Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Manhunt 2 NOT to be released in the UK

145791022

Posts

  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2007
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »


    Frankly, there's a hell of a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people; and given my experiences with the majority of people, I'm not sure I'd trust them to know their own minds at all.



    Yet you trust an organization made up of the same people to make the choice for you?

    I have more inclination to think an independent organisation that have made a detailed study of the entire problem know what they're are talking about than knee-jerk reactions on a messageboard do.

    This does not mean I agree with the ban, merely that I'm inclined to stop and think about the whole thing rather than rushing in head-first.

    Is there a chance the committee was pressured by a politician or political interests? How is corruption in British politics these days?


    Theres currently an ongoing investigation into people being given honours in exchange for cash donations.

    Oh and theres an MP campaigning against violent video games for teh parents of the aformentioned murder victim killed by his friend who didn't own Manhunt and yet was told to kill for drugs by it.

    ...it's in the shape of a giant c**k.
  • XagarathXagarath Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »


    Frankly, there's a hell of a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people; and given my experiences with the majority of people, I'm not sure I'd trust them to know their own minds at all.



    Yet you trust an organization made up of the same people to make the choice for you?

    I have more inclination to think an independent organisation that have made a detailed study of the entire problem know what they're are talking about than knee-jerk reactions on a messageboard do.

    This does not mean I agree with the ban, merely that I'm inclined to stop and think about the whole thing rather than rushing in head-first.

    Most studies on the influences of media are either done on children or just suck due to counting rough play as violence. Got a link to the study?
    http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/pressnews.php
    Click on the link for April 17th.
    Where does that say it corrupts adults?
    Where did I say that it said that?
    Read my posts.
    a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people
    That's from another line of discussion, not the one you replied to.

    Really, try reading things properly.

  • DroolDrool Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Except that the plot and pupose in Clockwork Orange do not revolve around rape and murder for its own sake, whereas anyone with half a brain can tell that is the main purpose of Manhunt 2, whatever plto they dress it up in.
    Cardboard Tube, you don't have half a brain.

    What proof do you have that Manhunt 2 is about murder for its own sake?
    The entire content of the gameplay, is, according to all sceenshots, reviews etc, availible, killing people. Granted, this means that Serious Sam is also about murder for its own sake. Which it is.

    The so is every shooter ever made. The whole point in HL2 is get from point A to point B by waxing as many dudes as you can. Just because they are in masks doesn't make them not people. I think a game that shows the horrible things people can do to each other in a no holds barred way could be saying something important in its own right.

    The original Manhunt was meant to make you uncomfortable. Just like all the good slasher movies. Sure some people just get off on it, but thats the price you pay for making people think.

  • PendegastPendegast Registered User
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    The entire content of the gameplay, is, according to all sceenshots, reviews etc, availible, killing people. Granted, this means that Serious Sam is also about murder for its own sake. Which it is.

    You don't really know what "for its own sake" means, do you?

  • Duchess ProzacDuchess Prozac Registered User
    edited June 2007
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »


    Frankly, there's a hell of a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people; and given my experiences with the majority of people, I'm not sure I'd trust them to know their own minds at all.



    Yet you trust an organization made up of the same people to make the choice for you?

    I have more inclination to think an independent organisation that have made a detailed study of the entire problem know what they're are talking about than knee-jerk reactions on a messageboard do.

    This does not mean I agree with the ban, merely that I'm inclined to stop and think about the whole thing rather than rushing in head-first.

    Is there a chance the committee was pressured by a politician or political interests? How is corruption in British politics these days?

    Well there is this one prick MP called Keith Vaz who has been trying to get Manhunt banned for th past couple of years and he appears to be ecstatic that the BBFC have made this decision. Then there are the parents of that kid murdered by his friend who even after all the evidence proving otherwise, have been petioning for violent games to be banned.

    And that's eally about it that I can think of off the top of my head.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »


    Frankly, there's a hell of a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people; and given my experiences with the majority of people, I'm not sure I'd trust them to know their own minds at all.



    Yet you trust an organization made up of the same people to make the choice for you?

    I have more inclination to think an independent organisation that have made a detailed study of the entire problem know what they're are talking about than knee-jerk reactions on a messageboard do.

    This does not mean I agree with the ban, merely that I'm inclined to stop and think about the whole thing rather than rushing in head-first.

