 20 Jun 2007 at 23:15

XPE said:
Look like sony said the same thing LINK

Read that just after i posted, oh well i wasnt having ago at the Wii or nintendo there. I just think some companies just try to promote a rather average game by using things like it being Adult only and the ultra violence to make people want to buy the game instead of wanting it cause its a good game. I hope manhunt 2 can now be altered so it will still get a release, but i still think Rockstar knew that it would get scrutinized because of all the uproar by the press about the first one, and it would get jumped on by the BBFC and ESRB etc.

nintenjo · 20 Jun 2007 at 23:27

Whats the difference between an Adult only rated game and say an 18 rated game?? I am pretty sure resident evil was an 18 game? but thats on the Wii / Gamecube.

Vonhelmet · 20 Jun 2007 at 23:53

nintenjo said:
Whats the difference between an Adult only rated game and say an 18 rated game?? I am pretty sure resident evil was an 18 game? but thats on the Wii / Gamecube.

We're getting our terminology mixed here. AO is a rating given by the ESRB, the US equivalent of PEGI, which puts the non-enforced ratings on games. 18 is, obviously, an enforceable rating given by the BBFC.

KNiVES · 21 Jun 2007 at 00:07

Rockstar obviously overstepped the line then. I am a very liberal person but if the game really is *that* bad... the first game was pushing it pretty close!

I think they tried to get as close to the line as they could, just for the publicity, then it backfired and bit them in the ass in the form of a ban.

XPE · 21 Jun 2007 at 00:29

msmalls74 said:
Read that just after i posted, oh well i wasnt having ago at the Wii or nintendo.

I know, i just though people might want to know that sony said the same thing and this would also help people to see what is happening with the game.

Gimpymoo · 21 Jun 2007 at 03:13

RuMp3l4$k1n said:
unless they appeal and or change the game a lot I doubt the UK disks will ever be pressed.

THIS IS HOW I SEE THE CURRENT SITUATION:

Most European releases are multi-langugage, so one size "Fits all" as far as europe is concerned so we buy the same discs as say Sweden, just with different packaging.

Assuming the game doesnt get banned in Sweden for example, I say there is a chance the game will get released in its current form as Take2/Rockstar have invested a lot of money in the project so far I imagine.

The region locking on the Wii is Region specific, not Country specific therefore if you were to import from a Swedish online store, the aforementioned game should run fine and as it is multilanguage, also have English menus etc.

If it was not planned to be a multi language european release, but country specific, I imagine this might be changed as Take2 will be aware of this and will do so to increase imported sales to the countrys where the game is banned.

Once the game has been released in the countrys where it is not banned and some revenue has been made, I would think they would reinvest some of those funds into editing the game/script so it can be re-certified in the countrys where it was originally banned.

REGARDING ALL THE TALK OF NINTENDO BANNING THE GAME

Nintendo Of America have said they will not license the game has it has currently been given an AO (ADULTS ONLY) rating. The AO is a big thing in america and is not something we have an equivelent to over in the UK. We have the R18 rating, but this essentially is only used for Hardcore Pornography involving urinating and the likes and has never been used for a feature film or video game.

Nintendo Of Europe will license 18 rated games, Scarface as an example. So therefore if another Country gives it an "18" Equivelant rating, I see no reason why they will not license that product in that country. Would NOE ban Scarface from the UK if Germany decided to ban it, probably not.

The easier route is that Take2 appeal against the given ratings and win..... but that seems very unlikely at the moment.

Also, Nintendo trumpeted the Parental control features of the console which would allow parents to enter a passcode which be required to play a game above a set age. Would this not be a good time to use this feature and promote it so parents know it is there?

Parents have been ignorant about computer games for too long, its time they were made accountable for themselves.

The BBFC should promote this MORE instead of banning content which is intended for adult entertainment.

pitchfork · 21 Jun 2007 at 10:35

n3crius said:
Surely there has to be a limit on content? Where do you draw the line?

I don't draw the line, limitations don't aid progress.

Pug · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:14

Gimpymoo said:
The BBFC should promote this MORE instead of banning content which is intended for adult entertainment.

i'm an adult, and i dont think sawing at some polygons genitals is entertainment :confused:

besides the BBFC havent banned it.

The game didnt meet the BBFC guidelines as to what is acceptable for release. These guidelines have been around as long (longer) than i have. Therefore the BBFC havent stopped rockstar, rockstar have stopped themselves by not meeting theseguidelines.

Incidentally, the guidelines set out by the BBFC are being relaxed year on year, so i think its fair to say that censorship is getting less and less as well, as opposed to being increased as ssome people here seem to think.

If you're angry, blame Rockstar for not meeting guidelines.

Weebull · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:31

With regards to ratings in general, and the whole "what if little Timmy gets this game?" theory, I can't help but feel that the world as a whole needs to wise up to video games, and realise that it's not just a kid's pasttime any more. The majority of gamers these days are 18-30 or so, and people need to realise that some games out there are meant just for adults. Retailers need to stop being so lax with their attitude to selling to minors. Parents should be aware of what they're buying, and that the rating on a game means something.

As EvilGrin said, the system just isn't policed well enough.

~J~ said:
However, what's different between watching a boxing game, playing a boxing game and beating the hell out of someone? Boxing games have been around for years, but AGAIN, the Wii has provided a more interactive experience.

But by the same token, why don't actual boxers go around punching the crap out of everybody? I mean, they're not just doing it in a game, they're doing it for real.

