ESRB Defends Manhunt 2's New Rating
In the statement, Vance defended the ESRB's decision last week to change the Manhunt 2 rating from its previously assigned Adults Only status to a more marketable Mature rating. The change came after Rockstar modified the game and resubmitted it for review by the ESRB.
"Publishers submit game content to the ESRB on a confidential basis. It is simply not our place to reveal specific details about the content we have reviewed, particularly when it involves a product yet to be released," Vance said in the statement. "What can be said is that the changes that were made to the game, including the depictions themselves and the context in which those depictions were presented, were sufficient to warrant the assignment of an M (Mature 17+) rating by our raters."
Vance also addressed her detractors, anti-violence activist Leland Yee and the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood, in the statment, essentially saying their concerns are unmerited and unnecessary.
"The FTC, the national PTA, the Kaiser Family Foundation, and Peter Hart Research have all found that parents are overwhelmingly satisfied with the ESRB rating system," Vance said in the release. "Rather than publicly second-guessing what is unmistakably a strong warning to parents about the suitability of a particular game for children, which presumably neither Senator Yee nor CCFC have personally reviewed, we feel a more productive tack would be to join us in encouraging parents to take the ratings seriously when buying games for their children."
Manhunt 2 will retail October 31 for PlayStation 2, Wii, and PSP. The PlayStation 2 version's development was helmed by Rockstar London and Rockstar North. Rockstar Toronto crafted the motion-controlled Wii edition, with Rockstar Leeds taking on the PSP release.
-
SwiftMoose 2
replySony, Microsoft and Nintendo need to cancel this game on their consoles no matter what rating it gets; it would create so much negative media for the gaming industry and add fuel to a fire that is already out of control. I think if the big guys refuse to release it on their consoles, it would be a huge step in pacifying the media, at least until GTA4 comes out.
-
-
All that would do is give ammunition to social crisis ambulance chasers like Yee and Thompson to go back to their respective groups shouting victory. The whole reason we have a society of oversensitive special interest and minority groups deciding what we can and can't watch or play is because companies back down like pussies whenever controversy raises its head. Rather than get negative PR they acquiesce which further emboldens these people. While I wasn't happy about the ESRB's original decision at least it's clear now they weren't trying to suck up to groups like these.
-
Some people might not like this, but nevertheless... what if a game gave you the choice of being able to do really horrific things? Stuffing Jews inside gas chambers, beheading innocent Americans and posting the videos publicly or maybe even murdering children or worse? Sounds alarmist at this point in time, but you never know where it could end. If you could show these games to people in the 50's, maybe we'd look like a community gone mad? You never know.
I like the fact that people have limits to visual depictions of violence. So far most games depict this as battles against good and evil, but with some newer games going more to the fringe, I have to think twice sometimes. Hey it's better to be honest right? :)-
No matter how distasteful you find those things, the principle of free of speech has to protect that as well. It may be horrifying and even completely devoid of any intellectual or artistic merit, but it is the responsibility of the community to show it's distaste for these subjects by not patronizing the works.
As much as I would be disgusted by a "SimHolocaust", I couldn't in good conscious say that someone should not be allowed to make it. I would hope though that we would be responsible enough as a society though to demonstrate our disapproval to the creators through the same freedom that allowed them to create it in the first place.
If the purveyors of hate become so powerful and prevalent as to be a threat to the rest of society, then maybe it is time for the government to impose some restrictions. Banning Nazi paraphernalia in post-war Germany makes sense, but I think we are far from that sort of extreme situation.-
When we talk about "banning" a game we should probably be more specific about what we mean. I don't think there was ever any danger of the government actually telling Rockstar that they couldn't make the game.
Rockstar was allowed to make Manhunt 2, and that's fine. It's also fine if (for example) Wal-Mart refused to carry it, or Microsoft refused to certify it for their console.
And by "fine" of course I mean that there shouldn't be any laws compelling these entities to behave otherwise. We're still free to believe that Rockstar, or Wal-Mart, or Microsoft are behaving badly.
-
-
-
Im sorry, I thought Shacknews users understood sarcasm, I'll make sure to speak slowly next time and write SARCASM in big bold letters at the bottom. :/
-
-
I thought it was ovibous, not many people want to see the media gain the upper hand in this, especially gamers, and even more so educated gamers.
I apologize then if I was misunderstood, my views are the total opposite.
-
-
-