    Most studies on the influences of media are either done on children or just suck due to counting rough play as violence. Got a link to the study?
    http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/pressnews.php
    Click on the link for April 17th.
    Where does that say it corrupts adults?
    Where did I say that it said that?
    Read my posts.
    a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people
    That's from another line of discussion, not the one you replied to.

    Really, try reading things properly.
    made a detailed study of the entire problem
    You claimed they made a detailed study of the problem. I asked you for the study. That isn't a study of the problem of the effects of violence on adults.

  • XagarathXagarath Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Drool wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Except that the plot and pupose in Clockwork Orange do not revolve around rape and murder for its own sake, whereas anyone with half a brain can tell that is the main purpose of Manhunt 2, whatever plto they dress it up in.
    Cardboard Tube, you don't have half a brain.

    What proof do you have that Manhunt 2 is about murder for its own sake?
    The entire content of the gameplay, is, according to all sceenshots, reviews etc, availible, killing people. Granted, this means that Serious Sam is also about murder for its own sake. Which it is.

    The so is every shooter ever made. The whole point in HL2 is get from point A to point B by waxing as many dudes as you can. Just because they are in masks doesn't make them not people. I think a game that shows the horrible things people can do to each other in a no holds barred way could be saying something important in its own right.
    My point being that the majority of violent video games are gratuitous.

    I'm not condemning them for that, but that's the fact of it.
    The original Manhunt was meant to make you uncomfortable. Just like all the good slasher movies. Sure some people just get off on it, but thats the price you pay for making people think.
    The point of the original Manhunt was that you were forced into the killings by external individuals, which is considerably less the case in the sequal according to everyone who's actually played the thing, namely the BBFC and the one UK magazine who managed to review it.

  • XagarathXagarath Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »


    Frankly, there's a hell of a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people; and given my experiences with the majority of people, I'm not sure I'd trust them to know their own minds at all.



    Yet you trust an organization made up of the same people to make the choice for you?

    I have more inclination to think an independent organisation that have made a detailed study of the entire problem know what they're are talking about than knee-jerk reactions on a messageboard do.

    This does not mean I agree with the ban, merely that I'm inclined to stop and think about the whole thing rather than rushing in head-first.

    Most studies on the influences of media are either done on children or just suck due to counting rough play as violence. Got a link to the study?
    http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/pressnews.php
    Click on the link for April 17th.
    Where does that say it corrupts adults?
    Where did I say that it said that?
    Read my posts.
    a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people
    That's from another line of discussion, not the one you replied to.

    Really, try reading things properly.
    made a detailed study of the entire problem
    You claimed they made a detailed study of the problem. I asked you for the study. That isn't a study of the problem of the effects of violence on adults.
    It's a study of the effect of violent video games on adults, which is what I claimed they made.

    For the love of Heaven, learn to read.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Drool wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Except that the plot and pupose in Clockwork Orange do not revolve around rape and murder for its own sake, whereas anyone with half a brain can tell that is the main purpose of Manhunt 2, whatever plto they dress it up in.
    Cardboard Tube, you don't have half a brain.

    What proof do you have that Manhunt 2 is about murder for its own sake?
    The entire content of the gameplay, is, according to all sceenshots, reviews etc, availible, killing people. Granted, this means that Serious Sam is also about murder for its own sake. Which it is.

    The so is every shooter ever made. The whole point in HL2 is get from point A to point B by waxing as many dudes as you can. Just because they are in masks doesn't make them not people. I think a game that shows the horrible things people can do to each other in a no holds barred way could be saying something important in its own right.
    My point being that the majority of violent video games are gratuitous.

    I'm not condemning them for that, but that's the fact of it.
    The original Manhunt was meant to make you uncomfortable. Just like all the good slasher movies. Sure some people just get off on it, but thats the price you pay for making people think.
    The point of the original Manhunt was that you were forced into the killings by external individuals, which is considerably less the case in the sequal according to everyone who's actually played the thing, namely the BBFC and the one UK magazine who managed to review it.

    You are forced into killing individuals. For the character, it is a life or death situation because if he doesn't kill his pursuers, he will be killed. That seems pretty forced to by most definitions.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    Your mistrust is irrelevant because I deem it irrelevant. I don't really care how god-awful and untrustworthy and puerile and irresponsible human beings are. I don't care if they have the least sense of any living creature to ever evolve from primordial soup. I find your mistrust obnoxious especially if you think it somehow excuses censorship. You are free to consider my "righteous indignation" irrelevant, too.
    But if something that subjective is the best argument you can put forward, you're failing to prove your point in any way, shape or form.