The concept that commiting an act in a game makes me want to do so in real life is a ridiculous one. To use the old cliche, I don't think I could ever bring myself to kill anyone in real life, but god knows how many virtual people I've mown through in my lifetime. The Wii's control system makes no bloody difference in that regard.

KNiVES · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:33

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6225286.stm

You seriously want something like THAT in the video games industry? No thanks, I see it as a backwards step. Manhunt isn't a game with substance and depth. You want a decent game with similair stuff and depth, see Fahrenheit or Silent Hill or something.

Weebull · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:39

KNiVES said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6225286.stm

You seriously want something like THAT in the video games industry? No thanks, I see it as a backwards step. Manhunt isn't a game with substance and depth.

Oh come on. You're a gamer for god's sake. I'd hoped that people who play games would be the exact kind of people who wouldn't jump to vague conclusions based on a single screenshot, because it's stupidity like that from non-gamers that winds us up so.

Who's to even say you're the player in that screenshot? Remember Bully? OH MY GODS ITS A BULLYING SIMULATOR everyone screamed. Only it wasn't, at all.

I never particularly saw the appeal of Manhunt, and had no desire to play it, but I would never condone banning a game just because I didn't like the concept of it. That's exactly the opposite of how creative freedom works.

RuMp3l4$k1n · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:39

I dont want anything restricted from my gaming thankyou, regardly of if I myself want to partake in it or not.

Inciedently whats happening with the PC version? after all there they have had postal 1/2, soldier of fortune and a game about accurately blowing jfk's head apart. Am I to believe kids dont play pc's and only consoles?

KNiVES · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:40

You haven't played the first game then I take it.

Weebull · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:41

Weebull said:
I never particularly saw the appeal of Manhunt, and had no desire to play it, but I would never condone banning a game just because I didn't like the concept of it. That's exactly the opposite of how creative freedom works.

I'll just quote myself shall I.

Also, bonus copy-paste from Error Macro:

Now let's ignore the debate on whether Manhunt 2 should get to play the "artistic merit" card on this, because I don't care. The bigger issue is that any game should be put into such a position, where the developer is forced to change their content or be left with no avenue to release their work. I know, Rockstar should be and no doubt was aware of Sony and Nintendo's policies on AO ratings. But they can't know what rating they're going to get before they even begin.

But big deal. So they shorten some scenes or remove a few animations and get it re-rated. Why make a thing out of it. The problem is that we don't have an answer to the larger question, which is what happens when (not if) the games industry's Requiem for a Dream comes along. Requiem was given an NC-17 by the MPAA, but director Darren Aronofsky refused to edit the film, arguing that the intensity and offensive nature of the scenes in question were central to the message of the entire movie. (Having seen the movie, I agree with him.) Showing fortitude rarely witnessed in movie studios, Artisan Entertainment agreed to release the movie unrated. This obviously posed a challenge to distribution, but they did have the art house circuit and later home video to support them. Video stores especially are more forgiving about unrated movies, with the exception of some family-oriented outlets like Blockbuster.

http://www.errormacro.com/2007/06/the_adults_only_rating_is_godd.php

Mobius 1 · 21 Jun 2007 at 11:58

PiKe said:
Maybe hitting someone damages your car now, and you'll just end up chugging to a halt.

i think the death will be bit more serious rather than comical. like screams of pain and bones breaking, people crying etc.

but back on topic. if people wanna saw some polygonal head off with the wiimote then by all means let them i say. it doesn't mean they will go and do it in real life. if it happened, fine, take it off the shelves, but it hasnt even been given the chance. not that its my sort of game.

~J~ · 21 Jun 2007 at 12:18

Weebull said:
But by the same token, why don't actual boxers go around punching the crap out of everybody? I mean, they're not just doing it in a game, they're doing it for real.

I honestly can't tell if you're defending my argument or not!

To clarify, I'm saying the ban is a bad thing because Wii:Sports has a boxing game in it, a sport which is 'classed' as dangeous/lethal.

Anyway...

What about Resident Evil and the Chain Saw attachment! That was allowed. A chainsaw attachment with splashes of blood, noise effects, vibrating, was MADE to LOOK and FEEL and SOUND like a real chain saw.

I said this on another forum: What about flight sims? Will we see a ban of those shortly in case some lunatic practices a flight on a 737 into a famous landmark. The details of these sims of late are astonishing. People will be able to time a flight from abudakashan to the houses of parliment, calculating time, distance, fuel, etc, etc.

What about Trauma Centre? Why hasn't that been banned then? Surely the 'baffoons' that think computers games are like real life (or a influenced) will be attempting their friends heart by pass after "getting a feel for it" on the game.

There's countless games that even offer you a bonus for a head shot! I mean come on, it's one thing playing Call of Battlefield 3 that reinacts famous battles of the last wars. But a bonus, an achievement, and pat on the back for allowing a bullet to penetrate the skull of johnny foreigner and turning his grimace into tomatoe juice is surely the same thing.

Us gamers can't win, or at least the more adult ones. We complain that we're bored of pretty pink princesses bouncing around with freddie the frog, get bored with ickle baby dinosaur trying to get home to mummykins and avoiding nasty wasty mr toad that goes "gwibbet" (he's got a lisp from the wicked witch). And when we get something a bit more meaty, something that has a tongue in cheek adult theme to it, it's taken away!

We're in a game that we can't win!