    The concept of subjectivity is exactly why my argument is, in my opinion, perfect. You argue that people are untrustworthy. That's a subjective statement on your part, and on the part of others. It is also implied in the BBFC decision about the game. That subjective opinion is then being assumed as objectively true for all humans, and then game is being made unavailable for everyone. If you have an objective, scientific analysis of why Manhunt 2 (or something like it) is harmful to humans, then you'll have a case for censoring it. When your case is subjective and opinionated and, I should add, completely cynical, then you have no case nor right to censor anything or advocate for its censorship.

    The BBFC is not qualified to objectively judge how self-responsible adults are.
    Xagarath wrote: »
    And did you miss what I said about playing devil's advocate? I don't have an opinion on this issue yet, because I don't feel there's enough to base one on.

    Okay, but I'm not. It's all fine and good that you are debating this on a lark, but this is a very serious matter to me and obviously to others. You can't just wave your hand in my face and say "hey, don't take my opinion so seriously because I'm not so serious." Maybe you shouldn't be in the thread if that's all you're going to do. Stick to your convictions, whether they are fabricated for the sake of debate or not.
    Xagarath wrote: »
    And, again, you are talking about law and case history, which is irrelevant. Obscenity law is not equivalent to research indicating that "obscene" things cause harm to individuals. That requires scientific research. Of which there is scant. Can I claim any such knowledge? I can claim knowledge of the fact that there is little relevant or conclusive research in this field, yep. Case history is irrelevant.
    Except that the cases in question reference what research there was.

    Okay, so show me the research. Since just about everyone in the gaming world has been waiting for some actual valid, scientific, credible proof supporting either side and approaching anything resembling finality in the subject, I know damn well it wouldn't have slipped under my radar. But I'd love to see any links you can produce.

    As titmouse said, though, most of the recent (and insufficient, insubsantiating) studies have been done on children alone. Since this ban affects adults - and that is the main problem here - I very much doubt there's any significant research done on the matter, and that the BBFC's decision is wholly subjective and wholly meritless.

    steam_sig.png
  • Breyker4711Breyker4711 Registered User
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »


    Frankly, there's a hell of a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people; and given my experiences with the majority of people, I'm not sure I'd trust them to know their own minds at all.



    Yet you trust an organization made up of the same people to make the choice for you?

    I have more inclination to think an independent organisation that have made a detailed study of the entire problem know what they're are talking about than knee-jerk reactions on a messageboard do.

    This does not mean I agree with the ban, merely that I'm inclined to stop and think about the whole thing rather than rushing in head-first.

    Why, trust said organization? Since its typically not in existence to be fair and even minded, as much as it is to sedate an overly reactive public.

    What grounds are there for a ban, should be the actual question. Even it if happen to be a murder simulator, why can't adults make a choice to own it or not? The key word in murder simulator is of course simulator...as in not real

    I don't have to take this abuse from you, I have hundreds of people dying to abuse me
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »


    Frankly, there's a hell of a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people; and given my experiences with the majority of people, I'm not sure I'd trust them to know their own minds at all.



    Yet you trust an organization made up of the same people to make the choice for you?

    I have more inclination to think an independent organisation that have made a detailed study of the entire problem know what they're are talking about than knee-jerk reactions on a messageboard do.

    This does not mean I agree with the ban, merely that I'm inclined to stop and think about the whole thing rather than rushing in head-first.

    Most studies on the influences of media are either done on children or just suck due to counting rough play as violence. Got a link to the study?
    http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/pressnews.php
    Click on the link for April 17th.
    Where does that say it corrupts adults?
    Where did I say that it said that?
    Read my posts.
    a lot of evidence in favour of the fact that some kinds of media do corrupt and harm people
    That's from another line of discussion, not the one you replied to.

    Really, try reading things properly.
    made a detailed study of the entire problem
    You claimed they made a detailed study of the problem. I asked you for the study. That isn't a study of the problem of the effects of violence on adults.
    It's a study of the effect of violent video games on adults, which is what I claimed they made.

    For the love of Heaven, learn to read.
    The most it says about it is this:
    violence in games, in the sense of eliminating obstacles, is built into the structure of some games and is necessary to progress through the game. It contributes to the tension because gamers are not just shooting, they are vulnerable to being shot and most gamers are concentrating on their own survival rather than the damage they are inflicting on the characters in the game. While there is an appeal in being able to be violent without being vulnerable to the consequences which similar actions in real life would create, gamers are aware that they are playing a game and that it is not real life;
    That doesn't say how it affects them. It says shit about the influence on their minds or behaviour.

  • TubeTube Administrator, ClubPA, SolidSaints Tube admin
    edited June 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    Except that the plot and pupose in Clockwork Orange do not revolve around rape and murder for its own sake, whereas anyone with half a brain can tell that is the main purpose of Manhunt 2, whatever plto they dress it up in.
    Cardboard Tube, you don't have half a brain.

    ?

    If you'd like an anime thread, please PM me to discuss it. Include pics/video of your favorites.
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    You claimed they made a detailed study of the problem. I asked you for the study. That isn't a study of the problem of the effects of violence on adults.

    You should have clarified which study you were talking about, he did mention seperate things. If you really want to have a gander at some research on the effects of violent media see http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/pspi43.pdf
    http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/dev392201.pdf
    http://www.lionlamb.org/mediaviolencefactsheet.pdf

    Might take you a while to read them though.

  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2007
    Isn't MAnhunt pretty close to the Running Man too? Which granted, was made a while ago but still. Plus you know.., Saw and Hostel.

    ...it's in the shape of a giant c**k.
  • DroolDrool Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Drool wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Except that the plot and pupose in Clockwork Orange do not revolve around rape and murder for its own sake, whereas anyone with half a brain can tell that is the main purpose of Manhunt 2, whatever plto they dress it up in.
    Cardboard Tube, you don't have half a brain.

    What proof do you have that Manhunt 2 is about murder for its own sake?
    The entire content of the gameplay, is, according to all sceenshots, reviews etc, availible, killing people. Granted, this means that Serious Sam is also about murder for its own sake. Which it is.

    The so is every shooter ever made. The whole point in HL2 is get from point A to point B by waxing as many dudes as you can. Just because they are in masks doesn't make them not people. I think a game that shows the horrible things people can do to each other in a no holds barred way could be saying something important in its own right.
    My point being that the majority of violent video games are gratuitous.

    I'm not condemning them for that, but that's the fact of it.
    The original Manhunt was meant to make you uncomfortable. Just like all the good slasher movies. Sure some people just get off on it, but thats the price you pay for making people think.
    The point of the original Manhunt was that you were forced into the killings by external individuals, which is considerably less the case in the sequal according to everyone who's actually played the thing, namely the BBFC and the one UK magazine who managed to review it.

    Ok but how is the main character's psychosis/being hunted by mad scientists any less interesting or valid a reason to kill people then a snuff film director?

  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Isn't MAnhunt pretty close to the Running Man too? Which granted, was made a while ago but still. Plus you know.., Saw and Hostel.

    Given that they passed Saw, Hostel and Manhunt uncut. Can we conclude from this that there probably is something different about it's sequel?

  • DroolDrool Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Isn't MAnhunt pretty close to the Running Man too? Which granted, was made a while ago but still. Plus you know.., Saw and Hostel.

    Given that they passed Saw, Hostel and Manhunt uncut. Can we conclude from this that there probably is something different about it's sequel?

    Something about it twisted their nipples the wrong way.

  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Isn't MAnhunt pretty close to the Running Man too? Which granted, was made a while ago but still. Plus you know.., Saw and Hostel.

    Given that they passed Saw, Hostel and Manhunt uncut. Can we conclude from this that there probably is something different about it's sequel?

    I don't see what could cause an entire game to be banned that isn't comparable to open brain surgery and twisting body parts with blowtorched eyeballs.

    Unless the game devolves into a defecating mini-game. Which considering its Wii status would not be surprising.

    ...it's in the shape of a giant c**k.
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Drool wrote: »
    Rook wrote: »
    Isn't MAnhunt pretty close to the Running Man too? Which granted, was made a while ago but still. Plus you know.., Saw and Hostel.

    Given that they passed Saw, Hostel and Manhunt uncut. Can we conclude from this that there probably is something different about it's sequel?

    twisted nipples

    Ah, I see. I retract all my statements then.

    There is nothing, and I mean NOTHING, more violent or damaging than a game that features high-res purple nurples.

    steam_sig.png
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Isn't MAnhunt pretty close to the Running Man too? Which granted, was made a while ago but still. Plus you know.., Saw and Hostel.

    Given that they passed Saw, Hostel and Manhunt uncut. Can we conclude from this that there probably is something different about it's sequel?

    I don't see what could cause an entire game to be banned that isn't comparable to open brain surgery and twisting body parts with blowtorched eyeballs.

    Unless the game devolves into a defecating mini-game. Which considering its Wii status would not be surprising.

    Yeah, but it's not the actual violence that they're usually concerned about. It's how it's portrayed. E.g. if you did those things, and then made the rest of the film about how awesome you are because you did those things, then it might be cut. Whereas if you did those things and showed how absolutely horrific those things are, you'll be ok.

  • Shakey1245Shakey1245 Registered User
    edited June 2007
    It's just stuck me that the although the BBFC has drawn issue with the content of this game, Nintendo has not. Now correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't or at least didn't Nintendo have quite a rep for censoring games or refusing to release games outright because of it's content i.e No Blood in Mortal Kombat and replacing the Hookers in Final Fight with men.

    Guess ninty is in it for the benjamins these days. ;-)

  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Shakey1245 wrote: »
    It's just stuck me that the although the BBFC has drawn issue with the content of this game, Nintendo has not. Now correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't or at least didn't Nintendo have quite a rep for censoring games or refusing to release games outright because of it's content i.e No Blood in Mortal Kombat and replacing the Hookers in Final Fight with men.

    Guess ninty is in it for the benjamins these days. ;-)

    Do they still do the Nintendo Seal of Quality?

  • Shakey1245Shakey1245 Registered User
    edited June 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Shakey1245 wrote: »
    It's just stuck me that the although the BBFC has drawn issue with the content of this game, Nintendo has not. Now correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't or at least didn't Nintendo have quite a rep for censoring games or refusing to release games outright because of it's content i.e No Blood in Mortal Kombat and replacing the Hookers in Final Fight with men.

    Guess ninty is in it for the benjamins these days. ;-)

    Do they still do the Nintendo Seal of Quality?

    Just checked the US cover for Manhunt 2 on the Wii. Sadly not.

  • Speed RacerSpeed Racer PUNISHED SNAKE PASSING ON THE ENDLESS SPIRAL OF REVENGENACE TO THE NEXT GENERATIONRegistered User regular
    edited June 2007
    From my understanding, Nintendo requested that they release a Wii version of the game.

  • FireflashFireflash Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Not entirely sure games can really be compared the same way movies are. Take an extreme example: The movie Irréversible. The movie features a 20 minute long, and rather brutal rape scene. Obviously this was a shocking movie, and not for everybody. Still considered a great movie tho.

    But take that to a videogame. Wouldn't it be going too far for a game to feature an extended gameplay segement ( something like 10+ minutes long ) where you brutally rape an helpless woman in a dark alley?

    PSN / XBL: PatParadize
  • TubeTube Administrator, ClubPA, SolidSaints Tube admin
    edited June 2007
    You know what's cool? As far as I can tell, the wii controls aren't used for murder simulating or whatever, they're used in a way that is AWESOME.

    If a baddy is close to you and you're in the shadows, you need to keep the controls perfectly still or the shaking will help the guard find you.

    If you'd like an anime thread, please PM me to discuss it. Include pics/video of your favorites.
  • Shakey1245Shakey1245 Registered User
    edited June 2007
    From my understanding, Nintendo requested that they release a Wii version of the game.

    I wonder if they got Mario in there as a secret character.

    "Take-a dis Base-a-ball bat upsida your head bowser. Wah-hoo"

  • TubeTube Administrator, ClubPA, SolidSaints Tube admin
    edited June 2007
    Fireflash wrote: »
    Not entirely sure games can really be compared the same way movies are. Take an extreme example: The movie Irréversible. The movie features a 20 minute long, and rather brutal rape scene. Obviously this was a shocking movie, and not for everybody. Still considered a great movie tho.

    But take that to a videogame. Wouldn't it be going too far for a game to feature an extended gameplay segement ( something like 10+ minutes long ) where you brutally rape an helpless woman in a dark alley?

    Sounds like a button bashing minigame to me.

    If you'd like an anime thread, please PM me to discuss it. Include pics/video of your favorites.
  • Duchess ProzacDuchess Prozac Registered User
    edited June 2007
    You know what's cool? As far as I can tell, the wii controls aren't used for murder simulating or whatever, they're used in a way that is AWESOME.

    If a baddy is close to you and you're in the shadows, you need to keep the controls perfectly still or the shaking will help the guard find you.

    Goddammit, you're not making the loss of this game any easier.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Something I just noticed, from the BBFC decision:
    “Although the difference should not be exaggerated the fact of the game’s unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying and the sheer lack of alternative pleasures on offer to the gamer, together with the different overall narrative context, contribute towards differentiating this submission from the original Manhunt game. That work was classified ‘18’ in 2003, before the BBFC’s recent games research had been undertaken, but was already at the very top end of what the Board judged to be acceptable at that category.”

    Apparently the original Manhunt was already at the limit of their sensibilities. Given the context of Manhunt, which is what we've been discussing, I think the content is justified. I don't think that should ever have been at the upper threshold of what they would allow, and I think they are using their impressions of Manhunt to excuse their decision on Manhunt 2. I would say that their assessment of the first game, regardless of the fact that they allowed its release, was off-base and may have colored their off-base assessment of this new title.

    Fireflash wrote: »
    Not entirely sure games can really be compared the same way movies are. Take an extreme example: The movie Irréversible. The movie features a 20 minute long, and rather brutal rape scene. Obviously this was a shocking movie, and not for everybody. Still considered a great movie tho.

    But take that to a videogame. Wouldn't it be going too far for a game to feature an extended gameplay segement ( something like 10+ minutes long ) where you brutally rape an helpless woman in a dark alley?

    You've just descibed half of the PC games that come out in Japan.

    steam_sig.png
  • Breyker4711Breyker4711 Registered User
    edited June 2007
    Fireflash wrote: »
    Not entirely sure games can really be compared the same way movies are. Take an extreme example: The movie Irréversible. The movie features a 20 minute long, and rather brutal rape scene. Obviously this was a shocking movie, and not for everybody. Still considered a great movie tho.

    But take that to a videogame. Wouldn't it be going too far for a game to feature an extended gameplay segement ( something like 10+ minutes long ) where you brutally rape an helpless woman in a dark alley?

    Sounds like a button bashing minigame to me.

    But either way you are engaged in the experience of a rapist....depending on the person it should have a similar after effect.

    I don't have to take this abuse from you, I have hundreds of people dying to abuse me
  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Considering 4 separate ratings boards have flat out rejected the classification of this game (ie banned) can we not agree that comparing the original manhunt is irresponsible. This sequel clearly has some new feature, gameplay mechanic or thematic device which tips it over the edge. And seeing as noone here has played it yet can we not also agree it is perhaps a little wrong to defend it so vehemently.

    And if you arent defending the game but merely 'free speech' or acting against censorship, you are like a century too late to get the ball rolling now.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Fireflash wrote: »
    Not entirely sure games can really be compared the same way movies are. Take an extreme example: The movie Irréversible. The movie features a 20 minute long, and rather brutal rape scene. Obviously this was a shocking movie, and not for everybody. Still considered a great movie tho.

    But take that to a videogame. Wouldn't it be going too far for a game to feature an extended gameplay segement ( something like 10+ minutes long ) where you brutally rape an helpless woman in a dark alley?

    Sounds like a button bashing minigame to me.

    But either way you are engaged in the experience of a rapist....depending on the person it should have a similar after effect.

    Honestly, I'm not kidding. So many Japanese "hentai" games - of which there are many in the Japanese market - centers around rape or "involuntary" sex with women you randomly meet. One of the most famous is Cobra Mission from way, way back when in the 90s. Granted, a lot of these are "storyboard" games, but a lot of them aren't. Ever heard of Battle Raper?

    Hell, just read Something Awful's hentai games review stuff.

    Anyway, my point is: Japan doesn't have a serial rapist problem, as far as I know.

    steam_sig.png
  • Breyker4711Breyker4711 Registered User
    edited June 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Considering 4 separate ratings boards have flat out rejected the classification of this game (ie banned) can we not agree that comparing the original manhunt is irresponsible. This sequel clearly has some new feature, gameplay mechanic or thematic device which tips it over the edge. And seeing as noone here has played it yet can we not also agree it is perhaps a little wrong to defend it so vehemently.

    And if you arent defending the game but merely 'free speech' or acting against censorship, you are like a century too late to get the ball rolling now.

    Well unless one of the special features is a knife and a map of the interior of local houses, with a reward for bringing back the blood of virgins....I can't see a reason to ban it.

    I don't have to take this abuse from you, I have hundreds of people dying to abuse me
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Considering 4 separate ratings boards have flat out rejected the classification of this game (ie banned) can we not agree that comparing the original manhunt is irresponsible. This sequel clearly has some new feature, gameplay mechanic or thematic device which tips it over the edge. And seeing as noone here has played it yet can we not also agree it is perhaps a little wrong to defend it so vehemently.

    I don't mean to be a dick, but did you mean to use a word other than "irresponsible" there? I'm honestly not sure what that sentence is supposed to mean.

  • PendegastPendegast Registered User
    edited June 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    And if you arent defending the game but merely 'free speech' or acting against censorship, you are like a century too late to get the ball rolling now.

    Why?

  • TubeTube Administrator, ClubPA, SolidSaints Tube admin
    edited June 2007
    Manhunt is off the top of my head maybe one of the most thematically interesting games I've ever played and the prospect of the sequel being denied me because I might be upset by unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone pisses me off.

    If you'd like an anime thread, please PM me to discuss it. Include pics/video of your favorites.
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    Fireflash wrote: »
    Not entirely sure games can really be compared the same way movies are. Take an extreme example: The movie Irréversible. The movie features a 20 minute long, and rather brutal rape scene. Obviously this was a shocking movie, and not for everybody. Still considered a great movie tho.

    But take that to a videogame. Wouldn't it be going too far for a game to feature an extended gameplay segement ( something like 10+ minutes long ) where you brutally rape an helpless woman in a dark alley?

    Sounds like a button bashing minigame to me.

    But either way you are engaged in the experience of a rapist....depending on the person it should have a similar after effect.

    Honestly, I'm not kidding. So many Japanese "hentai" games - of which there are many in the Japanese market - centers around rape or "involuntary" sex with women you randomly meet. One of the most famous is Cobra Mission from way, way back when in the 90s. Granted, a lot of these are "storyboard" games, but a lot of them aren't. Ever heard of Battle Raper?

    Hell, just read Something Awful's hentai games review stuff.

    Anyway, my point is: Japan doesn't have a serial rapist problem, as far as I know.

    Dude, even the nice hentai has rape in it. "James, I want you to take my virginity, oh wait why are you being so rough? It hurts James. CRY. CRY. Oh wait, I'm feeling such pleasure now, youre the best ever. Woohoo lets go get my sisters."

    ...it's in the shape of a giant c**k.
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Considering 4 separate ratings boards have flat out rejected the classification of this game (ie banned) can we not agree that comparing the original manhunt is irresponsible. This sequel clearly has some new feature, gameplay mechanic or thematic device which tips it over the edge. And seeing as noone here has played it yet can we not also agree it is perhaps a little wrong to defend it so vehemently.

    And if you arent defending the game but merely 'free speech' or acting against censorship, you are like a century too late to get the ball rolling now.

    So many things wrong with this post.

    1) Every rating and regulation board can reject classification of the game, and every rating and regulation board would be wrong. Doesn't matter if it's one, four, forty, four hundred, or four million rating boards. They would all be wrong no matter how large the number is.

    2) Yes, comparing it to the original Manhunt IS irresponsible. At least on BBFC's part it was, which is what they did. They compared the violence and context in this game to the violence and context of Manhunt which they publicly stated was already at the upper limit of their sensibilities. Not only was that an inappropriate assessment of the original Manhunt, but the comparison is also wholly inappropriate. Each game should be judged on its own merits.

    3) It doesn't "clearly" have anything new and where "the edge" is is entirely subjective. So, it may be clear that something tips it over the BBFC's edge, but I maintain that they have no moral right to draw that line, where the edge is.

    4) No, we really can't agree not to defend it so vehemently because we haven't played it yet. The content and the context are irrelevant, in my opinion. It is defensible, and vehemently so, because there is no "edge" at which any regulatory body needs to protect the general public from themselves. That concept, that entire motivation is horrible and is a power and responsibility that should never have been granted to the BBFC or anyone else.

    5) Games didn't exist a century ago, and I like to think that we've made a lot of progress on ending or at least curbing censorship for other, older mediums. If the Puritans ruled America today we probably wouldn't even have computers, much less 95% of the games available for them. We've systematically, albeit slowly, eroded Puritan ideals, and I hope we continue to do so. We have a long way to go, but we'll get there, I hope and believe.

    It is never too late to fix problems in society or redirect the misguided.

    steam_sig.png
145791022
Sign In or Register to comment.